Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Does all that spinning ever make the Brady Campaign dizzy?

As has been noted by many, the forcible citizen disarmament lobby's latest attempt to justify draconian gun laws is the rather . . . peculiar argument that "lax U.S. gun laws" are to blame for the bloody chaos in Mexico. The Brady Campaign is continuing this theme (it's apparently the best the other side can come up with), in its latest press release.

“Our polices help enable this cross-border violence,” said Helmke at a news conference in Washington D.C. “For too long, we have been putting our own citizens at risk by making it so easy for criminals to get guns. Now our neighbors are threatened as well, and our national security is at risk. We must do more to keep dangerous weapons away from dangerous people.”
Left unmentioned is the fact that the Mexican drug cartels are waging their war with hardware one will never find at a U.S. gun show or shop.
“Mexican criminals, and traffickers who supply them, cannot get the guns they need in Mexico because of Mexico’s strong gun laws,” said Helmke. In the United States, however – especially in the border states of Texas and Arizona – virtually non-existent gun laws enable access to a ready supply of guns including assault weapons and .50 caliber sniper rifles.
What was omitted here is that according to the BATFE, #1-Brady-Campaign-ranked California is the state that is the second largest source of guns used in Mexican crime (unmentioned by the Brady Campaign press release, despite it being a larger source than Arizona). California has highly touted (by the Brady Campaign) anti-trafficking laws like "one gun a month," universal background checks, no "gun show loophole," mandatory waiting periods, etc., and extremely expansive bans of so-called "assault weapons."

The best part of the press release, though, comes next.
“Existing laws are so weak that even one of the most notorious dealer supplying the cartels, the owner of X-Caliber gun shop in Phoenix that allegedly supplied 700 guns to Mexican drug gangs, had all criminal charges brought against him dismissed recently. As the X-Caliber case shows, ‘enforcing the laws on the books’ will never be enough: we need stronger laws, and strong enforcement of those laws.”
I mentioned George Iknadosian's vindication last week. Get this, though--Helmke doesn't regret that a man was dragged into court despite there being no case against him. Helmke's lament, instead, is that there wasn't some law that Iknadosian was guilty of violating.

Who's bitter now, Paul?

7 comments:

mikeb302000 said...

I'd bet if you spoke to some of those FFL guys down near the border, they'd tell you business is damn good, with a wink and a nudge. What do you think?

Do you think it's possible that Iknadosian is as dirty as they come but the government flubbed the case and he got off on a technicality? Or is your contention that there are no unscrupulous gun dealers?

It seems to me that you do as much spinning as you accuse the Bradys of. No one really knows what percentage of the guns are fully automatic in the Mexican war, just like no one really knows what percentage of the other guns comes from the States. Helmke says too many; I agree.

California was not mentioned and in your spinning you made that a great discovery proving all kinds of things. Nonsense. If Helmke was as good at spinning as you say, he would have said "Texas, California and Arizona, two of which have lax gun laws." The same point would have been made and your big "discovery" would have been moot.

Actually I've been going back and forth on this one, but I'm leaning towards my first take on it, which I mentioned here. But, even if all these people who are saying there's a big gun flow into Mexico are wrong, Helmke's still right about our needing stricter gun laws and stronger enforcement of those laws.

45superman said...

I'd bet if you spoke to some of those FFL guys down near the border, they'd tell you business is damn good, with a wink and a nudge. What do you think?

I think, winks and nudges aside, business in gun shops all over the country has been "damn good" ever since president HopeandChange (TM) was elected.

Do you think it's possible that Iknadosian is as dirty as they come but the government flubbed the case and he got off on a technicality?

Sure--the "technicality" being that the jackbooted thugs didn't have a case.

Perhaps you can point out to me where I claimed having made a "great discovery"--I seem unable to remember doing so, or finding any evidence that I ever did.

Whether Helmke was trying to hide California's position as the state from which the second greatest number of American guns show up in Mexico, or he just "forgot" to mention it, the fact remains that all those anti-trafficking laws (that the Brady Campaign says will be invaluable in fighting trafficking), and California's ultra-draconian AWB don't seem to have helped.

But, even if all these people who are saying there's a big gun flow into Mexico are wrong, Helmke's still right about our needing stricter gun laws and stronger enforcement of those laws.

Exactly--to hell with facts, logic, and reality, and definitely to hell with the Constitution.

the pistolero said...

I'd bet if you spoke to some of those FFL guys down near the border, they'd tell you business is damn good, with a wink and a nudge. What do you think?
I think you're a total scumbag,leveling such slander about a group of people whose operations you really don't have a clue. If you knew anything about FFLs as a group, you'd know that they watch out for each other and if any of them were doing anything untoward, the rest of them would make sure the feds knew about it, like, yesterday. And they would do this even without the FFL requirement, and if the ATF didn't exist to enforce all those unconstitutional gun laws.

No one really knows what percentage of the guns are fully automatic in the Mexican war
But you were just implying it was the border FFLs who were supplying the bulk of the weaponry to the drug cartels. If there were evidence to support your contention, there would also be evidence as to what percentage of the weaponry was fully automatic. You can't have it both ways.

Mike W. said...

Do you think it's possible that Iknadosian is as dirty as they come but the government flubbed the case and he got off on a technicality? Or is your contention that there are no unscrupulous gun dealers?

People who have committed no crimes are called INNOCENT in this country Mike. There's a presumption of innocence in the legal process here in the U.S. In the abcense of evidence of guilt, proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution, someone charged with a crime in this country remains INNOCENT.

That'as not a "technicality" Mike, it's a basic tenet of our legal system. If you don't like that there are plenty of countries where the rights of the accused are not protected.

No one really knows what percentage of the guns are fully automatic in the Mexican war, just like no one really knows what percentage of the other guns comes from the States. Helmke says too many; I agree.

There you go again Mike, admitting that you have NO PROOF that guns, automatic or otherwise, are flowing from the US to Mexico.

We're supposed to support more gun control simply because Helmke says so and you agree? You seem to ignore the fact that the onus of proof lies on those who want to restrict rights (that's you Mike) and not the other way around.

the pistolero said...

the government flubbed the case
Well, once could say that, considering they had NO PROOF that Mr. Ikadnosian did anything wrong...

straightarrow said...

mikeb303000, as anyone will tell you I am tolerant to a fault, I give everyone the benefit of the doubt and I never stoop to personal attacks.

So I say this with all sincerity and the most charitable of intentions. GO FUCK YOURSELF.

And that is far more tolerance than you have earned. Being a nice guy, I just went for the mildest of responses I could that would be appropriate.

Weer'd Beard said...

straightarrow, MikeB is just another bizzaro troll on the internet. From my information he's essentially a slightly less malicious, considerably more mentally ill JadeGold.

And little obnoxious hit-and-run posts like this are his MO. He doesn't even want to discuss the issues on his own blog. I think he just likes to play Make-Believe and raise pulses.