It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Calderon and Holder Agree: US Gun Control Is the Answer

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2010 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Calderon and Holder Agree: US Gun Control Is the Answer


beforeitsnews.com

Mexican President Felipe Calderon continues to weigh in on US laws. After siding with Obama against the laws and citizens of Arizona he is moving on to new topics. It seems that Calderon and Attorney General Eric Holder agree that Assault Weapons should be banned in the US. Obama and the Democrats are now blaming Mexican violence on US gun laws. Witness Dick Durbin the Senator from Illinois saying that we should "look at US policy on guns and drugs" before making judgements on immigration.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
voices.washingtonpost.com
blogs.suntimes.com




posted on May, 22 2010 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I fear I lost a lot of respect for certen world leaders when I read this article. I always knew that Obama wanted more gun laws. But hear it says that Obama and the Democrats are blaming Mexican violence on U.S. gun laws. That is just taking things to far. Laws are causing violence.....? So now the answer becomes make more laws.
It should also be noted here that Mexican President Felipe Calderon is also blaming Mexican violence on second amendment rights.

beforeitsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
The Next thing they will agree to is,

Calderon: " Hola, Muchacho...No he leído la Ley de Arizona." (I did not read the Arizona Law)

Holder: What Arizona Law? Oh yea I didn't read it either. We don't read Laws anymore, we prosecute people who follow the laws.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedGolem

But hear it says that Obama and the Democrats are blaming Mexican violence on U.S. gun laws. That is just taking things to far. Laws are causing violence.....? So now the answer becomes make more laws.


Yes, laws cause violence. But it's not the gun laws causing the violence, it's the DRUG LAWS. Prohibition always creates a black market with enormous profits available wherein disputes cannot be resolved in courts. Disputes are therefore resolved with violence. We learned this with alcohol prohibition is the 1930s yet still maintain drug prohibition in 2010. Reprehensible.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Sounds like the mexican president maybe is IN on the drug traffic as well. why does he fear AMERICANs with guns? kinda racist, isnt it? see why globalization dosnt work* thank god actually.
another reason why i figured out how the NAFTA really works years ago, no thanks to bill clinton...it would incorporate the norh american union, giving mexico LOTS of freeway on our soil.
they wanna take away guns? why not look at the CIA< who gave the afgahnis guns and missle launchers in the 80's before they turend on us, no thanks to ronald reagan tax payers expense.
Years ago, the us lost a few nuclear triggers i read,a nd no one wanted to onvestigate where they went..we all know bush prob had something to do with it, ended up un Israel or IRan probably.
Maybe someone should tell el mexican presidente about this as well.
Either way we will always have guns
our 2nd amendment in the constituion says so...the right ot keep and bear arms! god bless america* their will always be a black market for them too. simply outlawing it will only cause the balck market to expand



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 09:24 AM
link   
Also Calderon Mentions Gun Control, Imagine if his own citizens were allowed to own guns.

Holly Enchiladas with verde sauce, I mean these denizens of Meheco can stand up against those pesky drug cartels. The only reason those are running blasting anyone they see is because they know no one would blast back.

Holder better start acting up, because after Obama is kicked out of office, Holder is the enemy of the sate, oh wait he is the enemy of the state right now.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 09:31 AM
link   
This has been their position for some time. The administration signaled an intent to pass a new assault weapons ban shortly after taking office last year. One of their reasons was to curb Mexican gun violence


From last year.

Granted, I have been informed by some ATS members that there's an apparent statute of limitations on anything anti-gun that might be said by Obama or his senior staff and that you shouldn't believe anything they told you on the issue when they took office last year



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   
With so much money at stake, especially laundered offshore then finding it's way into legitimate (and I use that word loosely) business and banking, even the governments are reluctant to stop it. Sure, they'll bust the users and small time sellers to feed the private prison business (another win-win situation), but they'll stop short of any real effort to halt it.
State and local police are becoming more militarised in their operations and pursuit of some poor Joe with a couple of reefers. They'll send in heavily armed SWAT teams to bust them, kicking in doors, shooting pets etc, in a big show of force for the TV news, but that's all it is - window dressing and gives the dumb police a hard on being able to shoot things.

As for using this as a US gun control measure - as far as I am aware, automatic weapons are illegal in most, if not all states, yet there is plenty of footage of Mexican drug gangs using them. I don't believe either that many of those weapons are converted semi-autos bought stateside. All gun control is going to do is take away the means for the innocent to protect themselves and empower the criminals who (shock horror) take no notice of the laws and will continue to carry guns.

I was going to comment about gun control leaving only the government and criminals with guns, but they are one and the same these days.

[edit on 22-5-2010 by Britguy]



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Maybe the citizens in mexico wouldnt shoot back. I work with a guy from mexico. He tells me, its common, to find someones severed head on the side of the road, near his town. i dont remember where his town is in mexico. thats how they know, the drug cartel passed through. they will kill children as well, in sick manners, decapitatiing thier body parts and leaving them in obvious places as a sign.
even the people in his town are very nervous and scared. they feel the drug cartels can do whatever they want to them if they retaliate. the people in his town, dont like the drug cartels or dealers at all...same as us americans. the porblem is, local police forces are often payed off by the cartels to turn the other way.
Makes me think back in 2001...i wasin LIma peru for 2 weeks, visiting an ex g/f. Same night i got thier, thier family took me around town in thier van. i heard popping noises off to my right, looked. some guy was grabbing a woman by the back of her hair pulling n yanking her, talking strong to her in spanish, and punching, yes punching the back of her head quite a few times, as she cried and moaned.
I siad to everyone in hte van, lets get out n help her! instead they went a few blocks, and found a police officer. her brother told him what was going on, then we drove off. i asked her brother whats gunna happen are the cops gunna help her? his answer...eh if they feel like it. its not like in america... the cops can be known as 'dogs' as they were in Poland too. or as we would reffer to cops here as pigs*



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 09:56 AM
link   
If they try to ban assault rifles again, the first thing I will do is buy two more, and loads of ammo. I am tired of this BS.

[edit on 22-5-2010 by bakednutz]



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by ziggy1706
.. the cops can be known as 'dogs' as they were in Poland too. or as we would reffer to cops here as pigs*


How many US cops have you heard about that turn away from a crime? In fact it is the other way, you report a crime a here in the US you'll probably sometimes get a SWAT team responding.

Your hatred for law enforcement can be seen pretty loudly. It is these very Law enforcement doing their job to protect to the best of their ability. Yes there are bad apples. But the entire tree is not bad.



[edit on 22-5-2010 by prionace glauca]



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


Exactly. Prohibition is the problem. Decriminalize Drugs in the US so we arent over filling our prisons with non violent criminals and creating a black market. The Only thing that should be outright legalized is Cannabis/Marijuana and tax, regulate and control the consumption that we as a populace love so dearly. This is less dangerous both physically and socially then either alcohol or tobacco and would immediately cut 60% + of the money coming in to the cartels from our massive US cannabis consumer base.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   
I agree, why the h*** do people need assault weapons? Unless you're military or police, it seems like an ego thing, who has the bigger gun.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ForAiur
I agree, why the h*** do people need assault weapons? Unless you're military or police, it seems like an ego thing, who has the bigger gun.


What is wrong with having an assault weapon?

At least you didn't rail against having any guns. Mr. Tortilla & the Depart of Jihad are not talking Assault wpns alone, they are talking more in line with what Chicago has, all wpns ban.

BTW, have you seen such a peaceful city as Chicago...I mean there is no violence or crimes there because they took away all the guns.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   
The problem with banning guns, is that those who are comitting crimes will figure out a way to get ahold of the illegale firearms. If the US were to stop the flow of guns from going south, the question should be, do you think the drug cartels would not go someplace else to get said weapons and ship them in? After all, some of the more sucessful leaders of the drug cartels, from what I have heard, are not stupid. And based off of what I am seeing, via the internet and on the news reports, it tells me that they are learning real quick from someone, so the question is who is training the people who work for the drug cartels? The tactics that they are using reminds me of a few historical figures, and that shows someone is thinking on how to ensure the cooperation through terror and bribery on the part of the leadership. And the way the Mexican federal police and military are, it would not surprise me if they actually sold some of the firepower to the cartels.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:29 AM
link   
This is nothing new as they have been blaming the violence on US gun laws for a long time now. The thing is that the numbers they are using to make their claims are flawed. They are only counting the weapons that are actually traceable when in fact, most of the weapons used, are not traceable at all because the cartels are getting these weapons from the Mexican and other Central & South American militaries. The irony though is that these weapons are ultimately coming from the US, though not because of our relaxed gun laws, rather because of the weapons that our government allows our corporations to sell to these foreign governments.

Many people don't realize the reason for the 2nd Amendment. It's not because we have the right to collect guns, shoot guns for sport or even hunt. We have the right to bear arms to protect ourselves from others, including government, with an emphasis on protecting ourselves from an out of control government. This means that we need to be able to arm ourselves either equal to or better than government. Already, we are not allowed to do this, which renders the intent of the 2nd Amendment, useless. If we can not arm ourselves in a manner which gives us the ability to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government, then our 2nd Amendment and Constitution as a whole, has failed.

It's not a matter of "if" they outlaw assault weapons, it is a matter of "when". It will happen and then after this, the government or TPTB will move on to other types of firearms. Once we are disarmed, then government doesn't even have to pretend that they represent our interests (not that they even try that hard anyway).

We can't allow government to ban assault weapons because this is just another step on TPTB's latter to take away our ability to defend ourselves against their tyranny. Once we lose our assault weapons, we lose, period. Hold the line and never allow this to happen, at any cost!

--airspoon

p.s. - When they accomplish this ban, it won't be like last time. This time, it will have no expiration and they will ban us from even owning pre-ban weapons.


Edited for spelling: I missed a word.

[edit on 22-5-2010 by airspoon]



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
You need assault weapons to defend against oppression and tyranny.

ALWAYS BE WEARY of a Government that wants to take away the ability of the people to defend themselves against any and all opression. Including thier own government. We are all just human and therefore can never be perfect or trusted wholey with the idea that groups charged with our well being will actually honor that duty to the people who put them in control of protecting them.

That why we need assault weapons and weapons in general.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
You need assault weapons to defend against oppression and tyranny.

ALWAYS BE WEARY of a Government that wants to take away the ability of the people to defend themselves against any and all opression. Including thier own government. We are all just human and therefore can never be perfect or trusted wholey with the idea that groups charged with our well being will actually honor that duty to the people who put them in control of protecting them.

That why we need assault weapons and weapons in general.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ForAiur
 


Why not? Why do you need any 'luxury' item you own? If people want an assault weapon, I don't see it any differently from a person who buys a Corvette, for instance. Its not like its a necessity, but we buy them because we can.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:32 AM
link   
[removed off-topic post]

[edit on 22-5-2010 by ForAiur]



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join