The Big Lie Campaign Continues

[holypaper]

tionico:

However, the origins of those weapons is also obviously NOT the USA.

I believe you are jumping to a conclusion. It is not OBVIOUS that none of the non-traceable weapons came from the U.S. The article by Fox did not say that all of the disputed weapons came from foreign countries. It said that many were untraceable because the serial numbers had been removed.

You obviously want to believe that none of the disputed weapons came from the U.S. Fine, believe it; I don't care. I'm sticking to my guns here. I think the CNN report overstates the problem, and the Fox report understates it. The truth (as usual IMHO) lies between the two.

If one always gets all of his information from one source, then he is not an informed citizen, he is a propaganda parrot.

 

[Trlsmn]

tionico:

I believe you are jumping to a conclusion. It is not OBVIOUS that none of the non-traceable weapons came from the U.S. The article by Fox did not say that all of the disputed weapons came from foreign countries. It said that many were untraceable because the serial numbers had been removed.

You obviously want to believe that none of the disputed weapons came from the U.S. Fine, believe it; I don't care. I'm sticking to my guns here. I think the CNN report overstates the problem, and the Fox report understates it. The truth (as usual IMHO) lies between the two.

Sorry Fox did not say that, they said this

But a large percentage of the guns recovered in Mexico do not get sent back to the U.S. for tracing, because it is obvious from their markings that they do not come from the U.S.

In reference to this quote from Matt Allen, special agent of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

"Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable, and the U.S. effort to trace weapons really only extends to weapons that have been in the U.S. market,"

Reference: <broken link removed>

 

[holypaper]

This is copied and pasted from the Fox article:

"Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable, and the U.S. effort to trace weapons really only extends to weapons that have been in the U.S. market," Matt Allen, special agent of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), told FOX News.

That is the quote to which I was referring. If a U.S. weapon has the serial number removed, its source is unknown.

 

[Trlsmn]

This is copied and pasted from the Fox article:



That is the quote to which I was referring. If a U.S. weapon has the serial number removed, its source is unknown.

Where does that say the serial number is removed?

 

[tionico]

holypaper, nowhere does it state that serial numbers have been REMOVED. Many foreign countries, and the gun manufacturers within them, never put serial numbers on weapons. they are simple commodities like can openers, no need for numbers (in their view). ALL firearms manufactured or offered for sale in the US (regardless of country of origin) are required by law to have serial numbers, and records of them are to be kept by the legal channels through which they are distributed (FFL Dealers, see requirements of licensing, record keeping, per BATFE).

What Fox news learned is that many of the weapons seized in Mexico COULD NOT have had origins in the US. Further, other records show that a large number of weapons seized in Mexico WERE manufactured in the USA, and were sold (through legal transfer/export channels) to Mexico's military. So, in one sense they originated in the US,, but were transferred to Mexico's army and/or police forces. Thus a significant part of the problem is that those weapons, while manufactured in the US, found their way into the hands of the narcotraficantes AFTER their legal arrival in Mexico. Soldiers and LEO's deserting their government paid positions for the more lucrative positions in the narco machine, and brought weapons with them which were stolen from military and police.

I do NOT understand your bent to twist facts to support your foregone conclusions. Makes me wonder what your REAL agenda might be. It does not appear to be the discovery of truth, else you would not take "no serial numbers" to mean "serial numbers removed", nor "untraceable to the US" to mean anything other than a certain origin outside the US. (China, Russia, Romania, Korea, Israel, Czechoslovakia, Argentina, Brasil, India.....) In many cases, determining the origin of a firearm is as simple as it is to determine the origin of a car. This make and model is made HERE or THERE. Fiat=Italy. Renault=France. BMW=Germany..... SO-- take a large sample of cars found in Mexico, a percentage of them COULD NOT have their origin in the US on the face of it. THIS percentage, back to the firearms seized in Mexico, is given as 68&#37;. Of the remaining 32%, 90% WERE traced to the US, some of those not necessarily through the retail firearms distribution networks. The balance could not be traced to the US, but were traced to other places. That leaves only 18% from the US, and, as mentioned, some of those likely not through gun stores selling them at retail.

This is a FAR CRY from the statements of high government officials claiming 90% of ALL GUNS SEIZED in Mexico came from retail gun stores in the USA. Obama, Clinton, and a host of others have taken that number and run with it... and it is a lie. What are they REALLY on about, doing this? You tell me.... whatever it is, it is deception. There is NO WAY such high government officials do not have access to unadulterated facts. They either choose not to hear them, or choose not to report them accurately. Either way, they are culpable by commission (deliberate lies) or ommission (failure in the discharge of their duty to be accurately informed). Either way COULD be gounds for impeachment.

 

[Trlsmn]

"Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable, and the U.S. effort to trace weapons really only extends to weapons that have been in the U.S. market," Matt Allen, special agent of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), told FOX News.

This also has the meaning that there are no required USA markings indicating a weapon has ever been through a legal import and/or sale in the USA, if they have never been in the legal USA market they can't be considered as a problem that our 2nd amendment rights are helping contribute to.

 

[Trlsmn]

Many foreign countries, and the gun manufacturers within them, never put serial numbers on weapons.

I would have to disagree with that statement.

 

[Stomper]

Look... marked with serial numbers or not, the bottom line is the vast majority of those weapons used by the drug cartels are select-fire, military weapons and are NOT that easy for the average U.S. citizen to obtain (if at all)... so banning our access to semi-auto "assualt style" weapons HERE will make no difference to the situation in Mexico... follow the political money trail.

When I was pulling a tour of duty in Central America in '85-'86, I PERSONALLY saw load after load, after load, after load, after load of NEVER ISSUED U.S. manufactured "Hydramatic" branded M16's and other military hardware get off-loaded into Honduras alone... where do you think all of THOSE are winding up?

 

[Trlsmn]

Exactly and the big O knows this which makes him just another left wing liar.

 

[holypaper]

After doing more research on the lack of serial number issue, I must confess that the practice of producing weapons without them is much more widespread than I ever imagined. Given this, I have no choice but to withdraw my assertion that the Fox article is biased to understate the amount of weapons smuggled from the U.S. I apologize for any frustration I have caused.

 

[Spray-n-pray]

After doing more research on the lack of serial number issue, I must confess that the practice of producing weapons without them is much more widespread than I ever imagined. Given this, I have no choice but to withdraw my assertion that the Fox article is biased to understate the amount of weapons smuggled from the U.S. I apologize for any frustration I have caused.

You know, I just read through this whole thread, and I have to say that I am impressed. Not so much with all of the bickering, i mean dialogue, and throwing around links to facts and information, but holypaper's admittance that there were things he didn't know about the situation. I know he wasn't saying he was wrong, but the fact that he was willing to say that he was uninformed on a subject was refreshing. I don't know how many threads I have read where people would rather beat a dead horse to try to prove their point, whether they are right or wrong. Sometimes it gets downright ridiculous.
Hats of to you holypaper!!!!

 

[tionico]

holypaper, I must say THANK YOU... it is a rare thing to see someone bring an erroneous set of opinions into a situation, follow the details, persue more of them, then realise their presuppositions are not accurate and change their position. Even just a little. I respect that, and your ability to admit it, a lot. that sort of thing is part of what I've come to appreciate about this "community". Seems, at root, we're all on about the same things here, though details, personality, preferences, differ a lot (but hey, that's part of what keeps it interesting, right?
Yes, Fox News ARE biased.... and I am glad. SOMEONE has to dig out "the other side" and speak out. BUT-- from what I've seen thus far, they are NOT so biased as to manufacture "information" our of whole cloth just to support their foregone conclusions... as we've seen most of the reast of MSM do. On this issue, they did their homework, quoted sources, gave ample footnotes and cross references... and give solid evidence to the "hunch" I had when I heard Mrs. Clinton quote her false '"ninety percent" mantra. Both have their agendae.... but one of them seems to be allowing petty things like facts to drive theirs. The other seems to be riding on the presumption no one hearing her will bother to question, let alone do a bit of research. (how else could she and her "boss" even have got elected?)

 

[Trlsmn]

I enjoy these kinds of threads where people are willing to sit down and find the truth of particular situation instead of clinging to a certain party line. I know I often sound argumentative but in the end I would like to come to the facts not the propaganda and if it proves me wrong so be it, I would rather be wrong than blindly follow biased propaganda.

 

[tionico]

Stomper said this:

When I was pulling a tour of duty in Central America in '85-'86, I PERSONALLY saw load after load, after load, after load, after load of NEVER ISSUED U.S. manufactured "Hydramatic" branded M16's and other military hardware get off-loaded into Honduras alone... where do you think all of THOSE are winding up?

I was in Nicaragua, the other side that small river, in 1986. Missions trip, two weeks in country, and we couldn't get much outside Managua... which was VERY frustrating. At that time the Sandinistas, under Daniel Ortega, were largely in control, but plenty of US forces were there, particularly in the north... and definitely firmly entrenched in Honduras. THEY got the bulk of those M 16's to stand up against the boatloads of Russian AK 47's the Sandinista (and Russian) troops were using against them. After Ortega's failed attempt at rigging the "election" (which backfired on him, Do&#241;a Violeta was in by an incredible landslide... whew!!)

After the election, those weapons simply became the spoils of war and rewards of service... they disappeared into the hills and hands of Nicaragua like a cup of coffee spilled on a gravel bar down at the river. I am certain many of them have been held onto against the day Ortega and his minions could arise and take power again... which he's managed to do (he is again a "duly elected" president of that nation, by trickery). So far, his violence has not been widespread, but things ARE heating up. And part of how things are heating up is that Nicaragua has been a part of the drug highway for some time.... and some factions operate by funds derived from that trade. Such weapons, having been duly cached since 1990, would be VERY valuable to support such trade. Barter and outright sale likely have thousands of those very same weapons in the hands of the narcotraficantes. Mexico seems to be the focus of that trade now, but Guatemala in particular, and all the other Central American countries have been involved to some degree. Demand and funds in Mexico have been acting as strong magnets for such weapons.... and I'd be very surprised if at least some of those very same weapons you saw in Honduras 25 years ago have been captured in some of the drug raids in Mexico this past two years.

SO--while our dewly lectid guvamint is fomenting the closure of our own US gun market system on the basis of "US manufactured arms being used in violence in Mexico", at least a part of the problem stems from US Military activities in that region... and the thousands of arms WE sent down there (legally.. sort of. Through official channels, anyway). So the pot is calling the kettle black whilst neatly sidestepping the truth that the real issue is not gun violence in Mexico but the desire to disarm US citizens.

I can't help but wonder whether we'll ever be told if any of those seized Mexican drug weapons were traced back to those thousands of M 16's delivered to Honduras in 1985-90. "we couldn't have THAT sort of information leaking out to the public, now, could we?"

 

[Trlsmn]

Thus the big lie! And thus Obama doesn't even closely resemble an instrument of change, just another morally bankrupt politician.

 

[Stomper]

I'll bet the farm some (if not a LOT) of those very weapons I saw shipped in (on Air America aircraft) back then are some of those involved in Meh-hi-co... BTW, they were M16A1's... I suppose they were clearing the warehouses here, as the A2's were just starting to make their way into inventories back then.