Workman: BREAKING: NSSF, Gun owners react to threatened Mexico industry lawsuit
Hofmann: More evidence of guns pouring into Mexico--from the south.
Evidence continues to mount that contrary to claims on the part of those who would use Mexican drug war violence to justify heavier gun regulation in the U.S., the civilian gun market in this country is at most a very minor player as a source of the criminals' firepower--at least when the U.S. government isn't abetting the process. When the narco-thugs go shopping for firepower, they go south. The latest confirmation of that comes from McClatchy, in "Drug gangs help themselves to Central American military arsenals":
Crime groups in cahoots with venal army officers are looting military arsenals in Central America, giving them powerful weapons that allow them to outgun police and challenge the region's regular armies.
The weapons run the gamut from assault rifles to anti-tank missiles, some of which the U.S. supplied during regional conflicts more than two decades ago. The slippage from military armories occurs regularly.
And McClatchy isn't asking anyone to take their word for it--they refer skeptical readers to WikiLeaks cables to back up these assertions.
So...... Is "slippage" newspeak for theft?
If I may coin a new term, the NSSF needs to adopt "Barrett's rules of engagement". After being trashed by political hacks and their friends in the media, Ronnie Barrett informed one police department in California that if his products were so evil, then they sure didn't need to own any or have their existing ones serviced.
America's firearms industry needs to refuse any business from the Mexican Government at any level: no new sales, no warranty work, no trade-ins, no nothing, nada! Further, they need to inform Washington that any further firearm transfers from the US government or any of it's various agencies to the Mexican government at any level will result in similar treatment. You don't do business with those who wish to destroy your business. NSSF is either on the side of 2A or they are not. It's "fish or cut bait" time!
For Anonymous at 1:54 PM:
Sounds like the best possible plan. But do they have the guts to do it?
The problem with NSSF is that they are only interested in manufacturer prosperity. If that prosperity comes by way of the purchasing of the police state, that's just fine with them.
At best, our rights are of incidental interest to them.
Just like the NRA.
"At best, our rights are of incidental interest to them."
Do you remember when Smith & Wesson crawled in bed with the Clinton administration? I still do not own a Smith. Nor will I ever own one in the future. Yes, I know that the brand is under new ownership. But as far as I'm concerned, that name has a ton of baggage associated with it that I cannot forgive. The NSSF is in the business to make money. They make a good part of that money off of 2A supporters. If we threaten that cash flow they will pay attention. Think ATK and the demilled brass fiasco a few months back. Whether you think we can or whether you think we can't, you're probably right.
Post a Comment