"The growing sales of these military-style weapons have become a regional problem that requires regional solutions."

"I've got a 'regional solution' for you."

A tip of the boonie hat to Irregular Matthew for the link below.

Andres Oppenheimer, Latin America correspondent for the Miami Herald, writes -- "Commentary: Deadlier U.S. guns raise death toll in Mexico."

My opinion: With more than 40,000 deaths in drug-related shootings in Mexico over the past five years, an escalating death toll in Central America and the Caribbean, and U.S. policemen being outgunned by criminals in many cities, the growing sales of these military-style weapons have become a regional problem that requires regional solutions.

The Obama administration should seek congressional ratification of a 1997 regional treaty known as CIFTA, which tries to crack down on illicit firearms trafficking in the Americas. President Barack Obama has said he supports CIFTA, but isn't doing much to get it passed by Congress.

And Latin American countries should step up diplomatic pressure on the United States to get Congress to reinstate a ban on assault weapons that was allowed to expire in 2004, as well as to get Obama to issue an executive order to stop imports of military-style weapons that often end up in the hands of Mexican and Central American drug cartels.

How many more people have to die in mass shootings across the hemisphere before we put an end to this madness?

Now, y'all know I can't resist an open invitation like that.

-----Original Message-----
From: georgemason1776
To: aoppenheimer
Sent: Tue, Jun 28, 2011 7:53 am
Subject: Your failure to think through the problem.

Dear Andres,

I will skip over the policy implications of the current ATF Gunwalker Scandal, which, like most American media, you conveniently ignore in your screed and come to the more important point.

I was once asked by a citizen disarmament advocate such as yourself what I thought of "gun control." As I began, he interrupted and said, "Give me the short answer." I thought for a moment and then said, "If you try to take our firearms we will kill you."

Your obvious failure to think through the policy you advocate is an illustration of the Chinese dictum: "Be careful what you wish for, you may get it."

There are a considerable number of Americans -- well armed Americans -- who will not obey any further restrictions on our God-given, natural and inalienable rights when it comes to firearms. If, as I believe, that number amounts to a mere three percent of American firearm owners, that means you'll have to kill three million of us in a bloody civil war to achieve what you want. That doesn't count all the tyrannical, gun-grabbing sonsabitches that we'll be forced to kill in righteous self-defense before we meet our Maker, and you should know that we intend -- and have the skills and the means -- to make that more than a one-to-one ratio. The pile of bodies of the next American civil war that you unthinkingly advocate would be in the millions, and we'd almost certainly win anyway, simply because our will to live free is greater than yours to oppress us.

Please, do not extrapolate from your own cowardice. You think that if you convince the federal government to carry out your policy that we'll just meekly submit, because you cannot conceive of resisting yourself. We, on the other hand, have principles that we are willing to die for. Unfortunately for some, that means we are willing to kill in defense of those principles as well.

So, you have to ask yourself, now that I have helped you think through the practical, unintended consequences of your advocated policy, is it worth it?

If I may suggest, don't piss off the "bitter clingers" by trying to take any more of our liberty and property, Andres. There's no worthwhile future in it, for any of us.

Mike Vanderboegh
The alleged leader of a merry band of Three Percenters
PO Box 926
Pinson AL 35126