The new 60,000 is 84,000

[Oneka]

In recent weeks I have heard the number floated for US originated
guns seized in Mexico at 60,000. Apparently is has climbed to
84,000, according to exerts from this article.


"Mexico has seized approximately 100,000 guns in the last four years; 84% of them originated in America."

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/fast-furious-candal-a-republican-red-herring-tougher-gun-laws-article-1.979966#ixzz1eSLVkPIC


I'm confused, anyone know if either number is remotely accurate?

[We_Have_A_Problem]

1. Considering the source...

...it is doubtful

[slackmaster]

2. A more important question would be how many of those guns of US origin were imported legally,...

...sold to the Mexican government then diverted to illegal channels.

[rl6214]

3. By "Originated in America" do they mean manufactured in

because if that were the case I can see that number as realistic. If they mean sold to a dealer in the US, I would say BS.

[Oneka]

4. I would hope that

Rep Maloney knows the answer to these questions, since she is using
this data in support of legislation that would affect many thousands of citizen gun owners.

[ileus]

5. I think it's of the 60,000 recovered 84k of them come from hidden criminal rude US toters.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

17. but but but

... you want to ban all guns, surely Obama and Eric Holder want to ban all guns ... :shrug:

[Tejas]

26. So, 60+ congressmen were imagining things.

60-something Dem reps signing a letter reminding Holder to STFU about gun bans...nah, none of it happened, move along, nothing to see here folks.

[AtheistCrusader]

7. What I would like to know, is what percentage are military weapons that originated in the US

that our government transferred to their government, and those weapons subsequently leaked to criminal hands.

I am not trying to slag the Mexican government, but they are infiltrated by the cartels, and they leak weapons. I would like to see an accounting of how much they leak, and how that figures into the 'guns from america' issue.

[Oneka]

15. I would like answers to thouse questions

as well. I don't think that Carolyn Maloney, or Philipe Calderon, would be unbiased sources for such information.

[krispos42]

8. Traditionally on this story, there has been several bases of confusion

1. The trace percentage has been portrayed as the percentage of guns confiscated. However, it's my understanding that it is the percentage of traces submitted to the ATF. In your article above, you quote "'Mexico has seized approximately 100,000 guns in the last four years; 84% of them originated in America.'" Okay, did the journalist make a mistake and assume that the 84% trace rate is applied to all weapons seized? Did the contact he interviewed mislead him to that assumption? Did the journalist ask the right question?

Reading your quote leads me to believe that 84,000 weapons were traced back to America. Is this true, or did the numbers get mixed up? How many of the 100,000 guns had serial numbers sent to the ATF?


2. "US originated" is very vague.

The Mexican federal government and Mexican state and city governments buy weapons from the US for military and police use; some of them get lost or stolen and wind up in criminal hands.

The US government has given lots of guns to lots of South American countries over the years; some of them get lost, stolen, or sold on the open market and wind up in criminal hands.

Guns get stolen from private homes and businesses in America and smuggled across the border and wind up in criminal hands.

Straw purchasers buy guns with the intention of selling them to smugglers who bring them across the border and put them in criminal hands.

So which is which?

[Oneka]

9. The article that I quoted

was written by rep. Carolyn Maloney. In the article she attributes the
84% directly to Mexican President Philipe Calderon . The link Provided in her article
Appears to go no where.
That is part of my confusion.

[jmg257]

10. ATF's numbers: 40,564 in 2004-2010.

Stuart Lowrey, Chief ATF Firearms Operations Division
Sworn Statement Nov 8, 2011

"Between fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 2008, an estimated 20,060 firearms were traced back to the US."

"29,284 were recovered in Mexico and submitted to ATF for tracing in 2009-2010; of these 20,504 were US-sourced firearms."


This includes ALL US sourced (US manufactured or imported into US) guns, including military weapons (and apparently 96 of the 2,020 from Fast & Furious).

In 2009-2010, roughly 9,000 of the 20,500 were traced back to US FFLs.

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/judiciary/upload/Holder-11-15-11-Fact-are-Stubborn-Things-Guns-in-Mexico-documents.pdf


These '09 & '10 numbers coincide with the WSJ article "Mexican Guns Tied to U.S.".

[Oneka]

16. So ATF's numbers are less than half of what

Representative Maloney is claiming? As much as i distrust the ATF after their recent shenanigans, i guess i would believe thier numbers over

Carolyn maloney's, via Calderon. What makes me sick is that maloney is using this questionable 84% data from Calderon to promote a new gun law.

[Hoyt]

11. If they recovered millions of gun and thousands of bodies, American gun owners would oppose anything

that might impede their access to more guns, or to selling/trafficking them without a background check. Plus, they'd bash the ATF for trying to identify gun traffickers.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

12. Another nation's problems...

...do not in any way justify restricting a constitutionally protected right in the US.

[Hoyt]

13. Like I said . . American gunners don't care how many people are killed with their lovely guns.

[iverglas]

18. I've got the solution

Mexico should amend its constitution to include the right to possess, buy and sell narcotics.

Then Mexico could say to the US:

Another nation's problems...
...do not in any way justify restricting a constitutionally protected right in Mexico.

Mexico and Canada should both just do it, actually. Canada's constitution more than arguably already requires decriminalization (as does the US constitution of course, but that's your problem). Then you could fight your fucking drug wars on your own turf, and our various narco gangs could just go legit and wouldn't need your guns.

Of course, we'd be left trading with each other, by boat or whatever, and organized crime isn't likely really going to just settle down with the wife and kids, but what the hell. We take our chances. And the US can stop exporting its problems and the guns that go with.

[beevul]

14. If ATF had been trafficking the guns...

If ATF had been trafficking the guns, those against guns and/or toting would ignore it, ignore that ATF lied about it, ignore atf retaliation against whistleblowers, ignore ATF leaking documents to the public which it refused to turn over to congress in spite of subpoena, ignore justice stonewalling about it, blame it on bush, or claim it was something that it wasn't...like a failed sting or some such nonsense.

Or all the above.

[iverglas]

19. and the right wing

would be blaming the Obama administration.

Oh. Hmm.

[beevul]

27. And who would YOU blame?

Most that give two shits (Defined as caring more about it than ideology) would blame the administration under which it actually happened, regardless of the "flavor" of that administration, or at the VERY least, whomever IN that administration evidence pointed to as being involved (AKA responsible) and those in that administration whos job it is to be in control so things like this DO NOT and CAN NOT be done.

How about you?

Somehow I think that if ATF facilitated delivery of over 2 thousand firearms across the border of CANADA, and hundreds of CANADIANS including some within CANADIAN law enforcement ended up dead, shot with THOSE particular firearms, you'd pitch a fit the likes of which DU has never seen.

And I think you'd BLAME on whatever government, and whomever IN that government, evidence pointed to as being involved (AKA responsible), whether they were Democrat, republican, socialist party, communist party, etc, and I think you'd lay that blame regardless of the race, creed, color, gender, or sexual orientation of the individuals involved, and on those in that administration whos job it is to be in control so things like this DO NOT and CAN NOT be done.


But hey, feel free to tell us all that you wouldn't.

[iverglas]

28. but hmm

Would I be claiming that said government orchestrated it all in order to drum up demand for gun control?

Because the thing is, you see, that's what I keep seeing.

I'd probably have to spend a week of 10-hour days just trying to sort the wheat from the chaff on this business, as it stands, and I just don't have the time or inclination.

I have no doubt that governments and their actors and agencies sometimes fuck up. Some fuck-ups are genuinely and truly horrific and heads should roll, if not worse. There's still a difference between a fuck-up and a conspiracy, and there are multiple degrees and loci of responsibility possible. Many facts have to be determined in any such case.

Rushing to judgment is often unseemly, and often indicative of motivation.

[beevul]

29. Well...in fairness...

"Would I be claiming that said government orchestrated it all in order to drum up demand for gun control? Because the thing is, you see, that's what I keep seeing."

Well, in fairness, there are the following:

AFT agents told to "stand down" rather than "interdict". This is fact. Why were they told NOT to interdict (a KNOWN outcome of non interdiction in this case being guns they told dealers to go through with transactions on, would cross into Mexico), completely contrary to their mission as an agency?

Justice department stonewalling. This is FACT. Why is justice stonewalling?


And this:

But American authorities concealed one disturbing fact about the case from their Mexican counterparts: U.S. federal agents had allowed AK-47 assault rifles later found in the killers' arsenal to be smuggled across the border under the notorious Fast and Furious gun-trafficking program.

U.S. officials also kept mum as other weapons linked to Fast and Furious turned up at dozens of additional Mexican crime scenes, with an unconfirmed toll of at least 150 people killed or wounded.

Months after the deadly lapses in the program were revealed in the U.S. media — prompting congressional hearings and the reassignment of the acting chief of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — top Mexican officials say American authorities have still not offered them a proper accounting of what went wrong.

Marisela Morales, Mexico's attorney general and a longtime favorite of American law enforcement agents in Mexico, told The Times that she first learned about Fast and Furious from news reports. And to this day, she said, U.S. officials have not briefed her on the operation gone awry, nor have they apologized.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/19/world/la-fg-mexico-fast-furious-20110920

You have deliberate non-notification of Mexico, of fast and furious. Why?




You have the Denial:

MCMAHON: I totally agree with you, sir. That is not in the makeup of an ATF agent. We do not allow guns to walk. What we did in this investigation was investigating a large group of individuals that were breaking the law, and we were trying to put our case together so that we could actually make an impact.

http://findarticles.com/p/news-articles/political-transcript-wire/mi_8167/is_20110726/rep-darrell-issa-holds-hearing/ai_n57903903/pg_14/

"we do not allow guns to walk". That was an obvious and clear 100 percent LIE to the American people. Why the lie?


Take whistle blower John Dodsons testimony in front of congress:

"what we were ordered to do every day, was watch these - the same guys, buy the same guns, from the same dealers, who WE told to make the sales, and then we'd sit back and wait for the traces, and when they came through from places in Mexico, where it was DEFINITIVELY related to cartels, they were giddy, they thought that that justified ...that that created their nexus from the straw purchaser to the cartel, however theres not a rookie police officer in this country that can explain to you how were going to make a case on them with that information".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EupHuUQVzVo

If the information Mr. Dodson isn't useful for making a criminal case with, why would anyone be giddy about receiving it, and what WOULD it be useful for which might cause them to be "giddy" about receiving it? Remember what McMahon said above, about "trying to put our case together so that we could actually make an impact"? He was lieing. Dodsons testimony makes that crystal clear.

Why was he lieing, and what was the truth of the matter?

You have Obamas "under the radar" statement, which sure doesn't help matters any:

During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control, “to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda,” she said.

“I just want you to know that we are working on it,” Brady recalled the president telling them. “We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/over-a-barrel-meet-white-house-gun-policy-adviser-steve-croley/2011/04/04/AFt9EKND_story_2.html

You have Holder:

Whether he knew and did nothing, or did not know when it was his job to, Holder failed.

So far, he has not been asked to resign by Obama. Why?

You have the sealing of the Terry case, to witch veteran ATF agent Vince A Ccefalu comments:

Many of us in the Law Enforcement community are extremely troubled by the sealing of the Terry prosecution. As we all know, there is very little in the L.E. World which is truly sensitive or classified. No we DO NOT want to give away trade craft. No we DO NOT WANT to give away investigative strategies. However, when the government witholds information related to an extremely controversial and questionable investigation which has resulted in so many abuses and deaths, it is clear that its sealing can only be to secret such abuses. I have not been able to find anyone in Law Enforcement who has seen such an action in their entire career.

http://cleanupatf.org/forums/index.php?/topic/153-atf-operation-gunrunnerfast-furiousphoenix-division/

Why was it sealed?



You have former U.S. Attorney Dennis Burke leaking documents which were withheld from congress in spite of subpoena, presumably to smear a whistle blower. Why?

http://www.usatoday.com/USCP/PNI/NEWS/2011-11-10-PNI1110met-burkeleakPNIBrd_ST_U.htm


Combine those things with Holders signature on the amicus for DC, for the handgun ban, and against the second amendment, in the heller case, Holders statements about assault weapons before he was told to shut up by the administration, Obamas voting record and activity on the gun issue previous to being president, and the fact that certain positions in ATF are known to be "political" which in that agency equates to "anti-gun". Plus the recent edict attempting to require border gun shop to report certain long gun sales - which are no doubt based on violence in mexico with American guns, the supporting data of which, almost certainly contains elements from fast and furious guns...

What you get, from all of the above, is people speculating and drawing conclusions which are not at all implausible.

"I'd probably have to spend a week of 10-hour days just trying to sort the wheat from the chaff on this business, as it stands, and I just don't have the time or inclination."

What grounds do you have then, to denigrate, characterize as "rushing to judgment", or question in any way - people who most likely HAVE been paying attention to this since last january when it became public knowledge?

An honest position, is that nobody is beyond reproach where something like fast and furious and its ramifications and intent are concerned, and while I am not convinced that "said government orchestrated it all in order to drum up demand for gun control", I don't think such a conclusion or one similar to it (ATF did it independently to gin up more budget/power for example)can be moved into the category of implausible, either, based on evidence at hand.

Is that unreasonable?

[Callisto32]

30. Right.

Governments never do horrible things to drum up support for their pre-determined positions.

Gulf of Tonkin, anyone.

[iverglas]

20. it really is quite interesting to note

that the Mexican government is fighting the drug war as a pure proxy for the US, the drugs in Mexico being a problem for the US and not so much for Mexico.

And in return, what does Mexico get?

Guns for the other side of the little war.

Interesting concept of fair trade.

[Oneka]

22. That proxy bit

is an interesting take on the situation down in Mexico. I haven't looked at it that way till now, but i don't disagree with your analysis.

[iverglas]

23. thank you

I may see it more clearly because we're doing it up here too.

We grow pot; big fucking deal, eh? But because the US -- insisting on its own interpretation of the international convention in question as covering cannabis, when many disagree -- pitches a huge trade-threatening fit whenever we talk about decriminalizing it (and the Senate here, home to political hacks of a generally very non-progressive bent, recommended that very thing some years ago), we are stuck between frying pan and fire, and stuck with the Hell's Angels and their various ilk running the grow ops and trading the stuff for guns and coke.

[Oneka]

24. A sad state of affairs

when just a bit of sense could rule the day. Imagine what ending the War on Drugs in the US would do to lower, violence in all 3 countries.

[Callisto32]

31. Meh.

Drugs aren't a problem, prohibition is.

Hows about we end prohibition, and turn the cartels into a bunch of farmers?

You do understand that the situation you decry is the result of the failed policies of the governments to which you wish we would cede more authority, right?

[oneshooter]

21. Gee Hoyt, you must have squatted and strained to get that much crap out of your mouth,

without choking. Just goes to prove that practice helps.

Took some rain jackets to the park today. Was accompanied by my good friend a 45cal SIG220. They said thanks and I left. Nothing happened.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Tejas]

25. "they'd bash the ATF for trying to identify gun traffickers" - Newell, is that you?

You seem familiar.