Obama Blames U.S. For Gun Violence In Mexico

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

The root cause was Obama's and Holders manipulation of a federal agency 'corporations' didn't have a thing to do with it.

Obama and Holder's involvement are symptoms of the issue in Mexico (which existed before Obama) combined with a pair of buffoons who have no business in the positions they hold.

reply to post by burdman30ott6

Obama and Holder's involvement are symptoms of the issue in Mexico (which existed before Obama) combined with a pair of buffoons who have no business in the positions they hold.

Curious any other administrations used what has been going on there for 50 years to push their political agenda's?

Originally posted by neo96
Curious any other administrations used what has been going on there for 50 years to push their political agenda's?

Not to this degree, but then we've never seen an administration this opportunistic and this irresponsible before, either.

reply to post by burdman30ott6

Not to this degree, but then we've never seen an administration this opportunistic and this irresponsible before, either.

I agree with that assessment would add this :

The war related murder chart last picture on the right side.

notice the sharp increase from 2008-2011.

From here: en.wikipedia.org...

Neo, you are focusing on a small portion of the problem. Yes Fast and Furious is responsible for a good majority of the weapons, but its not like the violence didn't exist before hand. Yes, it is hypocritical of Obama to say what he did, but again we still aren't addressing the real problem. How the cartels achieved their money and power, which is illegal drugs. If you cut off the cartels' chief source of income by legalizing or at the very least decriminalizing many if not all drugs, you would stop the cartels in their tracks. I'm sure that the cartels will resist for a while and violence may increase as they try to prove a point, but by then they will be fighting a losing battle. There is no way that an illegal enterprise can compete against a perfectly legal one since the average person would rather deal with someone on the up and up who is accountable to rules and regulations instituted by his industry instead of some shifty eyed guy on the corner who could just as easily rob you or give you some bad stuff. Not to mention right now they have an insanely large profit margin which they can use to bribe officials or purchase guns (aha now we come full circle to your OP), legalization would shrink that profit margin considerably (since at that point all they can reliably rely on would be human trafficking and other non victimless crimes which are harder to cover up).

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by neo96
Curious any other administrations used what has been going on there for 50 years to push their political agenda's?

Not to this degree, but then we've never seen an administration this opportunistic and this irresponsible before, either.

I guess we forgot Bush and 911. Whoa, what an agenda pusher that one was.

reply to post by Krazysh0t

Neo, you are focusing on a small portion of the problem

No I am well aware of the larger issues Immigration,gun control, and get's to take a dig at his country yet again.

If America is still so bad well that was of his own making.

reply to post by intrepid

I guess we forgot Bush and 911. Whoa, what an agenda pusher that one was.

Obama makes Bush look like an amateur come on!

reply to post by neo96



Obama Blames U.S. For Gun Violence In Mexico

Eric Holder is laughing right now.....

Originally posted by intrepid
I guess we forgot Bush and 911. Whoa, what an agenda pusher that one was.

...at the end of the day, Bush laid the groundwork for a lot of this crap, but it was largely pointed outside the country when he left office. We were consistantly hearing arguments over whether or not American Civil Rights extended to non Americans in our dealings with them. This admin has now made the argument "Do American Civil Rights even cover American citizens anymore?"

reply to post by burdman30ott6


Valid point.

reply to post by neo96


thats like blaming birds for bird flu.

yeah this whole thing stinks.

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."

What's so wrong with background checks so illegal immigrants can't buy guns and bring them across the border? That is ALL he is saying. He's saying they get their guns from the US, fact. You can bring up Fast and Furious, but there's no evidence contrary to the official claim that it was a failed sting operation.
If you're reading something else, you're either willfully ignorant, or a brainwashed partisan buffoon, most likely both.
Misconstruing someone's words is sick.

and to Neo specifically, you're living in a fantasy world, be careful.

reply to post by Ghost375

What's so wrong with background checks

Gee some people like me have problems with the invasion of privacy,civil liberties, and being guilty until proven innocent.

That's for start rather crystal clear what 'shall not be infringed' means then add the fact the US is the largest arms dealer in the world that has more blood on their hands arming people in Mexico they would call criminal here in the states.

Then there is that little factioid of arming terrorist overseas, and dictator alike anyone who supports gun control or its state sponsored 'terror" campaign of using fear to push a political agenda that is 80 years old.

Gee I really don't know why anyone would not let the US government/the current administration roll right over them.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Ghost375

 

What's so wrong with background checks

Gee some people like me have problems with the invasion of privacy,civil liberties, and being guilty until proven innocent.

Background checks would only target those already found guilty in a court of law.
Oh no, you have to wait 2 days to get a gun....what an infringement on your civil liberties!

reply to post by Ghost375

Background checks would only target those already found guilty in a court of law.

No they don't they target everyone the entire population of the US that violates their civil liberties, and invasion of privacy.

A background check is nothing, but proving to the state that they are worthy of gun ownership, based off a predetermined set of rules of perfection.

People are not perfect.

I will never support that fascism.

Originally posted by Ghost375
Oh no, you have to wait 2 days to get a gun....what an infringement on your civil liberties!

Hmmm... I can only assume, then, that you wouldn't be among those with major problems over laws attempting to pass a 24 hour "cool down" period before an abortion is performed? If background checks don't violate a gun owner's civil rights, would it be fair to say that you're also in support of some manner of background check or license be required before any individual can voice their opinion on a forum, newspaper, or public stage as well?

Weapons being used to terrorise Mexico come from organised criminals and arms international traffickers....
Many come with the deserters who leave the Mexican and other South American armies o join the cartels.
The military grade weapons in Mexico are largely liberated from the Mexican Army, and brought into Mexico from places like Bosnia or other trouble spots.
The Cartels can buy fully automatic weapons and pinas (handgrenades) from foriegn sources......not the civillian US gun owners.same goes for heavier weapons.....bazookas etc...
The charge is baseless.......with the money the cartels have they buy the best and most deadly weapons on the black market internationally, not cross border.

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by Ghost375
Oh no, you have to wait 2 days to get a gun....what an infringement on your civil liberties!

Hmmm... I can only assume, then, that you wouldn't be among those with major problems over laws attempting to pass a 24 hour "cool down" period before an abortion is performed? If background checks don't violate a gun owner's civil rights, would it be fair to say that you're also in support of some manner of background check or license be required before any individual can voice their opinion on a forum, newspaper, or public stage as well?

I see nothing wrong with the first part.
The second part is offensive, and kind of surprised a mod would say that.
Plus you guys do require email verification! there already is a delay! and you guys censor people ALL the time for saying things you deem offensive. Pretty rich coming from a mod on this site.

So answer me this, you are okay with repeat violent offenders to have easy access to gun? You think a guy who just got out of jail should be allowed to go straight to the store and pick up a semi-automatic rifle?

It's so fascist to limit people with a history of violence access to guns..../sarcasm.