Comments on: American guns and the war next door Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: Fred Bowser Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:23:54 +0000 If they are being smuggled then where does this figure of 2,000 a day come from? How much drug traffic comes into the U S from South America and what is the responsibility for that by their citizens in terms of their freedoms and rights. Perhaps every home and business in certain South American countries should open to search and seizure on a daily basis. Why is this a war between drug dealers in Mexico so important and what makes this something that U S citizens should be concerned about. Concerned to the point that we should curtail our freedom? Perhaps England should have set aside a lot of their citizens civil rights during the strife in Northern Ireland? Who would pay for the enforcement of new and restrictive laws in the U S?
Finally, again why is this so important? Huge areas of Africa still live medically in the 19th century. Over and over we again see headlines of hundreds of thousands on that continent perishing due to lack of food. The situation in darfur, Western Sudan is not solved and a reminder of ten years ago the genocide in the former Yugoslav that went on for years with the world standing by just observing.
I will give the writer one hurrahh for great great creativity and nominate him for a high award for best fiction author this month.

By: John Swierczewski Mon, 12 Jan 2009 16:33:02 +0000 I guess if you are a reporter you can “report” whatever you like. First of all if you buy a firearm on a internet site like gunbroker you have to have it shipped to a
FFL licensed dealer, than if a waiting period is required, like florida, wait to pick up your purchase.
This also applies at gun shows, you have to have a background check to buy.Between private individuals you can sell and that applies to anything, bombs, booze or
drugs.We have enough laws in this country regarding
firearms. It’s the jerls like the mayor of NYC and Chicago
that scream about more laws but do nothing about enforcing
them. By the way the cities with the most laws have the
biggest problems with firearms, duh !

By: Don Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:26:00 +0000 Gun shows DO have background checks. Apparently facts do not get checked by journalist but merely repeated off hand by word of mouth. America is not responsible for the actions of Mexican citizens. Mexicans commint a huge amount of crime as far away as Canada and all over the United States. Maybe if our citizens were allowed to defend their nation against invasion both countries would see a signifigant drop in crime. Mexicans kill more Americans then Al Quada ever did or ever will. Lets focus on the real threat to us.

By: B.Free Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:10:40 +0000 Hey Jimbo, you are so close. Now, is there a difference between the rules of government set forth in the Constitution and the wills of men? If this government stops listening to the people is it still a republic? Is it still the government set forth in the US Constitution? The election of a president that was not popularly elected didn’t violate any rule set down in the Constitution. Even though I do not believe the US needs an electoral college it followed the rules. “To arms?” you are funny. As I stated, it will be the states that do the calling. Not some two bit para military org. or even me. And, as I stated before, I doubt it will happen. My reason for this position is simple, I think the American public is still to fat and happy and unwilling to see all the wrongs this government is doing. And of course the two party system allows us, when we are fed up with one abusive regime, to switch to the other abusive regime and they make it feel so good. Of course I will need to also state that I think this country does a vast amount of good in the world and at home but that is no excuse for the wrongs we commit. They don’t offset. A good citizen acknowledges the good and fights to correct the wrong. And in my opinion, my right to protect my self is inherent and good and this government should not try to limit this ability. If this is making it easier for individuals in other countries to acquire arms, then better enforce the laws regarding international trade in these arms but, do not restrict my rights. If this is being fueled by gross amounts of illicit income and for the past 50 years the country’s efforts at stopping that income have failed, maybe it is time to try a different tactic. Maybe we should take a clue from history. You know it as the XXI amendment. Repeal prohibition!

By: jimbo Tue, 06 Jan 2009 07:19:25 +0000 Our government does provide for peaceful change; it just might not be the change that you want. What then? To arms? Hasn’t happened even in Zimbabwe where there is clearly an illegitimate government in place. If you want an example of a recent time when we allowed peaceful change regardless of the will of the majority I call your attention to the 2000 election where the loser obtained some half million more votes than the winner, yet the only civil unrest was that by the Brooks Brothers GOP congressional staffers who tried to intimidate (terrorize?) the Florida vote counters as they went about their work. I wonder what would have happened if they were armed? The majority of people don’t believe in evolution or plate tectonics or any number of other things that exist or occur, but facts are not determined by majority vote. Which is the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill depends on how you measure it, so this argument is pointless without some definitions we can agree on.

By: Scott Tue, 06 Jan 2009 06:25:53 +0000 No one is going to take MY guns, or tell me what type I amy or may not own, because of what anyone else thinks or does. End of story.

By: B.Free Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:20:27 +0000 Jimbo, I just don’t think the majority of those posting here agree with your message.

As for your take on the Constitution…If a government does not provide for peaceful change…I think you know the quote.

As for your concerns over my spouting conspiracy theory…no, just a simple matter of funding. And, if you think the NRA is the most powerful lobbyist on capital hill, man are you deluding yourself. They don’t have the money or power to be a leading lobbyist. Compared to big oil and the pharmaceuticals they are a gnat buzzing around being an annoyance at best.

And, I am aware of how the Constitution defines treason. And, I will restate, the winners try those charged with treason. Also it is not treason to call upon Congress to vote for a constitutional congress. Call upon…demand…you decide. It would take a popular movement, no doubt. But politicians usually want to keep their job and if enough “demand” was voiced I am sure such action would be taken. And if they didn’t, well, you already stated secession could never happen again and I am sure everyone agrees with you.

James, you state the simple facts. And, if all that illicit money were to dry up???

By: Jason Sun, 04 Jan 2009 18:02:12 +0000 America has two borders in North America. Why don’t we have the same problem with Canada? Maybe Canada is not corrupt. If America magical got rid of their guns tomorrow, the drug cartels would buy guns from China or Russia.

By: William Fletcher Sat, 03 Jan 2009 17:46:35 +0000 Why do the Yanks feel it necessary to HAVE to own more guns than some national armies?

Reliance on a 219 y/o law is twaddle – if I acted on a statute from the Middle Ages and I could (I have a book with complete English statutes from Magna Carta to 1681) I would be looked at askance. Yet 300 million yanks do exactly that – why? Look at all the kids who spray their fellow pupils with semi-auto fire – that was the meaning behind your Constitution??

The US needs to wake up!

By: james Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:43:09 +0000 In this phenomenon tearing at the Mexican social fabric and functionality of Government of Mexico (GOM) the firearms are an accoutrement, an incidental, rather than a driving influence. The cause is incredible illicit wealth, and it is aggravated by the chief influence of inherent corruption in the elite class ruling Mexico and running GOM. The corrupt conduct is systemic and generations long in its influence. I worked as a US Justice Department criminal investigator and official from 1971 until 2004. I met and mingled with GOM officials up to the immediate subcabinet level. A nation does not descend into lawless gang warfare because of weapons, but because the leadership and institutions have sold out, failed. The pretense that smuggled guns from the USA are a cause rather than affect seems silly when the full automatic AK 47 and AK 74 are principle shoulder arms in the gang wars, yet are not even present in the USA to be available to smuggle to Mexico.