It was only a few weeks ago all indications were pointing to no immediate gun control action on the part of the Obama administration. Apparently that was a bunch of bullshit as now Eric Holder is suggesting the administration is planning to pursue a new ‘assault weapons’ ban. The arguments presented are disingenuous at best, but predictable. The main talking point appears to revolve around Mexico this time, or specifically the increased violence we’ve seen in recent years surrounding the drug trade.
“Some recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades,” the warning said. “Large firefights have taken place in many towns and cities across Mexico, but most recently in northern Mexico, including Tijuana, Chihuahua City and Ciudad Juarez.”
At the news conference today, Holder described his discussions with his Mexican counterpart about the recent spike in violence.
“I met yesterday with Attorney General Medina Mora of Mexico, and we discussed the unprecedented levels of violence his country is facing because of their enforcement efforts,” he said.
Two points worthy of note;
1. With extremely rare exception we don’t sell automatic weapons and grenades to civilians in the US, so if that’s what Mexican authorities are dealing with someone’s military has to do the explaining, not the dude working the gun counter at Dicks Sporting Goods.
2. Of far more importance is the reason Mexico is at war with drug cartels. OUR DRUG POLICY. It has failed on so many levels and now is turning into a diplomatic nightmare. The problem is not hypothetical guns entering Mexico from the US, but actual drugs leaving Mexico bound for the US. And that’s only a problem because our prohibition has caused artificially high prices and made market share worth killing for. So yes, it is our policy that is Mexico’s problem. But not our gun policy (otherwise known as the Constitution).
Also worthy of note are the measures the Obama administration is looking at:
“I think closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent, would be something that would be permitted under Heller,” Holder said, referring to the Supreme Court ruling in Washington, D.C. v. Heller, which asserted the Second Amendment as an individual’s right to own a weapon.
Gun show loophole
No such thing. An individual’s ability to sell their own property is not a loophole. Is selling a used car or a lamp a loophole?
Cop-killer bullets
No such thing. This is a meaningless term that came from a 1982 NBC expose on Teflon coated bullets. The coating was designed to keep barrel wear to a minimum when ammunition manufactures moved from lead to brass jacketed ammunition. These rounds were initially designed FOR police who were looking for greater penetration against hard targets. If you hear someone use this term it’s a dead giveaway they have no clue what they’re talking about.
Assault weapons
Again, no such thing when used in legal parlance; or shouldn’t be but the term is still thrown around all the time. The phrase is usually regarded as a bastardized translation of the German ‘Sturmgewehr’, or storm-rifle. But there is no military definition of Assault Weapon and there is no accepted statutory definition of the term between local, state and federal laws. Gun control advocates most certainly have something in mind when they use the term, but that something is so poorly defined it’s only worth discussing if one has a flare for showboating their ignorance.
Obama is certain to see an interesting fight on this one. The number of Democrats in the house who got there with the support of moderates who typically vote for Republicans is sure to form quite a bit of bipartisanship, just not the kind he’s been looking for. Never mind the fact that nothing suggested by Holder would result in any real change in the world.
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
Speaking of U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder:
Eric Holder is a racial-minority individual, and in his heart and mind he inevitably does not endorse hate crimes committed by George W. Bush.
George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism (indicated in my blog).
George W. Bush did in fact commit innumerable hate crimes.
And I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed other hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention.
Many people know what Bush did.
And many people will know what Bush did—even to the end of the world.
Bush was absolute evil.
Bush is now like a fugitive from justice.
Bush is a psychological prisoner.
Bush has a lot to worry about.
Bush can technically be prosecuted for hate crimes at any time.
In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
“GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
______________________
I am not sure where I had read it before, but anyway, it is a linguistically excellent statement, and it goes kind of like this: “If only it were possible to ban invention that bottled up memories so they never got stale and faded.” Oh wait—off the top of my head—I think the quotation came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.