Quote of the Day
Mexico can’t show the court how a lawfully-made and lawfully-sold gun that is illegally straw purchased, illegally smuggled across an international border, illegally possessed in Mexico and criminally misused by narco-terrorist drug cartels is the responsibility of U.S. gun makers.
Larry Keane
March 6, 2025
What SCOTUS Got Wrong About Firearms and the Gun Business During Arguments in Mexico’s Lawsuit Against US Gun Makers – Shooting News Weekly
I think what happened is that they believed their logic was irrefutable. It went like this, “Guns are bad. Companies that make and sell bad things are bad. These bad things hurt our people. Companies must make us feel good by giving us lots of money.”
How could it be any clearer?
The SCOTUS decision will reflect the soundness of their arguments.
Mexico ain’t got a case.
But since when has hypocrisy or law ever stopped a communist?
And after the judicial power grab we just witnessed with giving lower court judges the power over the presidency?
Don’t hold your breath.
If I was Thomas, I would have asked Mexico. You’all want to be held responsible for what happens in the US because of tequila alone?
(Having been on a few tequila/cocaine benders myself.)
I trow not.
Just saying.
And if Kamel had won?
If “¿Que Mala?”* had won, it wouldn’t change much. SCOTUS would be the same, since no new appointments have been made or confirmed by the Senate during this administration.
———
* – An appropriate nickname, given the subject of discussion. Spanish for “How Bad?”
“Wouldn’t change much”.
It shouldn’t. But politics is always a part of every decision in government.
And at this point, “investigations”, hopefully.
I thought Mexico’s argument was more like, “Guns kill people and are illegal here. The illegal guns here used to be legal guns there, but become illegal guns here when our criminals use them. We can’t or won’t or don’t want to control our criminals, so please make guns illegal there so we have no more illegal guns here.”
That’s a losing argument.
Now, if they had said, “The American-sourced guns here were acquired in straw purchases knowingly approved by your BATFE, as part of an alleged ‘botched sting operation’ in which the guns were released ‘into the wild’ with no feasible plan within the BATFE to track or recover them other than finding them ‘after the fact’, at crime scenes with dead Mexican citizens. Please censure or abolish your BATFE and prosecute — under applicable American law — all officials involved for their willful acts during this highly-irresponsible operation.”
That MIGHT be a (sort of) winning argument. It won’t shut down the American firearm industry (which is their goal), but it would discourage the federal government agencies from approving suspected straw purchases and get some measure of justice for the victims. Fair consolation prize, I think.
But at the end of the day, even if they did succeed in shutting down the U.S. civilian firearm industry, it wouldn’t help them much. The vast majority of “illegal guns” used by cartels in Mexico come from Central and South American military stockpiles, originally purchased by those governments from Russia and/or China. The whole “70%* of crime guns in Mexico submitted to the ATF for tracing come from the U.S. civilian market” is a misdirection — the key phrase is “submitted to the ATF for tracing”; if a full-auto AK is found at a crime scene with Chinese or Russian markings, they won’t submit it to the BATFE for tracing because it obviously did NOT come from the American market and the BATFE will have no record of it. It’s a waste of time and resources.
Besides which, the military stockpiles will have those full-auto AKs, belt-fed machine guns, RPGs, and other fun toys. Logically, why would you use semi-auto AR-15s to terrorize the neighborhood when you could use full-auto AKs or truck-mounted DShKs? Which has the greater shock factor to cow the citizens into submission?
——–
* – Or whatever number the media is using this week. I’ve seen it as high as 95% and as low as 60%, depending on how much outrage they’re trying to stoke.
Mexico would have a very good case against Obama and Holder for operation Fast n Furious. After all: Their whole plan was to intentionally get Mexicans killed to drum up anti 2A sentiment and undermine the Constitution here in the US. I, for one, would love to see those two extradited.
What does Mexico have to lose by attempting such frivolous lawsuits.
That’s one of the fundamental strategies of the left….use lawyers they
already OWN to file and if not at least cost their opposition lots of money
from having to defend against such lawfare. Till such “petitioners” are forced
to bear the costs of such pointless, baseless and usually frivolous legal
shenanigans they have no reason to stop.
Sometimes the good guys win. When the parents of an Aurora Colorado movie theater shooting victim sued Lucky Gunner for selling the ammunition Lucky Gunner got th case dismissed and hit the plaintiffs for $100,000 in legal fees. At this point the anti gun groups who had encouraged the case cut and ran leaving the parents twisting in the wind.
Yes…but did Lucky Gunner actually collect those fees? If not then Lucky Gunner is STILL the loser.