A Self-Inflicted Gun Wound

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: CTTillman @ 08/03/2009 1:45:50 PM

    This is another perfect example of erroneous "FACTS" being thrown around that just aren't true. Read this http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/04/02/myth-percent-guns-mexico-fraction-number-claimed/. This statistic that 90% of illegal firearms in Mexico comes from the US is just total bull. The majority of illegal weapons in Mexico are fully automatic, which ARE illegal in the US and not manufactured in the US for DOMESTIC sales. Those automatic weapons are smuggled into Mexico from some other country, and many are not even US brands or manufacturing. And this 90% "FACT" has been re-iterated multiple times. This particular statistic comes from a related, but completely different "FACT" - That when Mexican officials confiscate an illegal weapon - AND ALREADY SUSPECT IT IS OF USA ORIGIN - AND SHIP THAT WEAPON TO US FOR TRACING - 90% of the time they are correct about that specific weapon. The actual US weapons percentage in Mexico is only 17% of the total.

  • Posted By: CTTillman @ 08/03/2009 1:28:49 PM

    This article is another example of stating erroneous "facts" about the gun situation in Mexico. Read this http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/04/02/myth-percent-guns-mexico-fraction-number-claimed/. It very clearly states that only 17% of the firearms in Mexico are of US origin. Most weapons taken are fully-automatic weapons, which ARE illegal and not manufactured for domestic sale in the United States - therefore smuggled in from another country. The 90% statistic comes from a different fact - That when Mexico SUSPECTS a particular weapon is from US origin - AND SHIPS SAID WEAPON TO US FOR TRACING - 90% of the time they are right!! The total percentage of US firearms in Mexico is only 17%.

  • Posted By: Fatesrider @ 06/23/2009 12:48:20 AM

    So, for the sake of the uneducated masses reeking of gunpowder, here's a little history lesson:

    In England, back around 1100 or so, it was the requirement of every able bodied male between 15 and 50 to own 'arms'. This meant, usually a sword, bow and arrow, shield, etc. They were expected, and REQUIRED to bring them in defense of the nation should invaders wander in. At the time, it was a prudent idea. All you needed to do was put out the word and people arrived, armed and ready to fight. No stockpiling of weapons, no taxes or effort for forging or crafting weapons on the part of the government.

    Move ahead 700 years and the concepts have been unchanged. The US government didn't have the funds to maintain a standing army. The US won because a small number of disaffected individuals (about 10% of the population) and France's intervention made defending the Colonies more expensive than the Colonies ever brought in through taxation without representation. Without a strong central government, the second amendment was written to ensure that should the call go out to defend the US, those who responded would bring their own, personal guns.

    So without a strong central government back in 1789 to maintain a standing army for defense, they used the old English tradition (up til then) of making sure anyone who could own a gun wouldn't have it taken by the state. The founding fathers HATED the idea of a strong central government - you know, the kind we've had since the Civil War. We have arms because the second Amendment says we have to bring them when we report for militia duty.

    Anyone reported for militia duty lately - with or without their guns?

    Unless you feel the need to wage armed insurrection against the state or federal government, there is no one you're going to be legally shooting with that assault rifle - ever.

    The second amendment with respect to arms is obsolete and should be repealed.

    But if you have to have your guns, fine, define for constitutional purposed what "arms" are. My personal favorite: "Arms": Any muzzle-loading, black-power-burning firearm capable of a sustained rate of fire, on average, of no more than four rounds per minute.

    It might take the fun out of shooting Skeet, or might put the challenge back into it (muzzle-loading shotguns would be legal) and you won't get more than 4 rounds per minute out of that baby, either.

    So, I'd take your toys away, teach you all to use muzzle-loaders and let the world work things out without 900 Round-per-minute Uzi's spraying death and destruction in some gang-banger's idea of a fun night.

    (And while you're angry, think of this: Some gang-banging idiot trying to do a drive-by with a muzzle-loader. C'mon, that;s worth a grin, at least).

    • Posted By: hattles @ 08/02/2009 4:14:48 PM

      It is obvious you are as treasonous as some of those that took an oath to uphold the Constitution, then either ignore it or try to reinvent the meaning. More than ever before, The Constitution makes sense in the wake of governments attempts to deprive Americans of thier freedom and turn our society into a government controlled society. It didn't work in Hitler's Germany, with millions of deathes the result. It won't work in the USA either. If you don't like our Constitution the way it reads now, just scoot your red behind to Russia or Cuba. Maybe you can get a new job and advise the Taliban or Al-Qeada on public relations.

    • Posted By: zsu2357 @ 06/28/2009 1:05:26 AM

      Fatesrider I hope you never have to defend yourself or family, if so I wish you all the best with your muzzle loaders
      or what ever you use(golfclub?)

  • Posted By: JoeAmerica1 @ 06/30/2009 7:46:58 AM

    Pro Guns is the opposite or adversary of Pro Life...Gop Flip Flop Party.
    Pro Guns is the opposite or adversary of pro life when it comes to Pro War...Gop Flip FLop Party.

    One could Protect their family with a semi automatic hand gun or semi auto matic shot gun.

    There is no need for ak 47, or tech 9, or mac 10, or m-16's to be in the hands of todays violent society!

    Right Winged Radical Racist Redneck Republikkkans are, admant about Gun Rights being used as a front to disguise patriotism with Mall killings, School Killings, Restaurant killings, suicides with ASSAULT WEAPONS.

    This isnt about that people kill people its about people having assualt weapons available to kill people on a large scale and harm others in public.
    Public Safety comes before the individual rights of one to bear arms...
    and since there is many guns one can defend or protect themselves or property or persons and family, then its not like any right to bear arms would be abridged.
    There needs to be a Manufacture ban on assault weapons , with some law suits against them too.

    That would be a good start, it would be the same analogy with tobacco ,, get it? ATF?

    Todays gun rights activists are, usually some lone wolf angry white man that is a redneck racist who hates others based on fear of them taking their white privilege and special white only treatment.

    • Posted By: hattles @ 08/02/2009 4:03:58 PM

      "Todays gun rights activists are, usually some lone wolf angry white man that is a redneck racist who hates others based on fear of them taking their white privilege and special white only treatment"
      There must be about 80,000,000 lone wolf angry white men. I forgot, how about angry asians, hispanics, europeans, blacks that are also pro-gun advocates. They don't count I guess But to a white hating racist like you, it only pertains to your percieved notions of what a gun owner is. Get your head out of you asx!

    • Posted By: hattles @ 08/02/2009 3:53:15 PM

      You are an even bigger fool because you believe what you spouted in your comments. The anti-gun movement will use any tactic it needs to deprive you and me from owning a gun, of any type. I agree, we do not need fully automatic weapons, without a permit. Remember, semi-automatics are totally legal and should be. As for Tec 9's, AR-15's, AK47's, no valid reasons to ban them.
      In a series of email exchanged with Dan Reeves, the chief of staff for Ca, Assmblyman K. DeLeon, "long guns are seldom used in crimes".

    • Posted By: tubes @ 07/28/2009 8:38:06 PM

      yoyr correct but then you can't buy a full auto ak47 assault rifle tech9 or m16 unless you pay the ATF a big bribe, get an FBI background check, Have your storage pass a government inspection and jump thru a few other hoops. People like you who believe what these liberal rags and your liberal run government put out as facts are real gullible. If not just stupid and too lazy to find out facts for yourself.

    • Posted By: Truepatriot69 @ 07/03/2009 10:39:35 AM

      You're an idiot and certainly not an American as you name implies. You pick and choose the ammendments that apply or provide the most benefit to you and your beliefs and are willing to trample those that don't meet or live up to your standards. If it weren't for the 2nd amendment you would have lost your right to free speech a long time ago. It's the only thing keeping Obama and his henchmen from taking it now. Or, maybe that's what you would prefer to happen. Drink some more of the Obama kool-aid.
      It's thinking like yours that does us more harm than good.

  • Posted By: hattles @ 08/02/2009 3:42:49 PM

    What is with the bold faced lie that up to 90% of the guns confiscated come from the US. Even BATFE refuted those figures. Mexico confirmed that about 17% of the guns confiscated (not all guns used) originated in the US. Major media is, as usual, neglgent in reporting the facts. Would anyone believe for one minute that mexican criminals would bother with legal purchases in the US, which wouldn't include one automatic weapon, when they can buy them on the black market in Mexico, Central and South America without so much as proof of identity. Run these anti-american fools from office.

  • Posted By: Prospector_Al @ 08/01/2009 6:18:44 PM

    Why should law-abiding citizens be punished for what criminals do in Mexico? The effort should be concentrated on intercepting the flow of weapons across the border and implementing severe punishment on those who are violating the law. A life sentence would be appropriate.

    Allan W.

  • Posted By: burbank @ 07/29/2009 2:46:21 AM

    As the article so correctly states, "during the 1990's, congressional Democratic leaders aggressively pushed gun-control legislation-and suffered crushing setbacks in the polls starting with the 1994 Republican takeover of Congress". "They've learned the lesson of what happened the last time," said LaPierre. Indeed. What the anti-gun crowd does not get, and proably never will is that people have the right to defend themselves from any kind of violent attack, be in their home, car, or upon their person. Law enforcement cannot protect you from these encounters because they are not oblilgated to do so. Their responsibility is to the community at large, not to you the individual. Yes,You can call, and yes they will respond. But in the three minutes it takes them to get to your residence, (the response time on a priority one call), you, or your loved ones can suffer terribly and the perpatrator will be five blocks away before the first unit arrives on scene. Then you become nothing more than a statistic, and a 911 footnote on the 10:00 evening news. Gun control never works. In point of fact, the only thing it has ever controled is the ability of law abiding citizens to protect themselves and their loved one's from harm.

  • Posted By: thehappyamerican @ 07/28/2009 10:26:58 PM

    Mexico wants the US to enact a ban HERE which did not work HERE to reduce crime when it was law, in hopes that what is enacted HERE and fails HERE will reduce crime THERE?
    Well, Mexicans! Remember don't get carried away wuth our democrat party's hate for for gun owners HERE, and their nasty discrimination campaigns against them!
    Not everything in our news media is true, and us Americans have to read between the lines! We understand why Newsweek-- for example-- lies about the 90% figure it repoeats!
    Newsweek is and has bought into the discrimination campaign against gunowners here, years ago!
    They are the kind of liars who WANT 90% of the guns in mexico to be from here as all 100% of them are used in a murder so theycan report that !
    That is...you die as they lie! Such has become the sad state of American journalism! Viva the NRA!

  • Posted By: tubes @ 07/28/2009 8:29:28 PM

    the same mexico that demanded the prosecution of border agents who shot a drug smuggler from their country? You can't have it both way, exporting drugs to bring money into their economy, they have a border with us let them control it in both directions. The cartels are using AUTOMATIC weapons which have been banned in the U.S. since the 1930's. They will not turn weapons over for inspection and tracing so we are just suppost to take their word for it. Most of the weapons are from their own armorys brought to the gangs by defecting army members,and most of them were gifts from the U.S.. They have a problem with their border let them fix it, Maybe they will pay for half of the fence like your neighbor should do when you put up a fence between your properties.

  • Posted By: swsharpe @ 07/28/2009 9:21:52 AM

    I would like to know why they (the news media) keep posting the 90% number on assault weapons coming from the US to Mexico. The DEA, FBI and the BATF have already said that those numbers are WRONG. Also the Assault weapons they are finding are for the most part full auto. In the US there are very few full auto assault weapons up for sale, and the ones in public hands are regulated and monitored. Could the media look at possibly they are coming from somewhere else? The hand guns may be going across the border but I really get tired of hearing full auto weapons are coming from the US when they are really coming from a hand full of other 3rd world countries.

  • Posted By: bcdkimble @ 07/28/2009 7:53:54 AM

    Figures the liberal rag Newsweek ssupports a ban on assalt rifles. I wouldn't read newsweek if they paid me to read it. I no longer read the local Atlanta liberal rag, the AJC. I say screw Mexico. Who cares about that 3rd world fleabag. They send all of their parasites slinking across our borders like insects to dilute our standard of living. Taking the jobs of our working class. It is not like they have something to offer America. We have penty of laborers. That BS about jobs Americans don't want. Well hell no, not for $5 an hour LOL. Their assalt weapons come from the black market. If it weren't some enterprising American, it would be an enterprising Chinese or Russian dude. I say if Mexico takes back the parasites they sent here, we will take back our assalt rifles. It would be a great trade.

  • Posted By: mcgillagorilla @ 07/23/2009 6:56:40 PM

    the attornie generals job is to enforce the laws on the books not to determine what new laws go on the books. newsweek is trying to get anti gun llegislation in the news to promote newsweeks liberal anigun bias. that is the main reason i quit subscribing to the liberal rag years ago.

  • Posted By: rayinmn @ 07/23/2009 6:31:12 PM

    Why is Newsweek resurrecting this outdated (March) article? It seems like once everyone has moved on from this subject there are always a few discouraged editors who, frustrated at their inability to generate a nationwide demand for the banning and confiscation of guns, feel a need to try to reignite a burned-out issue. The statistics that were used are false anyway so it's not like there's anything new or overlooked here. Now that another 4 months have elapsed are there more "assault weapons" heading there or this just another periodic regurgitation of the same anti-gun drivel? Likely the latter since there's been nothing from any news source which indicates there is any new flood of weapons heading south.

  • Posted By: matthg @ 07/18/2009 7:53:33 PM

    there is hardly as many fully auto weapons as you people think.there were laws placed in the early and mid 1900's deforming fully automatic owner ship. i am sure we can rid ourselves of the gangs and drugs here. it is up to Mexico in reality, where these perpetrators are doing these things.i do not think the u.s. should lower its arms while the dealers and killers have all the guns...probably from Venezuela. if we disarm ourselves then peace here will be in jeopardy. a real red dawn would begin.

  • Posted By: KhanTulwar @ 07/15/2009 11:31:13 AM

    since when are Mexican drug lords buying weapons from gun shops in the US? I am pretty sure they, like all criminal enterprises, are buying their wepaons, which are the real deal, fully automatic military weapons (long since banned in the US from regular sale) through the BLACK MARKET. The bigger issue is, why is it that guns are being blamed for this violence? It's over drugs, which Mexico's cartels seem to be dutifuly supplying to thousands of useless blood-sucking drug USERS in the United States, Maybe if the reality of the fact that getting stoned comes at the cost of Mexican police/military/civilian lives maybe these morons would get a clue and stop using their product...
    I mean really, where is the logic in thinking that by outlawing guns in the US it's going to stop DRUG DEALERS in MEXICO from obtaining FULLY AUTOMATIC MILITARY WEAPONS?

  • Posted By: KhanTulwar @ 07/15/2009 11:30:02 AM

    since when are Mexican drug lords buying weapons from gun shops in the US? I am pretty sure they, like all criminal enterprises, are buying their wepaons, which are the real deal, fully automatic military weapons (long since banned in the US from regular sale) through the BLACK MARKET. The bigger issue is, why is it that guns are being blamed for this violence? It's over drugs, which Mexico's cartels seem to be dutifuly supplying to thousands of useless blood-sucking drug USERS in the United States, Maybe if the reality of the fact that getting stoned comes at the cost of Mexican police/military/civilian lives maybe these morons would get a clue and stop using their product... ornot

  • Posted By: rn7755 @ 07/10/2009 9:25:12 AM

    Mexico has lots of problems. Law abiding American citizens aren't going to be the scapegoats for it! The US government knows that a majority of the people of this country want nothing to do with having our rights chopped away simply because Mexico can't control it's own house. The drug cartels have enough money to buy WMD's if they wanted to, from any number of sources, so leave the American gun owners out of it. As in, they can buy WMD's, so they certainly can buy all the guns that they want. I hear North Korea runs a pretty good weapons sales operations. The US won't search their ships.

  • Posted By: Bubbadafuhl @ 07/09/2009 3:39:51 PM

    The drug lords of Mexico are ruthless killers. If you take away assault weapons, they'll just kill each other with non-assault weapons. Besides if we don't sell them these assault rifles, someone else like China will get that business.

  • Posted By: Figures123 @ 04/27/2009 2:48:59 PM

    I love how everyone turns to the Constitution when the topic of a gun ban comes up. When the Constitution was written there were no assault weapons. There weren't factories churning out thousands of guns everyday. I'm willing to bet the Constitution would read quite differently if our founding fathers knew how easily accessible guns would be. Furthermore if you want to debate facts, check out the numbers of homicides per year in England (where guns laws are incredibly strict) compared to the US. Even when looking at the obvious difference in population, proportionally there is still a distinctive difference.

    • Posted By: Time4U2Wakeup @ 06/14/2009 3:45:51 AM

      Yes, figures123 there were assault weapons and they were called the Brown Bess, Blunderbuss, British, French, Hessian and American Infantry Muskets, etc. All of which started off as military assault rifles of the day and all of which became mainstays in post-war America as hunting and defense weapons.
      And since it sounds like you enjoy statistics, here are some #'s for you. 2005 was the last year statistics were figured for gun related deaths here in the US. Approx.18,000 total gun deaths, of that total, about 10,000 were from gun suicide. That leaves about 8,000 to gun homicide and accidental gun death. Any homicide is bad, but to put that into perspective that same year over 25,000 US citizens died from drunk drivers. In a country with over 300 million people we still have less violent crimes and/or homicides per capita than England (approx. 51 million people) and they are rethinking their ban on weapons because they found out criminals pray on a weak and unarmed populace. Thats funny because I always thought criminals were fine up-standing citizens that would never forcefully take anything that wasn't theirs' or hurt anyone. Uh, boy am I embarrassed. If you want some more facts, look up how much England's violent crimes and homicides have gone up now that only the bad guys have the weapons. I believe if our founding fathers where here today they would not only pass out the ammunition but also give every legal, up-right citizen a fully automatic weapon.

      • Posted By: Truepatriot69 @ 07/03/2009 10:53:20 AM

        Bravo. If our founding father were still alive they would be the first ones in line to fight against these idiotsf who claim to be Americans, but are really nothing more than the domestic enemies that the 2nd ammendment gives us the right to defend against.

    • Posted By: BigArch @ 06/22/2009 10:53:14 PM

      The constitution should be document we all turn to in any situation. Why would you have a problem with that. I wonder if the founders would have written the !st Admendment had they know how distorted the media is now reporting the news.
      And Figures123, I think you might check the facts about Englands violent crime rate since the citizens have been totally dis-armed. They might just surprise a socialist like you.

    • Posted By: arealpatriot @ 06/06/2009 8:38:37 PM

      Try looking at the crime rate in England which is much higher then here since the gun ban was imposed. You are a dufus.

  • Posted By: slizzard @ 06/28/2009 8:40:33 PM

    Assault weapon is a legal term that refers to a broad category of firearms, including military-style semiautomatic rifles derived from assault rifles, and also including some pistols and shotguns Now i know some of you are to stupid to figure this out so lets take a stroll down your logic lane ok???
    Assault weapons are made to kill people. but people kill people to so lets ban people to? thats what your saying i dont know if you have ever heard your self talk but i must say that people that belive that i have one word for you IDIOT. you can try to explain your point of views but that facts are facts. assault rifles kill people but they save lifes to so next time you open your mouth to talk think before you do.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse