CNN iReport

Don't mean they're not after you."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/16/obama.latin.america/index.html

I read a number of articles yesterday on various websites, all pulling at the seam at what would culminate in the predictable item above. Very recently a friend and I were discussing the surge in gun sales and he couldn't identify with these people and their paranoia. I mentioned recent statements by the new Attorney General, Eric Holder (his "out of the gate" statements on race relations left me shocked and inspired) on his support for the reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban as well as Obama's campaign promise to the same effect.

The violence in Mexico is escalating everyday. The issue is especially personal to me because I have family all over the country, but mostly in Monterrey. My recently widowed great aunt lives there in an aged row house in a humble neighborhood, all burned into my memory from a handful of visits throughout my childhood as well as the last several years, so you can imagine how worried I was to hear about two very recent grenade attacks in that city. Thousands of people have been killed and one report claimed that Mexico was only second to Pakistan in being the country most likely to collapse.

This is all however no reason to make snap decisions guided by feeling and not reason. I am beginning to see a pattern of reactionary efforts by the Obama Administration recently. This is especially troubling because a similar move in this case is inappropriate for several reasons.

Is the right move to give up some of our freedom in exchange for safety? Or more importantly for the safety of another country? Are we really expecting to disarm the cartels with this strategy? Or are we more likely to simply disarm ourselves? Or is that simply the point? (The Obama Administration just wants us to come upstairs for one drink, honest. Let’s be careful not to go overboard and wake up tomorrow with a pounding headache in a bed we never intended to be in.)

83% of the guns recovered cannot be traced back to their country of origin. Before we consider punishing American gun owners for somehow contributing to nationwide Mexican police, military and governmental corruption, we should be very clear of our real effect.

The primary source of automatic weapons (the types of guns you probably though about when you read the words “assault weapons” above) for the cartels is everywhere but the US. The M16/M4 type automatic weapons come from the Mexican military itself. (Who would have thought drug cartels were getting guns from the very soldiers they were recruiting?) The primary sources of AK-style automatic weapons reads like a mapping of Tom Clancy novels: Central America, South America, Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, South Asia, East Asia. The purchase of these types of weapons was not in any way affected by the Assault Weapons Ban. In order to acquire one of these weapons one must get a Class III weapons license, which involves a thorough background check by the government along as well as getting permission from local authorities. They must be registered and their sale and transfer is heavily regulated by the government. For more on that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_III_NFA_firearm

The U.S is the primary source for semi-automatic AK and AR-15 (the civilian-legal version of the M16) style weapons. But the purchase of these types of weapons was nearly unaffected by the Assault Weapons Ban. You see, the ban was almost entirely cosmetic in nature. It limited a legally manufacturable (or importable) firearm to two of a group of potential features. So for example, an AR-15 could have a pistol grip and a flash suppressor but not also a folding or collapsible stock. The other limited items were bayonet lugs and grenade launchers. (Grenades and grenade launchers are Class III destructive devices and are regulated the same as the automatic weapons above.) The main point being that before, during and after the salvation of the assault weapons ban, one could purchase essentially the same firearm. It fired the same ammunition at the same rate with the same range and deadliness. Gun control advocates didn’t care because it was a political victory in this game of inches. Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy Center and the man some give credit for coining the term “assault weapon” wrote the following:

"Assault weapons—just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms—are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can envision a practical use for these weapons."

Anyone who would advocate purposefully taking advantage of public confusion on an issue should not be a trusted source on anything. It’s incredible that this bait-and-switch has gone on for so long.

Another common misconception is that the Assault Weapons Ban made these guns illegal. It actually prohibited the sale of a gun with these features manufactured after it was passed. You could still buy one that was made before its passage. You could also buy one just like it after it was passed, just as long as it stayed within the laughable requirements. The Assault Weapons Ban was a grave waste of this country and Congress’s time and an inappropriate infringement upon our Second Amendment rights.

Mexico itself has very strict gun laws – laws that do little to prevent them from being smuggled in from all over the world. Even if we were to outlaw assault weapons altogether, the market would be met by the same smugglers and will further disarm law-abiding Americans who are now beginning to feel the sting of the violence spilling over the border. Don’t forget that criminals don’t care about breaking the law.

And once again we would be focusing on the “drug users” and not the “drug dealers”. We should devote our attention to prosecuting these unabashed gun dealers performing under the table deals and work better to prevent the guns from going over to Mexico in the first place. If we really expect them to do something about the flow of illegal aliens and drugs flowing into our country, don’t we owe them the same courtesy with our firearms and drug money? Couldn’t we just do a better job of securing the border (walls are the 5th century BC solution) and enforcing the laws we currently have instead of stripping away our apparently inconvenient rights?

When faced with a similar dilemma of choosing between freedom and safety, which one did our nation’s founders choose?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The irony of the title quote is that it is a line from Nirvana’s "Territorial Pissings". It is ironic because Cobain killed himself with an illegally acquired shotgun (he had a friend purchase it for him) and was probably strung out on Mexican black tar when he pulled the trigger.