Friday, May 3, 2013

Obama Blames U.S. For Gun Violence In Mexico


Obama Blames U.S. For Gun Violence In Mexico, Pushes For Gun Control

"Most of the guns used to commit violence here in Mexico come from the United States," President Obama said during a speech at Mexico's Anthropology Museum. "I think many of you know that in America, our Constitution guarantees our individual right to bear arms. And as president, I swore an oath to uphold that right, and I always will."

"But at the same time, as I’ve said in the United States, I will continue to do everything in my power to pass common-sense reforms that keep guns out of the hands of criminals and dangerous people. That can save lives here in Mexico and back home in the United States. It’s the right thing to do," Obama added.

42 comments:

  1. Did he mention Eric Holder and the Fast 'n Furious scandal?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. just doing their part;)

      Delete
    2. Gun shows are supplying most of the weapons in Mexico. What is wrong with background checks at these shows? The people living along the border with Mexico and in major cities like San Diego, Phoenix, and Laredo will all suffer major violence from the Mexican drug lords as it spreads north into the border states. Luckily, most of these states are Republican, so get your guns ready red staters, you WILL need them to fight the drug gangs from the border towns.

      Delete
  2. "Most of the guns used to commit violence here in Mexico come from the United States," President Obama said during a speech at Mexico's Anthropology Museum.
    ------------------------------------
    Another reason to shut the border, but the Muslim Marxist isn't bright enough to figure that out...........

    ReplyDelete
  3. When I tried to comment on this via Disqus I was unable to. Across the top of the comments section was "The site has blocked you from posting new comments." Real Clear Politics has been know for censorship as the article below states.
    http://rightinaleftworld.blogspot.com/2007/12/is-real-clear-politics-restricting.html

    Just keep it this in mind as you read the comments as you are not getting the full picture of the rage of people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Just keep it this in mind as you read the comments as you are not getting the full picture of the rage of people."

      Not to worry Angie, your rage is abundantly clear here as is gotta's, Live's, and TD's. Much as you may dislike my views, I at least show up here and listen to yours and respond mostly with at least enough respect to address your point.

      Delete
    2. I don't think I've been "raging" lately... Clearly the current administration is doing a good job of stepping in it and can't seem to wipe it all off anymore..... Just waiting for the whistle blowers to testify about the pile of stink from seven months ago...

      Delete
    3. Twinsdad,

      I'm skeptical about what the whistleblowers' testimony will reveal. The least of it is the willingness of the administration to bow to the pressure suggests at worst a little more mud. What if ound interesting, though, was hearing the democratic couterpart to Chaffetz yesterday agree that the administration lied re the vidoe thing.

      Granted, his admission was rather secondary to (one of?) the talking points memo from about 9/14/12 where the references to AQ were erased.

      We'll see.

      Jean

      Delete
  4. WTH? First he goes down there and champions immigration reform IN MEXICO?

    Now he is down there championing gun control.

    I guarantee you one thing. THose law-abiding Mexican citizens that are being murdered everyday by Mexican drug gangs would love to have some guns.

    Instead, it's the drug gangs with the guns that the Obama admin sent across the border.

    Now we can see for a fact, that was done to STOP gun ownership in the US.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. They have to erase borders to help eradicate nationalistic pride and individuality. They also have to take the guns out of the hands of the citizenry to accomplish their goals ... Agenda 21 in progress....

      Delete
  5. I have to admit, seeing these cherry picked quotes bothers me. There's probably more context that I'm not interested enough to go and find, but my feeling is that if Obama is mad about this, show some fucking spine and wage your war on this side of the border. Clearly, our desire for drugs on this side of the border is central to all that is going on there. Of course they are using our guns, so is the rest of the armed fucking world at war. It's besides the point.

    A LOT of people in this country are demanding background checks, and they are being denied because of a small, well funded group. Hearing him cross the border to whine about it bothers me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A LOT of people in this country are demanding background checks, and they are being denied because of a small, well funded group. Hearing him cross the border to whine about it bothers me.
      --------------------------
      The gun runners are going to go through background checks along with the gang bangers that create most of the gun related homicides in THIS country? Yeah, and I asked Santa Claus for a million dollars!

      Delete
    2. Once again gotta, I'm not really in disagreement here with what you are saying. I'm certainly not preaching that I believe background checks are going to stop what is a multifaceted problem. But that wasn't my point. My point was that the background check is something that a lot of people are asking for, and they being told to fuck off by a significantly smaller group. That is what bothers me. To be honest Brian, I am truly stunned that after this got predictably shot down (see what I did there) in the senate, it has come back and been thrown in Obama's face. That he runs to Mexico to bitch about it is also something that bothers me.

      In the world of politics, you pick your battles and you typically don't invest much angst in something you know will never pass....unless you are a Republican voting endlessly to repeal Obamacare. After the New Town shooting, Obama gave the predictable lip service and stopped trying to push for something to get done because he knew he'd lose. He didn't want to go beating the drum and investing capital in this because (and I know YOU ain't gonna believe this) he is not out to take away guns and probably doesn't really give a shit about them.

      Delete
    3. Mike....................

      My e-mail is bmiller137@att.net. My cell # is 314-420-1542.

      I am as open as anyone. Shit, I just gave my e-mail and phone number up to the entire cyberspace.

      Let me say this again. You can do all the background checks you want to law abiding citizens wanting to own a firearm, you can ban the transfer of firearms to felons from law abiding citizens. Ban, Ban, Ban, the criminals will still use them against us law abiding citizens since they don't care...............

      Wanna buy an MP-5 from my safe? Sorry, I don't own illegal weapons and I don't hold a class 3 license to make the transfer.

      Delete
    4. I hate to think that politicians should only concern themselves with the legislation they know will be successful. I'd like for them to continue to oppose the legislation they know to be problematic, distorted, dishonest, misconcieved or 'bad' for America, regardless of whether it is difficult to repeal or not.

      Isn't Obama always talking about 'it's the right thing to do'?

      How about that as a criteria?
      Of course, it goes without saying, not everybody will agree with what Obama thinks is the right thing to do, but isn't that the point? Doing what you and your constituents think is the 'right thing' to do?

      Delete
    5. Like I said before, I tend to agree with your outlook on whether or not background checks will accomplish what people think they will. Easy access to guns is just that, easy access. The desire to inflict the violence comes from somewhere else.

      I'm going to have to prank call you LOL

      Delete
    6. Three things Max.... one, the US exports about 1/3 of the conventional weapons to the world a far cry from "the rest of the armed fucking world" and interestingly enough Brazil exports more hand guns to the US than we sell to all of South America.

      Our failed drugs policy is the root cause of the violence and of coarse fuelling the fire by the Feds selling drug lords weapons doesn't help. Yes, the proximate cause is drug usage but the policies are all wrong and have been for some time.

      The left like to through around the 'fact' that the overwhelming majority (90% gets bantered around alot) of people want gun registration, background checks, etc... but I have yet to find a reputable source of information to that end... I do know that when things get talked about in Washington, I write letters... and my father, rip, a life time member or the NRA, the Texas Rifle Association an registered carry a concealed weapon did too.... oh and so did/do my uncles, cousins... and an aunt... Their is more support for the second amendment and its reasons for existence than you might imagine.

      Delete
    7. TS, you cut off the second part of my quote which is the world AT WAR. Where there is armed conflict, there are AK47's and some version of the M16. You're satisfied we are supplying 1/3 of the world's conventional weapons? We have armed a lot people around the world, including those who are basically enemies but whose interests lined up with ours for five minutes or so.

      To your second para, our failed drug policies are indeed much to blame. From stupid three strikes laws on down, we have been approaching this problem with an outlook cemented in 1980's thinking. By and large, I believe we want punishment to be the guiding principle in everything we do. 2 million plus people in jail. How's that working for us?

      To your last para, that is the beauty of slicing and dicing, like this piece http://heritageaction.com/2013/04/untangling-the-spin-polling-on-background-checks-highly-misleading/ I personally don't believe background checks are the answer that the left is hoping it will be. Regardless, the debate is simply being shut down by filibuster. Not Rand Paul style filibuster, just the simple one where McConnell calls Reid and says, "I'm not going to waste my breath like Paul did, just go ahead and F off and don't bother trying to hold a vote on anything to do with this".

      I probably won't say much more about this. Most of you here, I believe, agree with ensuring that not a single thing changes. Someday, the balance of the Senate will change and when the Dems obstruct, you will bitch just like I am. It's kinda screwed up that I almost look forward to seeing a Republican majority just to watch the obstruction.

      Delete
    8. The filibuster was shut down and the VOTE failed.

      Delete
    9. Max... I don't believe now or ever have the Democrats wanted background checks as a method of dealing with guns.... it, like most progressive agenda is a step process... the elimination of guns is the goal of those driving the sentiment and ANY law or regulation in that direction serves a purpose. I don't think it is any more obstructionist to stop the progress to the elimination of the 2nd amendment than it is disingenuous for Democrats to say bang on about 'sensible legislation' when anyone who listens understands that isn't the goal at all....

      Delete
    10. @gotta

      Actually the vote in the Senate failed 54-46, shy of the 60 votes filibuster-proof votes it needed to advance.

      The bill was filibustered down.

      Jus' sayin' ...

      Delete
    11. Max,

      "desire for drugs on this side of the border is central to all that is going on there."

      A nice, simple, accurate summary.

      Jean

      Delete
    12. " it, like most progressive agenda is a step process.."

      And that TS, is the conservative answer to just about anything;"We need to stop THIS because ultimately there is some worse hidden agenda". John McCain once said elections have consequences, but clearly he meant only for Democrats when they lost. You and others are so convinced the end game is to take all guns away. Remember that when the Democrats do the same thing and say that simply the fact you are breathing is a hidden plot to take air away from the rest of us. That is how ridiculous things have gotten today.

      Delete
    13. Please Max, you can't have it both ways.... the link is to a post from last month. I answered you but I guess the subject was too old....

      http://mwamericanpolitics.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/calif-bill-would-let-non-citizens-serve.html

      Delete
    14. I went back and responded. I'll try to keep looking back there if you post again, but it doesn't hurt to mention it in a current thread as I do tend to stop looking once a new month is up. As for having it both ways, I'm not sure how I'm being inconsistent. As it stands, the Democrats are a minority power in the senate. Not because the founding fathers intended that, but because it's the way Republicans want to do things. When and if that shoe is on the other foot, I won't approve of it anymore then I do today.

      Delete
  6. Every new gun sold requires that the buyer undergo's a background check.

    If you don't think that this information will be abused. Take a look at what happened to Missouri. A couple of years ago the politicians promised that no one would get their list of gun owners and that it would just be controlled by the driver's license bureau. They made it AGAINST THE LAW to provide information to any other agency, ESPECIALLY Federal Agencies.

    What happened? The Driver's License office handed all of the data over to the ATF, the FBI and Social Security Administration Office of Inspector General. No one knows WHY or WHERE that data is now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Live, let's wait and see about this issue. As a resident of Missouri, it just came out yesterday the Jay Nixon signed off on the data release in defiance of a law he signed himself in 2010. The Missouri attorney general (another law non-abiding democrat) is refusing to investigate. The Republicans have super majorities in both the Missouri House and Senate and are voting to fund an outside prosecutor and even whispers of impeachment. Too make the case even more damning, Nixon received a letter from Big Sis in D.C. thanking him for the documents.

      Here is a quick link......

      http://danaloeschradio.com/docs-show-napolitano-thanked-missouri-governor-for-breaking-state-law/

      Delete
    2. GottaLoveit, I was raised in Missouri. What city are you in? I was raised in Columbia. I will be there in a couple of weeks. Shakespear's pizza, here I come.

      Delete
    3. Just south of St. Louis in Fenton.

      Delete
  7. Melissa Wilson, wife of state Rep. Kenneth Wilson (R), told the committee earlier this month that she was certain that gun records had been shared with the federal government as a part of a United Nations initiative called AGENDA 21, which some conservatives believe is a conspiracy to “transform America from the land of the free, to the land of the collective” through “a mind-control” tactic called the Delphi technique.

    Republican lawmakers in Missouri became alarmed at a recent hearing at a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing when Revenue Department Director Brian Long refused to agree to stop scanning and retaining concealed carry data. Long said that the records helped to prevent fraud.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Obama Blames U.S. For Gun Violence In Mexico

    Are people from the US now moving to Mexico with their guns?

    Is the Mexican police and military that inept that they need to blame the US for their own drug issues?

    Could this be just another push by the administration to push their own agenda?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What get me is this that the left is not even trying to make it believable as they have spoken so it is true. Everyone rational person can see what they hell is going on and it is all the more reason resist every and all actions with reference to gun registration.

      Delete
  9. The part I never understand is this:
    the assumption seems to be that if guns ARE available then gun violence MUST therefore follow.

    The fact that many many gun owners are NOT committing violence on the order of the Mexican drug cartels seems to be lost in the shuffle.

    This fact should make one think there might be other factors at work. Maybe the brutal and deadly cartel members have more in common than access to guns---ie a psychopathetic personality disorder that allows them to view killing humans as a normal everyday by product of doing business.

    If these psychopaths were denied access to guns do you really think they would then operate their drug business in more benign ways? Or without guns they would be driven to see the appeal of other forms of making a living? Become shopkeepers, perhaps, or fruit vendors?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't deny there is an element of psychopathology here with these drug dealers. It seems impossible to climb to the level of drug kingpin without possessing that trait. Couple psychopathology with the possibility of making millions of dollars and you have what's going on Mexico. But, you ask a fair question about what would these people do without the guns. I say look no further then Wall Street and the housing fiasco. I could draw endless parallels.

      Delete
    2. You mean people buying homes did so with a gun held to their head? They were forced into it by merciless psychopaths willing to behead them and display the head for all to see should they refuse?

      Of course you don't. That's what makes your analogy so faulty.

      Delete
  10. Similarily the conventional wisdom says it is America's demand for drugs that causes these people to commit such violent acts. Really?

    That's another syllogism I have never understood.

    America's demand for drugs has never forced me to commit violent atrocities. Why has it forced them to?

    Again could there be other factors such as an unwillingness to work hard to earn a living in a less violent way?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gun control is a dead letter teri. Obama lost, it's over. He's just using it as a smokescreen to cover up his more pressing problems,,like,,where were he and Hillary on the evening of 9/11/12?

      Delete
    2. I wish I could agree. We will continue to hear the same myths over and over as regards guns/violence/drugs and no one who believes them will ever question the points I made in the 2 posts above.

      Delete
    3. William has a point here, it is a dead issue and it will be a dead issue forever unless enough people come together and outspend the gun lobby.

      To your questions, Why does America's demand for drugs cause violence in Mexico? Simple, it's about protecting market share. The producers want to ensure that THEIR product is the one being sold. So, they kill their competitors and then kill anyone in office who tries to clamp down on drug production.

      To your point about unwillingness to work, it again comes back to money. When you see the gobs of money being made in drugs versus going to work and busting your ass to barely survive, you start to wonder whether the risk/reward might be worth it. Look at what's gone on in this country. Some folks are intoxicated with a message that the government has created a legion of people who don't want to work because government benefits are so generous. But, look at wages for the last 30 years. Look at benefits in the workplace. It's not like wages have gone down and benefits have gone away and corporations have barely scraped by.

      Do you genuinely believe that the entirety of poverty and violence surrounding drugs is simply a matter of lazy people refusing to make better choices?

      Delete
    4. Teri, I have to say... business.. all business is a competitive effort. Some people with little hope of getting out of their neighbourhoods turn to runners and dealers to make a better buck that would be offered to them otherwise... undoubtedly so. But make no mistake, the drug violence in Mexico and increasingly playing out in the streets of the US are not petty criminals... they are gangsters of the highest order and their goal isn't to do better than the store clerk or the bank manager... it is to own the bank. The only why that they do that is to have a customer. That customer might be a john for prostitution, a terrorist for weapons or a user of drugs.... no buyers.. no business. So to blame the violence on lazy people refusing to make better choices is like blaming the CEO of a rouge bank for not trying hard enough to get along with people.... Money and power is what they want and as long as the laws allow them the latitude... they will make money... lots of money... and they will kill anyone that gets in the way... literally and meteorically.

      Delete
    5. Max
      It's got to do with more than just a risk/reward assessment. Again you are acting as if no other motive than money could possibly motivate anybody. As a drug cartel member you have to be willing to decide that human life has no value and it is acceptable---even expected--to torture and kill your competitors.

      You must view humans as fundamentally selfish, greedy and evil.

      I simply can't agree. Although I admit that there certainly ARE humans who are selfish, greedy and evil.

      Delete