Drug Control Breeds Gun Control
By Jacob Sullum, Reason Senior EditorTwo weeks ago (as Radley Balko noted), a Fox News story by William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott debunked the commonly heard factoid that 90 percent of the firearms used by Mexican drug traffickers come from American dealers. In a front-page story about gun smuggling on Tuesday, The New York Times modified the claim, saying "90 percent of the 12,000 pistols and rifles the Mexican authorities recovered from drug dealers last year and asked to be traced came from [gun] dealers in the United States." But according to La Jeunesse and Lott, that's not quite right either:
"In 2007-2008, according to ATF Special Agent William Newell, Mexico submitted 11,000 guns to the ATF for tracing. Close to 6,000 were successfully traced—and of those, 90 percent—5,114 to be exact, according to testimony in Congress by William Hoover—were found to have come from the U.S.
"But in those same two years, according to the Mexican government, 29,000 guns were recovered at crime scenes.
"In other words, 68 percent of the guns that were recovered were never submitted for tracing. And when you weed out the roughly 6,000 guns that could not be traced from the remaining 32 percent, it means 83 percent of the guns found at crime scenes in Mexico could not be traced to the U.S."
Hence La Jeunesse and Lott's conclusion that "only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to the U.S." Which sounds a lot less impressive than 90 percent.
Does the percentage matter? Rhetorically, yes, because gun controllers argue that more restrictions should be placed on American gun buyers to reduce smuggling of firearms to Mexico. The Times story implicitly makes an argument for heavier regulation of long gun sales and requiring private sellers to do background checks (a.k.a. closing the "gun show loophole"). It also suggests that the sheer number of retailers, such as the "1,500 licensed gun dealers in the Houston area, easily accessible to Mexico," is a problem.
The story does acknowledge skepticism that limiting Americans' gun rights will reduce violence in Mexico:
"With billions in profits from illegal drugs, the cartels can easily obtain weapons on the black market in other countries, [NRA Executive Vice President Wayne] LaPierre and many gun dealers argue. "The cartels have the money to get guns wherever they want," said Charles Fredien, the owner of Chuck's Gun in Brownsville, Tex., on the border "They have grenades, don't they? They don't buy grenades here."
You might think the persistence of the drug traffickers' main business, which consists of transporting and selling products that are entirely illegal on both sides of the border, would give pause to those who think they can block the flow of guns to the cartels. Instead, the violence fostered by drug control feeds demands for equally futile gun control.
In February I noted Attorney General Eric Holder's call for renewing the federal "assault weapon" ban in response to Mexico's prohibition-related violence. The Cato Institute's David Rittgers detects a rhetorical shift from "assault weapons," which was always an arbitrary and fuzzy category, to "military-style weapons," which he says is potentially "a term inclusive of all modern firearms in a back-door attempt to enact a new gun control scheme."
Addendum: Radley Balko points out that President Obama yesterday used the erroneous 90 percent figure during his visit to Mexico, where he reiterated his support for an "assault weapon" ban. "Some 90 per cent of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States," Obama said, repeating a claim made by Mexican President Felipe Calderon.











Drug Control Breeds Gun Control
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
prohibition breeds violence
Thank you, Mr. Sullum.
These relationships are very clear, yet policy-makers ignore the roots of these crimes (while average Americans remain apathetic).
For example, the ill-advised experiment with the federal prohibition on alcoholic beverages (passed in 1919) clearly and directly caused the rise in gang-related liquor smuggling and sales. These ventures being outside the law, liquor gangs opted to provide their own protection and enforcement, and violence increased. In response to their failure of prohibition-caused violence, the federal government passed the Gun Control Act in 1934, infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms. But by that time, liquor prohibition had just been repealed, and the violence abated.
Now, we have similar prohibition on narcotics ... and if some had their way, prohibition on firearms . Narcotics prohibition has (and continues to) driven a great amount of gang warfare. Nearly ALL the inner-city gang murders are over drug sales and turf, as is the cartel violence in Mexico. Just like the Capone-days gangs, these outfits live on the immense profits of dealing in prohibited substances, and because it's outside the law, they enforce justice themselves (often violently).
It is literal insanity that our own legal policies of prohibition fuels criminal violence in the first place, and then some lawmakers would dishonestly offer FURTHER prohibition (firearms) as the solution. I am not a big "NRA person" but Wayne LaPierre was perfectly correct on this. He stated that these issues (such as bans on semiauto guns ) are phony issues, being pushed on the back of the failure of fundamentally flawed and misguided policies.
- Carl in Chicago
April 20, 2009 10:31AM
Reply to this Recommend
(4)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Couldn't have said better...
NTXT
- John Q Citizen
April 22, 2009 9:09PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
they must be nutts
this is not dew to the drugs it is the money if you take away what they make all there money from they would not be there and anything where there is a lot of money they will have guns to protect what they have no matter what. They will just get them some where else in the world if they take away are right to have a gun think about how many more Americans that will be out of a job ? and the way the hole world is today do not count out that some day there could be a war here in are own country and it will be the average American useing what ever he or she has to fight with this is how America started
- Doc64 April 22, 2009 12:15PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.