Mr. Diehl writes:

“…in Mexico’s war, the United States also plays the role of supplier to the enemy — and it does that far more efficiently. At a discussion sponsored by the think tank Third Way in Washington last week, Mexican Ambassador Arturo Sarukhán pointed out that the vast majority of guns and money flowing to the cartels come from the United States, including from 7,000 federally licensed gun stores along the border in Texas and Arizona. Eighty percent of the 75,000 guns seized by the Calderón government over three years came from the United States.”

OK, so he’s quoting figures that came from an independent group, and quotes Mexican Ambassador Arturo Sarukhán, but the simple truth is that this number is erroneous. It is simply not true that 80 percent of the guns seized came from the United States, and if Mr. Diehl had bothered to read the rival paper in Washington he’d know this. The Washington Times set the record straight this past May:

“(The) claim that 80 percent of guns used in Mexican crimes come from the United States is completely false. Most weapons seized in Mexico have traceable serial numbers that show they come from countries other than the United States. The 80 percent number reflects how many guns sent to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives for tracing end up being from America. Most weapons seized in Mexico aren’t transferred to U.S. authorities, so that figure is meaningless for calculating overall totals.”

But beyond this not so simple mistake, it is frustrating to see that Mr. Diehl basically is calling for America do more to help the Mexican government, when Mexico has done little to stop the flow of illegal immigrants to America, or stop the flow of drugs to our country. Maybe when Mexico steps up and stops blaming the United States for its problems the time will come for us to actually step up and help.

The New York Times picked up the story noting:

“Prisoners in a northern Mexico jail were allowed out at night to carry out murder-for-hire jobs using jail guards’ weapons and vehicles, officials said Sunday, revealing a level of corruption that is stunning even in a country where prison breakouts are common as guards look the other way.”

What is still shocking to us – beyond the story itself of course – is that the MSM has said little that the guns used were those belonging to the guards. Shouldn’t this question the whole thing about American guns being used in the cartel wars in Mexico?

“Mexican prosecutors say guards at a prison let inmates out and lent them guns to massacre 17 people at a party, then allowed them to return to their cells.”

Do you think this story will get much play? Probably not, because again reporting on corruption in Mexico just isn’t done that much. Maybe the American media doesn’t want to rock the boat. Imagine if American guns were supplied to those criminals? Now that would probably make the news.

The Chicago Tribune noted:

“The investigation by Chicago police officers and FBI agents included the purchase from the suspects of weapons that they themselves had purchased in Wisconsin, Indiana and other Midwestern states, and in Europe and South America.”

ABC 7 News in Chicago added to the facts:

“authorities displayed the majority of the 65 weapons confiscated by investigators, including three AK-47s, a .50-caliber magnum handgun and several sawed-off shotguns.”

Two questions must be asked. First, why isn’t the source of the guns being mentioned? Could it be that the mainstream media doesn’t want to show how easy it is for criminals to get guns from foreign sources? And why isn’t it noted what guns were actually seized? If “authorities displayed the majority” of the guns, why aren’t we getting more facts?
 
The answer to the second question is simple. If the authorities show that these include fully-automatic weapons or guns that are clearly beyond a reasonable doubt from Europe and South America it proves our point that criminals will find a way of importing guns.

Let’s face facts. If criminals can smuggle in cocaine in large quantities what is to stop the criminals from importing illegal firearms? The answer is nothing, but Chicago’s authorities don’t like that fact known. It would make their argument to keep guns out of law-abiding citizens’ hands all the harder if it was known that criminals will find a way to get guns.

“Mexican soldiers fought late-night gunbattles [sic] with gangs who forced citizens from their cars and used the vehicles to block streets in a city across the border from Texas.” 

Clearly this is NOT about a battle being waged with simple hunting rifles and semi-automatics that one can buy at the average gun shop north of the border. It will be interesting if Mexican officials and the American mainstream media sticks its guns that it is American firepower that is fueling this war, especially as the facts of the latest showdown in Nuevo Laredowould suggest otherwise.

Voice of America offered a choice quote from Matt Bennett, vice president of Third Way, a self-described moderate think tank:

“It is not just a Mexican problem. Guns and money are flowing from the United States south and fueling this problem and drugs are traveling north.”

Actually we see that the problem is that drugs are flowing north, and whether it is hardcore addicts or just the occasional recreational user, they’re the criminals who are in turn sending the cash back to Mexico. There remains little evidence that the United States is supplying massive amounts of firearms to the cartels. This week’s news about a 19-year-old who was caught with half a dozen weapons should be proof of that fact. The media notes this incident as proof that American guns are heading to the near war zone, but the truth isn’t so obvious.

First, you don’t supply guns in great numbers by having a few individuals drive across with half a dozen guns. For this type of conflict you need dozens, or hundreds of guns. Second, it isn’t clear where those illegal guns had come from, notably as they were described as “machine guns,” which aren’t exactly the sort of item you pick up at the average gun shop.

But back to our original point, this is an issue of criminals. Criminals selling drugs, criminals using drugs, and criminals shooting each other to control the drug trade. Unfortunately the word “guns” gets involved and that is something that can affect the law-abiding gun owners. Ironic isn’t it?

“…five automatic guns, two pistols, numerous rounds of ammunition, 23 loaded magazines, 10 rifle slings and other gun accessories.”

The San Diego Crime Examiner, which is part of Examiner.com included a bit more information, noting that U.S. Customs and Border Protection found several weapons. The site noted:

“The weapons included three P90 standard machine guns, a M-4 machine gun, and one AK 47 machine gun, the CBP said. The weapons stash also included a 5.7 semi-automatic handgun and a 10 mm Colt semi-automatic.”

No doubt some in the mainstream media, as well as numerous politicians will try to spin this into something it is not. First, it is not clear if the weapons are in fact “automatic,” which is a point that needs to be crystal clear. Several sources state the weapons to be “machine guns,” but as many firearm enthusiasts know only the P90 could rightfully be called a “machine gun.” The M-4 is a carbine, based on the M-16 assault rifle/AR-15 semi-automatic rifle; while the AK-47 is simply an assault rifle/semi-automatic rifle.

And here too the wording is the key. The “P90 standard machine gun” is a Belgian made submachine gun, which is used by numerous military, paramilitary and police units around the word. The PS90 is the semi-automatic commercial version. So the key is whether these were in fact “fully automatic” weapons, which wouldn’t be something you could buy at just any gun show. The commercial version, the PS90, also retails for $1800 or more, and it isn’t a gun that is typically stocked at many gun shows.

In other words there is much more to this story than just a 19-year-old who went north of the border to buy a few guns. This is one we’ll be watching very closely.

The article also notes, “a unique loophole in a new security procedure means a gun permit is like a special access pass.” This is only partially true and of course the article from the U.K. Press Association lacks noting what people need to do to get the permit. Instead it makes it seem as if the gun itself, as opposed to the special permit is what gets people fast tracked.

Yes, this is an issue, just as much as how elderly individuals with dementia and other mental problems shouldn’t be driving or possibly living alone, but this seems to be yet another case where the media can take fire at gun owners. So should we be surprised that The New York Times chose this time, as the gun debate is hotly in the news, to come out with this one sided article?

We say one-sided because one aspect that seems to be missing is a counter point. While the article does address dementia and other issues, it fails to note that some elderly individuals do indeed need guns to protect themselves, such as Mr. Otis McDonald of Chicago. The paper also ignores the fact that many of today’s elderly men fought in World War II and as such certainly know to handle a gun with respect and confidence.

“A bag belonging to officers from Israeli security service Shin Bet – containing four Glock 9-millimeter pistols – was placed on a wrong flight by American Airlines at New York JFK Tuesday, and at least one handgun is still missing, according to several media reports.”

Not much else to say, but clearly someone dropped the ball and four Glock 9mm guns are out there. And it wasn’t from gun show loophole or straw purchase, just a simple theft.