– Bernd Debusmann is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own. –
Last year, around 2,500 Mexicans died in the twin wars drug cartels are waging against each other and against the Mexican state, using weapons smuggled in from the United States. In the first 11 months of this year, the death toll was 5,367, according to the Mexican attorney general. Next year?
There is no end in sight. At least two of the lethal ingredients in the toxic brew that fuels Mexico’s ever-widening violence are unlikely to change: lax American gun laws and a Mexican border that barely controls north-south traffic. On many of the crossing points along the 2,000-mile frontier, travelers coming in from the United States, by car or on foot, are routinely waved through without even having to show identity papers.
Weak Mexican border controls rarely feature in official or academic reports on a problem that has prompted some experts and U.S. publications to wonder whether Mexico is a “failing state”. That’s the headline over a cover story on Mexico in the latest edition of the business magazine Forbes. Mexican officials reject the label.
But privately, they concede that Mexican authorities are doing a less-than-thorough job in searching and monitoring north-south traffic. They tend to point in the other direction, to the easy availability of guns in the United States, the armory of Mexico’s criminal mafias.
According to statistics from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), the agency charged with regulating the firearms industries, there are 9,161 licensed arms dealers in the four states bordering Mexico — California, Texas, New Mexico and Arizona. Buyers from licensed establishments need to go through a background check and the serial numbers of their purchases can be traced.
No background checks and no paperwork is necessary for weapons traded between private citizens on the “secondary” market — gun shows, over the Internet, through classified advertisements. Around 40 percent of all gun sales in the United States, where private citizens own at least 200 million guns, are on the informal market, estimates the Violence Policy Center, a Washington-based group in favor of tougher gun controls.
How many guns are smuggled across the porous border? Nobody knows, and a frequently used figure of 2,000 every day appears to be more of an urban legend than an estimate based on evidence. It would amount to 730,000 smuggled guns a year.
Whatever the number, it is enough for the U.S. State Department, on its website, to advise citizens contemplating a visit to Mexico that “recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have taken on the characteristics of small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and, on occasion, grenades”.
AMONG WEAPONS OF CHOICE: COP KILLERS
Almost all the weapons seized inside Mexico or left at the scene of shootouts have been traced back to the United States through eTrace, an electronic system the ATF set up to trace illicit firearms. The cartel killers’ weapons of choice: AK-47 and AR-15 assault rifles. Favorite pistols: Colt .38 Super, Glock 9 millimeter, and the FN 5-7, nicknamed “cop killer” because it can pierce a flak jacket at a range of 300 meters.
All these can be legally (and easily) acquired in the United States by citizens and legal residents without a criminal record, after a background check with the Federal Bureau of Investigations that often takes less than 15 minutes. The ease with which Americans can get arms flares into public controversy at regular intervals, usually after a gun owner with a grudge commits a massacre in a school or other public place.
Attempts to introduce more restrictions have failed regularly, and this year the Supreme Court ended decades of legal argument by ruling that the second amendment of the U.S. constitution, written 219 years ago, does guarantee an individual’s right “to keep and bear arms”.
Even Eduardo Medina Mora, the outspoken Mexican attorney general who makes no secret of his frustration with the flow of weapons from the north, seems resigned to the prospect that the United States will not change its gun laws to keep Mexico from sliding into deeper trouble.
“Although … it may seem absurd to us that a (U.S.) citizen can buy an AK-47, an AR-15, or a Barrett .50, it’s the law of the land,” he told the Spanish newspaper El Pais in November. The last item on his list is a sniper rifle that costs $8,650, weighs 30 pounds and can punch through an armored vehicle from a mile away.
On the U.S. side of the border, the ATF has just launched an advertising campaign in Arizona to remind citizens that buying guns on behalf of others — so called-straw purchases — carries penalties of up to 10 years in jail. Using straw buyers has been one of the cartels’ methods to evade background checks. Gun shows are another.
Just before entering Mexico, large signs at crossing points read: “Warning: Firearms and Ammunition Illegal in Mexico.” Chances that you are stopped and searched by Mexican officials are slim.
Reuters correspondent Tim Gaynor, author of a forthcoming book on the frontier (Midnight on the Line: The Secret Life of the U.S.-Mexico Border) reports: “In scores of crossings I have made to Mexico over several years, I have been stopped on just two or three occasions. Never once have I had my car searched. The odds are heavily in favor of the smugglers.”
Time for Mexico to start watching its border rather than pointing a finger at the United States?
You can contact the author at Debusmann@reuters.com. For previous columns by Bernd Debusmann, click here.
Sure. Why not? Watching borders definitely better than finger pointing.
Let's assume Mexico does as adequate a job watching the border as the US would do. . . what would happen? Drug Cartels quit the business for lack of fire power? If there were no high powered sophisticated guns there would be no cartels, right? Mobsters in America during the thirties had it so rough. No glocks, AK-47s or Barrett .50s. It's a wonder the mafia survived in America.
Perhaps a combination of the analyses behind *The Case for Piracy* *America's decades old failed drug war* and this column are in order. If we combined all three would we still be talking about the border?
Trackback
205 comments so far
Previous | 11 … | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Next
The Bush Administration has a direct responsibility for this situation. The business interests who funneled million of dollars to G W Bush and his team want to break the already low wages of the USA low and middle class by allowing millions of illegals to cross the border into the USA. How did they do this–by virtually leaving the border totally open and unenforced by the border patrols or by erecting a protective barrier. All along the border from Texas to California, local governments are forced to now deal with this influx of non-educated and impoverished people from Mexico and South America. One could easily reason that the bravado that Bush has exuded since 9/11 that he is fighting terrorism in Iraq is a pile of crap. Terrorists can easily come into the USA hundreds of ways all along the 2000 mile Mexican border.
We now are reaping the another of the Bush ugly history–thousands of Mexicans are fighting what amounts to a civil war just a few mile from us here in El Paso. Over 3,000 police in Juarez have been killed in the last 12 months.
Don’t get too complacent however. I think this bloody drug war will come right on over the border in the next 5 years and we will all be caught in it. Gangs already have staked out turf in all our major cities. Gun battles, kidnapping, murder, police corruption are coming to a neighborhood near you as this spreads. Thank God only 2 more months of GW Bush’s failure. However, we will all be victims of his neglect and greed for years to come.
Gun control critics, do you really believe Washington DC & Chicago can be taken seriously as examples of ineffective gun control given their proximity to uncontrolled jurisdictions and their exposure to uncontrolled populations?
How do you reconcile this position when considering the significantly lower homicide rates of Australia, Britain & Canada for example (and there are many others), as compared with those of the US?
I just don’t see how intelligent gun control doesn’t benefit everyone - definitely including gun fans. With intelligent gun control:
* People who don’t want guns don’t buy them.
* Criminals find it much harder to procure them.
* Perfectly normal law abiding citizens who have guns as a hobby can go to the local shooting range & shoot their own gun.
* Guns become just another hobby & its hobbyists no longer need to defend their hobby from those who don’t share it.
* Unstable 16 year olds have no option to plot & commit mass murder.
* The out of control meth addict tries to rob the local convenience store with a far less lethal weapon.
* The US constitution’s 2nd amendment stays in tact.
Add to all of that fewer dead people & how do good people lose out whether they are pro gun control or not?
Believe it or not, I like guns well more than most people, but I wouldn’t give up the gun control in my country for anything unless it saved more lives.
The pro gun argument by Dave532 is weak. The assumption that the way to protect yourself from “gun-toting criminals” is to carry guns yourself is absurd. I believe the chances of lowering the amount of gun deaths by introducing MORE guns into the equation doesn’t make any sense at all.
Your neighborhood cop is trained (or should be) in firearm use. He is also trained into how to assess a situation and make the decision WHEN to pull out the firearm. Your neighborhood cop has also got a big target painted on him since he has been granted the authority to enforce the law.
I would venture a guess that most gun owners have less than adequate training or experience with a gun to warrant using one. I would also think that a person like yourself doesn’t have any other plan of protection other than “I’ve got a bigger gun than yours”. While that plan works there are other preventative measures that can be taken looooong before the criminal ends up in front of you with a gun.
As a law abiding legal gun owner I applaude and very much agree with the pro 2nd ammendment responses. Come on do you really think law abiding US citizens are buying guns for drug cartel bad guys then smuggling them across the border??
Stop the drugs and the cartels will dissolve along with the killing and abuse. Mexico should stop pointing fingers and beef up their border searches with good, honest border police if there is such a thing.
Without the 2nd ammendment the United States would be just a hollow shell of a country with a lot of scared sheep (read people).
Since Bernd Debusmann is this inaccurate on firearms issues, I have to wonder about the accuracy of his other editorials. It’s apparent that he did not research this article and may have relied on “data” from organizations with their own agenda. Poor reporting, by any definition, but apparently acceptable for editorial comment. My faith in Reuters as a conveyor of news, truth, or any of the other noble virues has dropped considerably. Blaming Mexico’s problems on US gun laws is like blaming New York’s weather on Pennsylvania. I can only assume that Debusmann was seriously hoodwinked by some of his gun information sources - to advance their own agenda.
“The sovereigns of the world,” writes ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in elaboration of this theme, “must conclude a binding treaty, and establish a covenant, the provisions of which shall be sound, inviolable and definite. They must proclaim it to all the world, and obtain for it the sanction of all the human race… All the forces of humanity must be mobilized to insure the stability and permanence of this Most Great Covenant… The fundamental principle underlying this solemn Pact should be so fixed that if any government later violate any one of its provisions, all the governments on earth should arise to reduce it to utter submission, nay the human race as a whole should resolve, with every power at its disposal, to destroy that government.”
(Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha’u'llah, p. 192)
“It is obvious that not until the people are educated, not until public opinion is rightly focused, not until government officials, even minor ones, are free from even the least remnant of corruption, can the country be properly administered. Not until discipline, order and good government reach the degree where an individual, even if he should put forth his utmost efforts to do so, would still find himself unable to deviate by so much as a hair’s breadth from righteousness, can the desired reforms be regarded as fully established.”
“Furthermore, any agency whatever, though it be the instrument of mankind’s greatest good, is capable of misuse. Its proper use or abuse depends on the varying degrees of enlightenment, capacity, faith, honesty, devotion and high-mindedness of the leaders of public opinion”.
(Abdu’l-Baha, The Secret of Divine Civilization, p. 15)
Should I be embarrassed that I felt more emotion thinking “that sounds fun!” when reading the statement about the sniper rifle than at any other point in this article?
DRUG cartels, DRUG related crime, DRUG war ($40b/yr wasted)… None of this would be happening if the drugs were legal. Have governments control them, sell them and tax them. Save money and lives.
I hope people read what most of us in here seem to agree on… The 2nd ammendment. To me this is just another attempt at suggesting we give our rights up as American Citizens so either the “bad” guys or maybe, even worse soccialist ideas and ways win…No way I say, you can not have my guns. I will vote to ensure my right to bear Arms. If they take our right to vote away (soccialism) then I may have act…Hopefully we all will.
I was born and raised in Mexico and all I can say is that the Mexican government needs to seriously consider introducing a law that allows law abiding citizens the right to bear arms. Why should the criminals and the corrupt/scared police the only ones with the weapons? Since the police is already doing a lousy job of protecting the population, citizens should be allowed to protect themselves. The only thing I agree with this article is that Mexico is quickly becoming a failed state.
According to the organization, Fund for Peace, a failed state is one with a central government so weak or ineffective that it has little practical control over much of its territory; non-provision of public services; widespread corruption and criminality; refugees and involuntary movement of populations; and sharp economic decline.
Why else would most of the populations be fleeing to the US? No jobs, no protection, no safety, no education, NO FUTURE!!
The lead heads will always find a rationale for their absolutist interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. The NRA is the greatest thing to happen to the Mexican drug gangs; in fact they’re practically their armorer and facilitator. Collateral damage to others means nothing to the NRA and the lead heads. Pointing to DC and Chicago as two cities with large crime problems and gun control laws ignores many other factors that go into crime statistics; it also ignores an obvious measure of just how bad a place really is, its per capita gun deaths/year, which is quite high in places with loose gun laws like Houston and Miami, I believe higher than DC and Chicago. So look at all the facts, not just the ones you would like to pick and choose, and if you’re going to make an argument about correlation you’re being intellectually dishonest since causation is the issue.
A few observations from someone who travels in Baja California:
The FULLY AUTOMATIC weapons used by the drug cartels, including hand grenades and rocket propelled grenades used against Mexican police, most certainly did NOT come from U.S. dealers. In my opinion, the most likely source is the drug cartels’ connections with FARC and Chavez’s “Bolivarian” revolution. The choice of Colt .38 Super mention is significant to me because this is the largest caliber LEGALLY available in Mexico to private citizens, indicating that those handguns were most likely obtained in Mexico. Colts smuggled in from the U.S. would most likely be larger caliber, since the .38 Super commands a premium in the U.S.
As far as I know, There are NO cases of a Barrett .50 being used in a crime, either in the U.S. or Mexico.
As the article points out, the Mexican law is very strict against illegal possession of either guns OR ammunition. There are American citizens serving prison time in Mexico for inadvertently bringing ammunition across the border. These facts are well known and well advertised to those crossing the border. While searches may be infrequent, the penalties are severe and unlike the American side, difficult to escape. Only the foolish would risk it.
In summary, there are certainly problems with the drug trade, but I suspect they have more to do with the massive market and opportunity for profit that America’s prohibition approach creates. Mexico also suffers from systemic corruption in its police force, although its Army forces are improving. To blame the drug violence on “lax” American gun laws and “lax” border enforcement is to misdirect attention from real sources, and take resources away from where they would do the most good.
Mexico and Mexicans need an economy that offers alternatives, and their law enforcement forces need the prestige and pay that provide a defense against the temptation of corruption. Fixing the problems the drug trade and its associated violence requires assisting Mexico in building and strengthening a functioning civil society, none of which will be done by focusing attention on American gun laws or lack of border searches.
Just my two cents.
There is no doubt that Mexico is a country in trouble, not only because of the drug wars but also because of an ever-worsening crime situation. Kidnapping has developed into an industry, and common crime is everywhere. But it is an exxageration to speak of Mexico as a failing state, as Forbes did, and a few months ago Stratfor, a financial analysis company. The Mexican state is weak, but it is not failing.
What IS failing is an effort by the Mexican government to counter-act the very dark view many Americans have of their neighbor. Being called a failing state is bad enough but now a Columbia law professor, Philip Bobbit, has gone a step further in a recenet Washington Post article. This is what he said:
Mexico is potentially our Pakistan — a failing state on our border that can provide haven for our adversaries, at least some of whom will be privatized terrorists. Imagine a poorer, less-democratic Mexico; then imagine it harboring extortionists with a small arsenal of deliverable nuclear or biological weapons. This may be a long-term threat, but it requires immediate assistance and cooperation.”
Give me a break. Mexico is not Pakistan. What’s next? They will compare us to Somalia?
I am a staunch supporter of the 2nd amendment. The D.C ban is overturned and the Chicago ban will soon follow. That is not the issue here. If I have read correctly, firearm sales are unreported at shows and to foreign nationals or cross border. I am sorry to report that arms and military equipment are the United States biggest export products. It has been that way for some time (balance of trade you know).Our government knows the destruction and human cost this business has wreaked around the world yet they still allow it. Maybe that is why so many in congress support excessive gun control here at home (maybe this is why so many abroad don’t like us too). This seems to me less an issue of personal liberties and more a matter of politicians ensuring the financial health of substantial campaign contributors (weapons manufacturers). No matter what the cost.
Now we need to give up our constitutional rights to save Mexican bandits?
Search everybody if you want to, but don’t point fingers.
A little research would tell the author that a “flack vest” is something designed to stop shrapnal, as in mortar and Grenade rounds. As for regular body armor, AKA “bullet Proof Vest” An Arrow,a sharp stick, a knife, or any other pointed object, like a tire iron or barbeque fork will penetrate body armor. Throwing around terms like “Cop Killer” only serves to inflame otherwise sane people to make wrong headed ill-informed choices.
Another misinforming article written by yet another misinformed author.
Quickly:
The F-N 5.7 by itself is no more effective against body armor then a Glock .22 (for example). Only specialized ammunition (which is essentially attainable only by law enforcement) can penetrate various levels of body armor.
The .38 Super is considered a competition round and is sold in such limited quantities that gangs cannot find ammunition for it…Your data is highly suspect.
The AR-15 and AK-47 are rifles. Nothing more, nothing less. The Ruger mini 14, Browning BAR are also rifles that accomplish the exact same thing…semi-automatic fire. That’s all…no fully automatic, armor-piercing, evil technology. These are all rifles that fully serve
legal hunters in America throughout the year.
Federal background checks have never taken “15 minutes”…I am an avid and legal gun owner. Even after repeated checks I must still wait for at least 1 week to purchase a firearm. It is frustrating, but if it helps to keep a gun out of the hands of the wrong person, so be it.
Again…blaming the tool, not the user. History has proven time and again stricter gun laws only decrease the law-abiding citizen the chance to rightfully defend himself. Under no circumstances will increased gun restrictions in the US decrease gun-related crime south of the border. Mexican gangs can and will continue to replenish their gun supply from Brazil, France and of course, China.
Is it a coincidence that Chicago and Wash DC, the 2 most gun-crime ridden cities in the country, also ban the right of the homeowner to defend himself/herself against that which the criminal obtains illegally? But wait, how is this possible? Handguns are banned in Wash DC? That automatically removes ALL guns from ALL hands, correct?
These idealistic gun control views are often found wanting when reality proves that as long as the demand exists, so will the supply.
Just imagine for one second that we ban ALL guns in the US. Honestly, what would the Mexican border look like then? I propose that once criminals realize we cannot defend our border, the border will disappear.
In fact I propose that guns and the mean and women with the ability to use them have kept the borders as they are for hundred of years.
Why does law enforcement carry a weapon? To defend himself and others against ILLEGAL weapons and their owners.
I also own my weapon to defend…I don’t have the same right as my neighborhood cop?
my kids all were required to take drug education courses. these should include background on all of the cartels and narco-violence worldwide.
Sure. Why not? Watching borders definitely better than finger pointing.
Let’s assume Mexico does as adequate a job watching the border as the US would do. . . what would happen? Drug Cartels quit the business for lack of fire power? If there were no high powered sophisticated guns there would be no cartels, right? Mobsters in America during the thirties had it so rough. No glocks, AK-47s or Barrett .50s. It’s a wonder the mafia survived in America.
Perhaps a combination of the analyses behind *The Case for Piracy* *America’s decades old failed drug war* and this column are in order. If we combined all three would we still be talking about the border?
More gun control; More crime. All law abiding citizens should be armed!