• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. gun dealers arming Mexican drug cartels

Truth Detector said:
I see, so when a drug addict robs a house to support his habit, there are no victims. When a drug addict spends a family’s life savings on his habit, there are no victims. When a drug cartel trying to control the market on drugs murders police to prevent discovery, there are no victims. When a drug addict drives his vehicle into oncoming traffic, there are no victims.
Click to expand...

When a person robs another for any reason, he has committed a crime. When a person spends his life savings on his habit, he is morally bankrupt. When a group of individuals attempts to control the market of anything through violence and murder they have committed a crime. When a person drives his vehicle into oncoming traffic he is criminally negligent. And to keep this on topic, when a gun owner uses his "assault weapon" to kill a police officer he has committed a crime. All of these violations are already covered under criminal statutes.

The notion that legalizing heroine and cocaine will lead to less crime is about as hysterically absurd as suggesting that using heroine or cocaine only harms one's self.
Click to expand...

You're neglecting the fact that one can use drugs responsibly just as they can responsibly own a gun and use alcohol responsibly. Why do conservatives ditch the fundamental concept of personal responsibility as soon as the issue is drugs? To me, this shows the lack of guiding principles in the "conservative" movement.

Does anyone with a brain here think that legalizing these drugs will make them any more obtainable and that suddenly drug cartels will disappear?
Click to expand...

Yes.

Does anyone here think that people stoned out of their minds wont attempt to drive their cars?
Click to expand...

1. They already do.
2. The impairment caused by marijuana upon one's ability to drive is debatable.
2. It's already addressed by criminal and civil law.


Does anyone here think that just because the Government now taxes these substances they are no longer terribly harmful to society as a whole?
Click to expand...

The war on drugs is terribly harmful to society.

1. It's a waste of lives.
2. It's terribly expensive.
3. It results in the imprisonment of otherwise law abiding people who are often turned into hardened criminals.
4. A federal ban on possession is the result of an egregious misinterpretation of the Interstate Commerce Clause which gives the government the power to regulate essentially anything.
5. It's arguably a breach of the ninth and tenth amendments.

I can come up with more too, but this topic is getting derailed enough. I would say it's pertinent as the same arguments that are made against the possession of drugs are often made against the possession of guns ("it's harmful to society")
 
Last edited:
Vader said:
Actually, the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply to non-residents. Also ... people selling guns to drug lords, raqueteers, or other criminals, must be held accountable.
Click to expand...

Without imposing some sort of anti-2nd amendment regulation that affects law abiding citizens how do you make sure the persons selling guns are not selling them to non-citizens,drug lords,racketeers and other scum? We can't discriminate on skin color or because someone speaks with a funny accent.

Furthermore, selling automatic weapons is a no-no... unless the seller has a firearms license and the seller is authorized to purchase.
Click to expand...

Automatic firearms should be legal without any hoops to jump through. As you said in a previous post "The 2nd Amendment was designed to protect the American public from being inslaved by the government. ", not the American government from the people. So the federal government shouldn't dictate what firearms you can have and what processes and steps you must go through in order to exercise those rights.
 
Wait a gosh darn minute! Missile launchers from the US are making it into the hands of these Mexican bad guys??!! We may also have a serious breach taking place within our US military weapon supply bases.

President Calderon sees this flow of extreme weaponry as a responsibility of US officials at the border. I would agree but also wonder about Mexico's border guards too.



Mexico: U.S. Must Stop Gun Trade At Border - CBS News

(CBS/AP) Mexico blames the U.S. for arming the world's most powerful drug cartels, a complaint supported on Friday by a U.S. government report that found nearly all of Mexico's escalating drug killings involved weapons from north of the border.

President Felipe Calderon and his top prosecutor told The Associated Press on Thursday that Mexican police and soldiers are dangerously outgunned because U.S. authorities are failing to stop the smuggling of high-powered weapons into Mexico

Calderon has complained for two years that the U.S. isn't carrying its weight in the cross-border drug war, despite the fact that American drug users fuel the problem.

"We need to stop the flow of guns and weapons towards Mexico," President Calderon told AP. "Let me express to you that we've seized in this two years more than 25,000 weapons and guns, and more than 90 percent of them came from United States, and I'm talking from missiles launchers to machine guns and grenades."
Click to expand...
 
OutoftheBox said:
Wait a gosh darn minute! Missile launchers from the US are making it into the hands of these Mexican bad guys??!! We may also have a serious breach taking place within our US military weapon supply bases.

President Calderon sees this flow of extreme weaponry as a responsibility of US officials at the border. I would agree but also wonder about Mexico's border guards too.
Click to expand...

It's all hyperbole...

They're pushing really hard to coin semi-auto firearms as assault rifles... as long as they keep up with showing pictures of guys holding ar15s and ak47s... while mentioning machine guns, grenades, and missile launchers... Eventually the populace will swing into that mentality. It's already happened on this site, look at some of the anti-gun arguments in this thread... look a their quite uninformed opinions on what guns are.. and what types of guns there are.
 
Last edited:
stevenb said:
It's all hyperbole...

They're pushing really hard to coin semi-auto firearms as assault rifles... as long as they keep up with showing pictures of guys holding ar15s and ak47s... while mentioning machine guns, grenades, and missile launchers... Eventually the populace will swing into that mentality.
Click to expand...

With every story... with every situation, hype and true facts both exist. Hyperbole has always been used as a tool to some degree since who knows how long in order to pitch one's point of view that helps to promote one's agenda and leverage for seeking additional outside assistance and resources.

Fear is naturally embedded into our psyche over situations like this US/Mexican border struggle over drugs and arms smuggling in which implies that until something like this is brought under control. It's no wonder what types of weapons will end up in 'the bad guys' hands who just happens to also display very little compassion towards those that they assault.

The 2nd Amendment properly applies to US citizens. There will always be 'bad guys' who abuses laws and regulations to some degree. It's those few (suppliers and recieptients) of arms who 'deliberately' causes most major problems. That, of course, is what needs to be examined and addressed, that also needs to lead for being brought under control while still protecting our 2nd Amendment rights. I believe that since 2007/08, Congress has tried to do correct this situation by installing the Merida Initiative in which appears to still have 'bugs' mucking up its honorable intentions, because it too has it's own few 'bad guys' mishandling its funds etc etc. If only we could rely on a properly functional government to do what's right and greatly needed, we'd not be having these kinds of problems that seem to never end.

One thing most will agree to, it's not the 2nd Amendment's fault. It's individuals.



Easy to get, hard to trace

Back in the US, where the Second Amendment upholds the gun shows that some consider a loop hole that facilitates weapons smuggling, the politics surrounding tracing and information sharing can be complicated, while the process of purchasing and required background checks has been streamlined.

Background checks are not always required at gun shows because most sales are considered to be made between two private, unlicensed individuals - not a licensed dealer and an individual, as would be the case in gun stores where a background check is mandatory.

The check itself is often quick and easy. When a customer is ready to close a sale, the merchant is required to call a hotline administered by the Federal Bureau of Investigations, where he gives the appropriate information to the person on the other end of the line. Most of the time this process takes less than five minutes. For years, the process took much longer, to the chagrin of gun shop owners, but over time has become streamlined and easy, according to Litzman.

Strawmen who purchase weapons from law abiding gun merchants are a gateway into the murky world of the grey market, where the guns reside until they are smuggled into Mexico and resold. Before the guns are handed out for criminal use, expert gunsmiths inspect working parts, clean the guns and make the necessary adjustments to turn a semi-automatic into a fully automatic assault weapon.

Once the strawman leaves the store with gun in hand, or leaves the fairgrounds in the case of a gun show, there is no way to trace the weapon until it is found at a crime scene or seized. Often times, weapons seized in Mexico trace back to gun stores in the US, but the only information the gun dealer must legally share is the information already approved by the background check itself. From there it is a dead end.

Tracing weapons captured in Mexico back to the US is itself a complicated process, one only allowed through the federal police headquarters in Mexico City. As a result, many weapons remain untraced because agents do not want to hassle with the bureaucracy.

There are over 200 million guns owned in the US. At any time any of these guns could be sold to men and women who will smuggle them to Mexico - some for personal use and self-defense and others for criminal use. The combination of such a massive supply with demand met by ant-trafficking creates a sea of possibilities, variables and actors in a country where the ATF and others have a limited set of legal tools and, more importantly, constitutional rights to respect and defend.

Guns: The bloody US-Mexico market / ISN
Click to expand...
 
So lemme get this straight....the Mexican government actively encourages Mexicans to blatantly violate US law and US national sovereignity and US national security to invade this nation....and now they're complaining that some mexicans are breaking the law?

Isn't that just too damn bad?

If the drug cartels can bring down the Mexican government that's been invading the US for decades, something our own government's refused to do, fine.
 
BulletWounD said:
When a person robs another for any reason, he has committed a crime. When a person spends his life savings on his habit, he is morally bankrupt. When a group of individuals attempts to control the market of anything through violence and murder they have committed a crime. When a person drives his vehicle into oncoming traffic he is criminally negligent. And to keep this on topic, when a gun owner uses his "assault weapon" to kill a police officer he has committed a crime. All of these violations are already covered under criminal statutes.



You're neglecting the fact that one can use drugs responsibly just as they can responsibly own a gun and use alcohol responsibly. Why do conservatives ditch the fundamental concept of personal responsibility as soon as the issue is drugs? To me, this shows the lack of guiding principles in the "conservative" movement.



Yes.



1. They already do.
2. The impairment caused by marijuana upon one's ability to drive is debatable.
2. It's already addressed by criminal and civil law.




The war on drugs is terribly harmful to society.

1. It's a waste of lives.
2. It's terribly expensive.
3. It results in the imprisonment of otherwise law abiding people who are often turned into hardened criminals.
4. A federal ban on possession is the result of an egregious misinterpretation of the Interstate Commerce Clause which gives the government the power to regulate essentially anything.
5. It's arguably a breach of the ninth and tenth amendments.

I can come up with more too, but this topic is getting derailed enough. I would say it's pertinent as the same arguments that are made against the possession of drugs are often made against the possession of guns ("it's harmful to society")
Click to expand...

I guess TD has no response to this post. Shocking. ;)
 
Presidnet Obanana will sit down with the mexican drug cartel like he plans to do with the Taliban and once he concedes to all that oppose America everything will by hunky dorey.

"People can you feel it, love is in the air. People can you feel it, love is everywhere, love is everywhere".
-The Allman Brothers
 
Truth Detector said:
I see, so when a drug addict robs a house to support his habit, there are no victims.
Click to expand...

Yes. There are. The victims are the residents of the house. The crime is burglarly.

Drug abuse is victimless and shouldn't be a crime.

Truth Detector said:
When a drug addict spends a family’s life savings on his habit, there are no victims.
Click to expand...

Is it his life savings or someone else's? Spending one's own money isn't a crime.

Drug abuse is victimless and shouldn't be a crime.

Truth Detector said:
When a drug cartel trying to control the market on drugs murders police to prevent discovery, there are no victims.
Click to expand...

Yes. There are. The victims are the dead people. The crime is murder.

Drug abuse is victimless and shouldn't be a crime.

If drugs weren't illegal, the drug cartels couldn't exist.

For some strange reason the people owning Anheiser-Busch don't get into gang wars with the Coors people. Got any clue why that might be? Right, because alcohol isn't illegal and alcoholics don't commit a crime by drinking.

Truth Detector said:
When a drug addict drives his vehicle into oncoming traffic, there are no victims.
Click to expand...

Yes. There are. The victims are the injured, dead, or owners of damaged cars. The crime is negligent operation of a vehicle, manslaughter, murder, etc.

Unless you're willing to argue that it's not a crime when drunks do it.

Drug abuse is victimless and shouldn't be a crime.

Truth Detector said:
The notion that legalizing heroine and cocaine will lead to less crime is about as hysterically absurd as suggesting that using heroine or cocaine only harms one's self.
Click to expand...

Truth is never hysterically absurd.

Truth Detector said:
Does anyone with a brain here think that legalizing these drugs will make them any more obtainable and that suddenly drug cartels will disappear?
Click to expand...

Yes.

The Kennedy's are bootleggers no more.

Truth Detector said:
Does anyone here think that people stoned out of their minds wont attempt to drive their cars?
Click to expand...

Then they get put in jail with the drunks.

[/quote]

Yes. There are. The victims are the dead people. The crime is murder.

Drug abuse is victimless and shouldn't be a crime.

If drugs weren't illegal, the drug cartels couldn't exist.

For some strange reason the people owning Anheiser-Busch don't get into gang wars with the Coors people. Got any clue why that might be? Right, because alcohol isn't illegal and alcoholics don't commit a crime by drinking.

Truth Detector said:
Does anyone here think that just because the Government now taxes these substances they are no longer terribly harmful to society as a whole?
Click to expand...

The government cannot legally tax currently illegal substances.

So I have no idea why you're using the word "now".
 
EgoffTib said:
I guess TD has no response to this post. Shocking. ;)
Click to expand...

How does one respond to absurdity? The argument that cocaine and heroine are harmless to society and should be legalized is beyond absurd; it's moronic.

By all means, continue the circle jerk on how legalized drugs will be better for society. :roll:
 
Truth Detector said:
How does one respond to absurdity? The argument that cocaine and heroine are harmless to society and should be legalized is beyond absurd; it's moronic.

By all means, continue the circle jerk on how legalized drugs will be better for society. :roll:
Click to expand...

By all means, continue to spew empty words. Don't bother refuting any of my points or anything like that; you might have to think. Just know that your opinion is quickly becoming the minority in the face of reason and facts. Good day.
 
Last edited:
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
If the drug cartels can bring down the Mexican government that's been invading the US for decades, something our own government's refused to do, fine.
Click to expand...

LOL.
stupidest **** ever.
 
BulletWounD said:
By all means, continue to spew empty words. Don't bother refuting any of my points or anything like that; you might have to think. Just know that your opinion is quickly becoming the minority in the face of reason and facts. Good day.
Click to expand...

Yeah Bullet, I am in the minority thinking that it is a bad idea to legalize cocaine and heroine.

Carry on. :rofl
 
EgoffTib said:
I guess TD has no response to this post. Shocking. ;)
Click to expand...

I know someone on another board that does the same thing. Very rude.

He uses the same avatar that you do. Hopefully the two of you are not related.
 
Truth Detector said:
Yeah Bullet, I am in the minority thinking that it is a bad idea to legalize cocaine and heroine.
Click to expand...

So the mighty conservative that calls for smaller government is about government control. Go figure lol.
 
BobCarl said:
I know someone on another board that does the same thing. Very rude.

He uses the same avatar that you do. Hopefully the two of you are not related.
Click to expand...
Sorry friend, but your trolling will not last long here.
 
TheNextEra said:
So the mighty conservative that calls for smaller government is about government control. Go figure lol.
Click to expand...

The conservative ideology is that the government should have full control over serious matters like drugs, marriage, and abortions. :roll:
 
Truth Detector said:
How does one respond to absurdity? The argument that cocaine and heroine are harmless to society and should be legalized is beyond absurd; it's moronic.

By all means, continue the circle jerk on how legalized drugs will be better for society. :roll:
Click to expand...
Absurdity? Try rational thought. Scarecrow and Bullet laid out the laws for you and you chose to ignore their posts. I wish I could say I was surprised. :lol:
 
Truth Detector said:
Yeah Bullet, I am in the minority thinking that it is a bad idea to legalize cocaine and heroine.

Carry on. :rofl
Click to expand...
So you would rather be the majority? The majority of people are idiots. Good choice in association. :cool:
 
EgoffTib said:
So you would rather be the majority? The majority of people are idiots. Good choice in association. :cool:
Click to expand...

No, they're not. Most people just never realize their potential.
 
EgoffTib said:
Sorry friend, but your trolling will not last long here.
Click to expand...
You've been here since September. Maybe you are sleeping with the mod. Otherwise, I trust that they'll extend to me the same favors that you've been allowed.
 
BobCarl said:
You've been here since September. Maybe you are sleeping with the mod. Otherwise, I trust that they'll extend to me the same favors that you've been allowed.
Click to expand...
Another significantly profound addition to the conversation! Got anything besides personal attacks? Maybe something relevant to the discussion, perhaps?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom