But what Secretary Clinton and President Obama have neglected to say is more noteworthy. Neither the president nor the secretary has mentioned the importance of the U.S. restricting assault weapons or requiring Brady criminal background checks for all gun purchases at gun shows.
Violence in Mexico has increased since Congress allowed the federal assault weapons ban to expire in 2004. And a study just released by the Woodrow Wilson Center and the University of San Diego matches Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence reports, which confirm that a significant number of the guns used in Mexican drug crimes come from America.
What do you think? Is "a significant number" a better way to describe the guns which come from The States? Do you think increased scrutiny of the gun shops "along the border" is appropriate at this time?
Please leave a comment.
Jadefool's Biggest (Only?) Cheerleader:
ReplyDeleteIs "a significant number" a better way to describe the guns which come from The States?
"A significant number" is certainly a big improvement over the "eleven thousand percent of guns recovered in Mexican crime," or whatever the figure was that they used to throw around (funny, isn't it, how the percentage keeps going down--after we liberty advocates raised hell about the initial lies--and now, Helmke isn't even talking about percentages?).
Still, rabid extremists like Helmke will call one gun a "significant number."
By the way, still with the so-called "assault weapons" bullshit, Helmke? Are you going to tell me that limiting the drug cartels to this, instead of this (assuming--very generously--that any ban could thus limit them) would reduce the violence?
C'mon--tell me you truly believe it would. I dare ya'.
I have no doubt that a significant number of guns do come from America. Our government sells them to the Mexican government, and their criminals in the military in turn steal them and sell them to the cartels. You want to stop the flow of guns to Mexico? Then quit supplying them to their corrupt drug infested government.
ReplyDeleteZorro, Thanks for the links. I love the name of that company, Pre-ban Arms. I'll bet that's extremely attractive to that segment of gun owners I'm often talking about, you know the 10%.
ReplyDeleteI find it pretty funny that you call Helmke a "rabid extremist." Aren't you the one who said ALL gun laws are evil?
Jadefool's Biggest (Only?) Cheerleader:
ReplyDeleteI find it pretty funny that you call Helmke a "rabid extremist." Aren't you the one who said ALL gun laws are evil?
Oh, "extremist" characterizes me pretty fairly (although I tend not to think of myself as "rabid"), I think. Unlike Helmke's, however, my extremism is in defense of liberty, a type of extremism once wisely described as "no vice" (and yeah--I know Goldwater failed miserably in living up to that ideal, with his support of "gun control"--it's still a powerful quote).
MikeB: “I love the name of that company, Pre-ban Arms. I'll bet that's extremely attractive to that segment of gun owners I'm often talking about, you know the 10%.”
ReplyDeleteI’m not following you here. I thought your 10% theory was based on their irresponsible actions, not the model of gun they buy.
Sorry there I go again with the obscure jokes.
ReplyDeleteThe 10% characters include the types who would be attracted to a business entitled Pre Ban Guns.
Never mind, it's obscure even to me.