Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamFan0083
Actually his claim has a great deal to do with the Fast and Furious operation.
If he was unaware of the operation, it doesn't matter, it's still his responsibility as President, and now he will bear whatever consequences come of this screw up (one of a long line of many) on the part of BATF.
|
The criticisms of the "Fast and Furious" operation are a bit over-the-top. People are upset because some of the weapons that were knowingly (but unintentionally) allowed into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels were used in some violent confrontations. While that's understandable, let me ask you this: do you truly believe that the cartels would not have had a significant amount of weapons if the operation didn't take place? If it wasn't a tagged gun that we knew about, it would have been another gun. The way that people go on about it, you'd think that this operation was the difference between the cartels fighting with rocks and their fighting with guns. That's fantasy.
The act of "gunwalking" (allowing the purchases to be made, and then following it) took place over the course of about five years, and actually started under President Bush. The idea behind it was solid: no matter how hard we try, we haven't been able to cut off the supply of weapons to the cartels as we have been operating. By allowing a cartel purchaser to make the purchase, and then following him, we could nab two birds with one net: having direct proof of involvement in arms trafficking, we would
arrest the purchaser (my understanding is that, at present, we can only deny a sale to them because of suspicion) and
arrest their cartel contact. The weapons would then be retrieved. If it worked as planned, there would be no issue of weapons getting away, and the cartel's weapons trafficking network would actually be losing members.
The problem is that our surveillance and tracking isn't perfect. Under Bush, no arrests were made because even though we tracked the traffickers to the border and informed the Mexican police about it, they were unable to continue tracking where we left off. Even though we began to make arrests under Obama, we could not track everyone, and a number of weapons slipped through the cracks. That's where the anger came from.
I'll reiterate again that this was not the difference between the cartels having no guns, or even significantly fewer guns. It's obvious that our attempts to control gun sales aren't preventing the cartels from obtaining weapons. The ideas behind these operations were to be a bit more proactive, removing the cartel's purchasing network. Solid in theory, but as far as short-term thinking goes, it's a terrible idea.
But all of this talk about focusing on the weapons is really rather ridiculous. Declawing the cartels from our end won't fix anything. Seeing how militarized they've become, they could probably create their own weapons. Where is the source of their power and influence coming from? Money. Where are they getting their money from? Illegal drug sales. What happens if the drugs aren't illegal anymore? The money flow dries up, and with it, the cartels. History has already shown that this is the outcome: see the mafia and the ban on alcohol, the Prohibition of the 1920's. I don't do drugs, never have and intend not to, but I think this entire thing is utterly foolish. Just legalize the damn things already.