Tag: Mexico

Perhaps it’s the tea…

There’s something about the American 2nd Amendment that causes British journalists to wet themselves in fright. I have yet to figure out why guns an ocean away illicit such panty ruining terror. The latest to have a tinkle fit in print is Iain Overton writing in the L.A. Times. After blasting through his Depends, Overton blames murder and mayhem all around the world on the American gun owner. And more specifically, it’s the NRA that’s the chief demon to blame for Overton’s moistened shorts.

Of course, Overton blames American gun owners and gun sellers for the flood of illegal guns that have shown up in Mexico. What he neglects to mention is that the principle supplier is none other than the Obama Administration. Oh… And we’re somehow to blame for American foreign policy. I’m not sure how that works; but then again, my skivvies are dry. Overton, and his soaked choners, suggest that foreign nationals should pressure the American People to surrender their rights for some dubious greater good…

But more foreigners should be speaking out about America’s deadly relationship with the gun. The right to bear arms, and the sheer number of firearms bought and sold in this country every year as a result, has undeniable global implications. For a start, Americans in effect support the world’s gun economy. In addition to the 8.6 million guns made in the U.S. in 2012, 4.8 million more were imported from overseas. The U.S. import volume of foreign guns more than tripled between 2003 and 2012.

So guns that end up here are a bad thing there… I dunno. Perhaps there isn’t enough ammonia in the room for me to get it.


From America’s 1st Freedom…

How El Chapo Got His Gun

by Marshall Lewin – Thursday, February 4, 2016

Photo credit: El Chapo photo by YURI CORTEZ/AFP/Getty Images

You’ve probably heard the news that when Mexican authorities raided the hideout of Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán Loera, the head of the murderous Sinaloa drug cartel, on Jan. 8, they recovered a .50-caliber Barrett rifle that was trafficked through the ATF’s disastrous “Fast and Furious” debacle.

What you may not know, but probably suspected, is that the more information that surfaces surrounding Fast and Furious, the more it appears that the Obama administration deliberately helped traffic guns from the United States to the highest levels of the most ruthless and deadly drug cartels in Mexico for no other reason than to support the absurd claim—asserted by everyone from Barack Obama to his attorney general, Eric Holder, to his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton—that 90 percent of the guns used in crimes in Mexico originated in the U.S., and that imposing more gun control upon law-abiding Americans would somehow control international criminal networks with billions of dollars at their fingertips.

When you look at the evidence in aggregate, no other explanation seems possible, let alone plausible.

Continue reading

There’s a saying: “Never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity.” One gun slipping across the border can be explained by stupidity. Two can be explained that way. Perhaps even 100 can be. But thousands? But at some point, even the dullest BATFE agent will come to realize that it’s not possible to track a gun after it’s been smuggled across an international border. Thus stupidity does not and cannot explain the government’s actions. Only malice can.




The deadliest Obama scandal, Operation Fast and Furious, has been simmering for months now. Congressman Darrell Issa’s investigation has been getting stonewalled by the Administration and former AG Eric Holder, who oversaw the program, has since returned to life as a Beltway Bandit. But the arrest of Joaquin ‘El Chapo’ Guzman threatens to move the scandal off of the back burner.

When Mexican Marines caught up to Guzman (Tacos and Sean Penn were involved. I’m not making this up!), they recovered a .50 BMG rifle at the house where he was hidingEl Chapo's fiddyWanna take a guess where this particular rifle came from? You got it; Operation Fast and Furious. This was one of at least 34 .50 BMG firearms that the BATFE allowed to “walk” into Mexico. For those who don’t remember, this operation was supposed to catch gun runners taking guns into Mexico. There was, however, one problem: BATFE agents had no way of tracking the guns once they crossed the border. Perhaps it didn’t occur to them that the other side of the border is Mexico, and not the US, and that their jurisdiction ends at said border.

That theory, as attractive as it sounds, isn’t plausible. How do we know this? The agents involved are able to dress themselves. Were they really that stupid, they’d be showing up to work wearing Garanimals. Which means, of course, that their actions were deliberate.

So why would the Obama Administration allow firearms like this .50 BMG rifle to get into the hands of Mexican drug cartels? The theory I find more believable is that they were ginning up the “iron river of guns” that Hillary and others have been babbling about for years. Robert Farago at The Truth About Guns thinks that this particular seizure adds credence to an alternative theory: That the US was arming the Sinaloa cartel in their fight against the Los Zetas cartel. In either case, US officials didn’t seem to care that these same rifles were being turned on Mexican law enforcement. There are reports that the Sinaloa cartel was using them against drug surveillance helicopters piloted by Mexican police. Perhaps both theories explain the Administration’s actions. One motivation may have conveniently grown from the other.



Anti-gun types have always been a little off. OK… They’re just plain nuts; obsessing over private property owned by others that, on the whole, harm no one. There’s roughly one gun in the US for every man, woman, and child in the population. And in case you haven’t noticed, we haven’t killed each other off. But that little factoid doesn’t stop that Anti’s hysteria. In fact, they’re getting worse.

The NRA-ILA writes…

Is it our imagination, or are gun control supporters really getting “out there” lately? Take Pittsburgh Post-Gazette columnist Dan Simpson, for example. On Tuesday, Simpson didn’t just exaggerate or engage in hyperbole. If he had, we might not have noticed, because those things are a dime a dozen when you’re talking about gun control supporters.

Simpson instead went off the deep end and then some, as he tried to vilify the NRA, NRA members, and American firearm manufacturers for disagreeing with expanded background checks and an expanded ban on semi-automatic firearms and their magazines.

Simpson didn’t stop there. He goes on to imply that the NRA and PBS were in collusion to produce the network’s “whitewash” of the NRA. (Funny… It looked an awful lot like a hatchet job to us.)

But this is a recurring theme that we’ve noted in these pages before. As the anti-gun crowd gets dealt more and more defeats, they become more and more unhinged. 10 years ago, if you suggested that anti-gun types might launch “false flag” attacks to further their cause, I might have paused to wait for you to then go on about how the black helicopters were involved in the plot. But now, after seeing anti-gun screwballs like Christopher Dorner, I have to wonder how goofy that sort of conspiracy theory really is.

Another example is “Operation Fast and Furious“.  For years, anti-gun activists have claimed that there is an “iron river of guns” flowing from the US into Mexico. Of course, this simply wasn’t true. (Unless one counts US-made firearms that were stolen from the Mexican Army as “smuggling”.) So what was the Obama Administration’s reaction to the “bad news” that American gun shops aren’t a source of illegal guns in Mexico? They ginned-up their own iron river to make up for the one that didn’t exist. It takes a special brand of anti-gun crazy to do something like that.

And Dan Simpson is another fine example of that special brand of crazy.


AWR Hawkins reports at Breitbart that the US Department of Agriculture has issued a solicitation for submachine guns chambered in .40 S&W. Is this the latest sign of a government gone rogue, arming for a fight against its own people? Not really.

The solicitation reads in part…

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General, located in Washington, DC, pursuant to the authority of FAR Part 13, has a requirement for the commerical [sic] acquisition of submachine guns, .40 Cal. S&W, ambidextrous safety, semi-automatic or 2 shot burts trigger group, Tritium night sights for front and rear, rails for attachment of flashlight (front under fore grip) and scope (top rear), stock-collapsilbe [sic] or folding, magazine – 30 rd. capacity, sling, light weight, and oversized trigger guard for gloved operation. 

Those of us who hunt public land will easily recall that the National Forests we hunt are administered by the US Forest Service, an agency of the USDA. We also know that there are some parts of the forest where one needs to tread lightly; and I don’t mean in a “be careful not to step on a flower” or a “keep and eye out for Yogi and Boo-Boo” kinda way. In those parts of the forest, it’s booby traps you’re looking out for.

Since Obama’s Consigliere General Eric Holder decide that arming Mexican drug cartels sounded like a great idea, our national forests have become a little sketchy in some places. And while hunters have a choice about what parts of the forest they’ll visit, forest rangers don’t. The poor schmucks have to go into what the rest of us would call no-go zones. And if a ranger wishes to avoid getting the Brian Terry treatment from Obama’s narcoterroristas, he or she had better be packing some serious heat.

So no, it’s not outrageous that the USDA would want submachine guns like the ones the solicitation calls for. Mr. Ranger probably loves his job, but that doesn’t mean he wants to die while doing it.

Hunting News Self-defense

Tony Canales looks at two very different reactions to firearms; specifically “assault” weapons. There’s the panty-wetting reaction of people like Kevin de Leon and then there’s the reaction of many people throughout Mexico. To de Leon, they’re scary pieces of metal that lurk around dark alleys and school playgrounds. To the otherwise law abiding citizens of Mexico in villages overrun by drug cartels and corrupt officials, they’re valuable tools for defending their liberties and their lives…

Much has been made on the subject of the regulation of gun ownership, both here in the United States and in Mexico. Of special controversy is the subject of small arms being smuggled south, and what is being done with them once they get across the border.

In the video above, journalists note that the local citizens of Ayutla have for over a year taken up unregistered firearms to protect themselves and their property from drug cartels and, implicitly, corrupt police officials.

Senator Kevin de Leon, (D-Los Angeles), whose district boundaries are based more on a design theory from Rorschach than anything rational, is proposing that solid blocks of metal be considered to be firearms in the eyes of the law (ie billets for lowers, among other components.).

Compare and contrast.

On the one hand, you have people who just want to live and work in peace. They see guns as tools they’ve been forced to buy to achieve that goal. I’m sure that each of them can think of some other way they’d have rather spent that money. But we all have tools in our garages that we didn’t really want to buy. We had to buy them. The same is true of people like the residents of Ayutla. They have guns they needed, not guns they wanted.

Now on the other hand, you have people like Kevin de Leon. This is nothing in his reaction that cannot be summed up in two words: Irrational fear. If someone wanted to use their phobia of Nyan Cat to write a law, they’d be hauled off by the nice, young men in their clean, white coats. But no one says anything when someone like de Leon wants to write a law based on his fear of a block of 7075  Aluminum. And Mr. de Leon is so frightened of that piece of metal that he’s wants to keep it away from you, me, and people here who face violence like our neighbors in Ayutla face.

I’m not sure which scares him more: An 80% lower or a single mom with a semi-auto rifle defending her children from some neighborhood thug.

News Self-defense

To be fair, perhaps he really means that Eric Holder imported far more guns to Mexico that anyone imagined.

The President, travelling in Mexico, made the false claim that the majority of illegal guns used in crimes in that country come from the US. Even the Daily Mail couldn’t help but notice that the President failed to mention his Fast and Furious operation that funnelled thousands of illegal guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.


At times it seems like ours is a world that’s ever in turmoil. Everything seems like it’s in some state of upheaval. There are, however, some things in this world that are reliable constants; like the Washington Post shilling for the extreme, anti-gun Left. This op-ed piece, Lax U.S. gun laws enable killing in Mexico, is the latest example of the “stability” of the Post.

If we are to believe the Post’s editorial board, the lessons we should take away from the whole Fast and Furious scandal are…

  • 80% of all illegal guns in Mexico still come from the US
  • Fast and Furious was well intentioned
  • It’s really George Bush’s fault

Of course, as has been explained before, the 80% Myth (Formerly known as the 90% Myth) is simply false. The Mexican government is downright sloppy when it comes to their gun trace requests to the BATFE and their own record keeping. They’re just plain corrupt about inventory control at armories and evidence lockers.

And was Fast and Furious really “well intentioned”? Increasingly, it looks like the sole purpose to the operation was to gin-up a reason for more domestic gun control laws. How well intentioned could a government be that conspires to manipulate the media in an attempt to rob the People of their liberties? (And let’s be honest, with media like WaPo around, why all the silly cloak-and-dagger nonsense? Our “free press” will  happily bend over and print whatever anti-gun propaganda the Obama administration asks them to!)

And for the record, the forerunner to Fast and Furious was “Operation gunrunner”; a Bush-era program that actually stopped illegal guns before they crossed the border into Mexico. But stopping illegal guns isn’t as useful for writing new gun laws as is letting them into the hands of narco-terrorists. For that little ruse, the Obama program Fast and Furious was created. And if this really was all Bush’s fault, why is Obama’s Attorney General engaged in a cover up? Why would Eric Holder protect the Bushies?

News Politics

News Politics