Mr. Helmke presented excerpts from the hearing in the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee about the Government Accountability Office report on American guns being trafficked to criminals across our southern border into Mexico.
That hearing included an exchange between Ranking Member Connie Mack, Jr. from Florida and Jess Ford of the GAO.
First Paul had this to say:
In the exchange between Connie Mack and Jess Ford, it was made perfectly clear that the original ATF report which said 90% was misleading. The original citation was cleverly worded to say "90% of the guns traced." (Kudos to Mike W. and the others for pointing that out and I apologize for being so difficult about it.) Now, for the first time that I've seen, it's being clarified that only one-quarter of the guns seized were traced. If the other three-quarters contain no guns from America, which I think is unlikely, the true percentage would be less that 20%, a figure I've seen from commenters on this blog.Rather than argue about percentages, let's focus on the fact that 20,000 trafficked guns from America have ended up at Mexican crime scenes.
With that kind of information, I hope our opposition will now acknowledge there is a serious problem that needs to be addressed:
Were these unconscionable lies and manipulation? I don't think so. I'd call it spinning a bit or taking advantage of slick wording. Paul Helmke said what I've been saying all along, the real point is too many guns are going to Mexico. If 17% of the Mexican weapons are coming from the United States, and they number 20,000, I say that's too much. I echo what Paul said, this "is a serious problem that needs to be addressed."
What's your opinion? Do you think 20,000 weapons is so small a percentage that we shouldn't worry about it? Some people say that about the 30,000 gun deaths a year, percentage-wise it's small. What do you think?
Please leave a comment.
I don't care if the number is 100%. Just because some third world corrupt government cannot control their own borders,soldiers or criminals is absolutely no reason that rights should be infringed for law abiding Americans.
ReplyDeleteIt is already against the law for Americans to export guns to Mexico (unless you are the U.S. government that is). So what does Helmke propose to "address the problem"? Make it illegal again? Nope, he proposes we ban guns here.
That will help. Ban civilian ownership of semi-automatic guns from Americans so the drug gangs will quit buying full auto weapons, grenades and RPG's from illegal sources.
When it proves out that such a ban had no effect on Mexico, do you think Helmke will say he was wrong and we need to drop the ban? Of course not. Mexico is an excuse for a ban, not a problem that can be addressed by such a ban.
How many millions of firearms transactions are there per year?
ReplyDeleteWhat Paul 'addresses' is nothing more than serious backpedaling from his previous statements like that it was 2,000 firearms/ day crossing the border. He also neglects to mention that of those 20K, over 4,000 of them came from Brady A+/#1 rated California, the state with ALL the requested laws already in place.
Comment?
"is a serious problem that needs to be addressed."
ReplyDeleteI agree with Paul, it is a serious problem, but it should NOT be addressed by restricting the rights of Americans.
Now, for the first time that I've seen, it's being clarified that only one-quarter of the guns seized were traced.
ReplyDeleteNot paying attention to my comment from a week ago, eh? Now you're hurting my feelings ;-).
Anyway--sure, if there's a significant number of guns from the U.S. civilian market being smuggled into Mexico, I'd like to see it hampered--that extra market just drives up our prices (for that reason, I'd be really interested in interdicting any ammunition smuggling).
I have yet to see a proposal for addressing the issue that would not constitute an infringement on that which shall not be infringed. I have also not seen a proposal in which there's any reason to have any confidence about its efficacy. As Thirdpower points out (and as I have said repeatedly), California, with nearly every anti-trafficking law the Brady Campaign can think of, is one of the biggest source states of smuggled guns. The biggest factor in the amount of smuggling would appear to be proximity to Mexico.
Maybe that's what we ought to do--simply move our country somewhere else.
We could just take over Mexico, and not have to worry about the corrupt government, or illegal aliens.
ReplyDeleteMikeB...you've been fed this info for months now.
ReplyDeleteOnly now do you accept it because it is sourced to one of your gods???
How about you admitting that numerous individuals have provided you with the exact same info months before Helmke cracked?
Who's telling the truth in this debate?
Who's back-peddling?
45superman and kaveman, I know you guys have been saying it for as long as we've been talking about it. But this is the first time I've read it in one of my usual "sources." That's why I included this little parenthetic comment:
ReplyDelete(Kudos to Mike W. and the others for pointing that out and I apologize for being so difficult about it.)
MikeB,
ReplyDeleteIf you were wrong in your understanding about this....is it possible you are wrong about other things?
Might want to go back and read some of your previous posts with that idea in mind.
Please take the time to watch each of these videos which are located on a website you have admittedly identified as one of your "sources" for accurate info.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bradycampaign.org/action/borderguns/video.php
1. Helmke stating that 90% of guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States.
2. Hillary Clinton stating that the '94 AWB was about full-auto machine guns.
3. Deputy director of the ATF saying yes to the question of 90% of all guns recovered in Mexico coming form the U.S.
4. Katie Couric, an alleged journalist, capping it all off with 90%.
After you grab a cup of cocoa and watch each one, tell me again who is lying and who is telling the truth.
Can you now understand why we fight this fight?
Can you now understand why we must fight this fight if we are to preserve our rights against the onslaught of main-stream media.
We fight lies with the truth. It ain't a real efficient option, but we will win in the end...one way or another.
What's this!!!???
ReplyDeletePaul Helmke stating that 90% of the Mexican guns come from the U.S.???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pj13lXse3Q&feature=channel
So which Paul Helmke is lying?
The one from July or the one from April?
Sorry, you don't get any other choices. He was either lying then or he's lying now.
Love to hear your comment.
This is why we win. We have the truth.
kaveman, thanks for the link to those videos. I still say "lying" is too strong. Some people who have used the 90% quote, myself included, did it in blissful ignorance, just repeating what others have said. Some, the really sinister ones, used careful slick wording that the 90% is of the "guns traced" to make it literally true but practically misleading.
ReplyDeleteIt's all beside the point though. The point is too many guns are going over the border. Too many.
"myself included, did it in blissful ignorance, just repeating what others have said. "
ReplyDeleteAnd yet you KEPT repeating it even after the facts were presented. So did Helmke.
What's that called?
No Mike, it is not besides the point. You know why? because it speaks directly to the credibility (or lack thereof) of you and your ilk.
ReplyDeleteThirdpower said, "And yet you KEPT repeating it even after the facts were presented. So did Helmke."
ReplyDeleteGive me a break, willya Third? The facts which were presented were presented by people like yourself, biased in your own direction. A couple times I vacallated, if you remember, admitting that perhaps you guys had a point. When I saw the 90% come up again and again, sometimes by major players including the ATF, I honestly thought there might be something to it after all. In the end, I get it. Sorry it took so long, but I can assure you that in my case and probably in some of the others who have quoted this figure, it was done in good faith. You can take it for what it's worth, I personally don't find it necessary to lie, and I don't.
When I saw the 90% come up again and again, sometimes by major players including the ATF, I honestly thought there might be something to it after all.
ReplyDeleteThe ATF NEVER said the 90% number. It was promulgated and repeated by the media and the Brady's. Of course since you take Brady, Gun Guys & VPC pressers as gospel you failed to understand they were lying.
Mike W. said, "The ATF NEVER said the 90% number."
ReplyDeleteYou're wrong about that, Mike. You can go back and check it out if you like.
The trick was that they said "of the guns traced." Then after numerous repetition, that little disclaimer got dropped and it became a flat 90%, later to be recanted.