Guns seized in Mexico from Gulf cartel. Photo from slide show
NYT
In Texas, New Mexico and Arizona, dealers can sell an unlimited number of rifles to anyone with a driver’s license and a clean criminal record without reporting the sales to the government.
If sales were reported, then trends could be tracked. That might have stopped a Texas smuggling ring from transporting at least 339 assault weapons into Mexico in 18 months, one of which was used in the murder of four police there.
If you buy a car, your name gets reported to the government. The same should be true for guns. This isn’t a gun ban, just common sense, seems to me (and I support the right of citizens to own assault weapons.)
Hi Bob,
Just curious: Want to elaborate on your support for the right to own *assault* weapons?
I don’t have much of a stand on the issue myself, but I would like to know why you feel that way.
Cheers
Let’s be clear on this: under federal law, the dealer MUST perform a background check on every gun sale. However, under the same law, the feds are not permitted to retain records of what was purchased. That applies across the board in all states.
I have generally supported the idea of keeping a database of guns, however recent developments have changed my mind. The underlying fear, of course, is that if through abuse of power a President succeeded in banning guns, he’d have a list available to go collect them with. Remember: our founders saw the right of gun possession as an underpinning of democracy.
But if that’s too paranoid for you, consider this: would a government database of who owns what guns fail to make it into your file at Homeland Security? “Wait, that guy owns six AKs, we’d better not let him on the plane…” Our experience under GWB ought to tell us that such a scenario is not only possible, but likely.
I too used to use the analogy of automobiles. But there are several big differences: (1) there’s no significant movement to ban automobiles, and (2) the right to own auotmobiles is not guaranteed by the Constitution, and (3) automobile ownership is generally not associated with security risk.
Charge Americans That Sell Guns To NARCO-Terrorists With Terrorist-Activity
Perhaps it would be more effective for U.S. Government to use current terrorist laws to charge Americans that knowingly supply U.S. and Mexico drug gangs with guns.
NARCO-Terrorists frequently cross into the U.S. from Mexico and have killed Americans. Threatening U.S. National Security, illegal drug gangs now operate in 230 U.S. Cities. U.S. Government should charge Americans that knowingly sell weapons to NARCO-Terrorists or their drug distributors, with Terrorist Activity.
As drug-gang violence increases in intensity on the U.S./Mexico Border, U.S. gun sales skyrocket. Many Americans fear Congress will pass laws restricting U.S. gun ownership.
During the run up to the 1994 passage of The Federal Assault Weapons Ban, Americans as they are now, stampeded gun stores buying weapons. In 1994 before passage of the “Ban” there was no legal definition what was an “assault weapon.” Gun owners worried the “Ban†could include all semi-automatic firearms, guns that when fired—automatically extract a bullet’s casing and reload the next round into the chamber.
Shortly after the 1994 Assault Weapons “Ban” Passed, Congress proposed a 1-Year shelf life for ammunition sold to the Public. A member of Congress proposed legislation that would prevent Americans stockpiling ammunition: that U.S. Citizens not be allowed to purchase ammunition with a shelf-life longer than twelve months—and ammunition purchased be self-destructing, biodegradable. Subsequently this idea was shelved after dissenters pointed out forcing biodegradable ammunition on Americans would create a black market for foreign ammunition.
In 2009 as in 1994, speculators are buying massive amounts of semi-automatic guns in expectation the government will restrict ownership of those weapons. In 1994 gun-speculators got burnt: the Assault Weapons Ban included a provision that prohibited the sale or transfer of guns listed by the government as “assault weapons.†It is problematic a new gun law passed by Congress might include that transfer ban. Perhaps it would be more effective for U.S. Government to use current terrorist laws to charge Americans that knowingly supply U.S. and Mexico drug gangs with guns.
See:
http://www.javno.com/en-world/us-man-sentenced-in-mexico-gun-smuggling-case_251927
April 17, 2009
U.S. Man Sentenced In Mexico Gun Smuggling Case
Meanwhile, the campaign whose motto is ‘ban guys not guns’ is gaining traction.