Trump Agrees With Mexican President: U.S. Gun Laws Are Too Slack

[Frank Cannon]

http://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2016/09/01/trump-agrees-mexican-president-u.s.-gun-laws-slack/

Didn’t the NRA endorse Trump?

Yes, they did, so it will be interesting to get their take on this.

    At a press conference with Donald Trump on Wednesday in Mexico City, President Enrique Peña Nieto said: “Every year, thousands of weapons and millions of US dollars in cash enter illegally into Mexico from the north, strengthening the cartels and other criminal organizations that create violence in Mexico.”

    The National Rifle Association (NRA), one of Trump’s key conservative backers, has long rejected such claims, arguing that guns sold by American dealers and smuggled across the border are not a major driver of crime in Mexico.

Okay, if you count Obama and Eric Holder’s disastrous and corrupt Fast and Furious gun running operation, Nieto may have a point, but I don’t think that’s what he was referring to. The problems he mentioned have been going on for much longer, and presumably, the failed Fast and Furious operation was meant to try and track those cartels.

Unfortunately, Holder is an idiot.

With that understanding, the NRA and proponents of the Second Amendment should be watching like a hawk to see the man that earned their endorsement, and how he responds.

They didn’t have to wait long.

    On Wednesday, however, in a largely conciliatory speech in Mexico City that preceded a more aggressive address on immigration at home in Arizona, Trump did not question Peña Nieto’s comment about guns. Instead, the Republican presidential candidate echoed the Mexican president’s longtime talking points.

    “No one wins in either country when human smugglers and drug traffickers prey on innocent people, when cartels commit acts of violence, when illegal weapons and cash flow from the United States into Mexico,” Trump said.

Um…
This was very likely not what the NRA or those who hold a strong view of preserving our Second Amendment rights wanted to hear from the man they so heartily endorsed just several months ago.

    Before the NRA’s endorsement, at its annual meeting in Louisville, Kentucky, some of the group’s members said they questioned whether Trump’s support for gun rights was genuine, and said they were concerned he might compromise on the issue if it proved politically expedient. Several prominent gun rights advocates, including some closely allied to the NRA, have spoken out against Trump.

Yeah… sometimes you really need to go with your gut. This is one of those situations where those who had doubts likely hate to be proven right, but they were.

For their part, the NRA have yet to make a comment on this latest left slant by their candidate. At this point, it’s highly likely that they’re hunkered down somewhere, desperately hoping this will blow over and that somebody with Trump’s ear is schooling him on what he said, in the meantime.

[Vulcan]

One of the half-wits at TOS told me he doesn't care what Trump's position on guns is as long as he builds the wall.

Yes, they are that shallow.

[Frank Cannon]

One of the half-wits at TOS told me he doesn't care what Trump's position on guns is as long as he builds the wall.

Yes, they are that shallow.

That's insane. This irrational fetishism over a wall that probably won't be built makes no sense to me in the least.....the same as Trump supporters make no sense to me.

[geronl]

He was never really on our side of the Two Amendment

[Vulcan]

That's insane. This irrational fetishism over a wall that probably won't be built makes no sense to me in the least.....the same as Trump supporters make no sense to me.

I'm all for a wall.  We have a great wall (fence, really) here in San Diego and it works very well. 

That said, I don't trust a lying, lifelong New York liberal to build one simply because he said he would.   I trust no liberal, and to those who trust Trump I ask, name another liberal you trust.

I don't trust him on guns, either.   I don't trust him on anything.

[Smokin Joe]

I'm all for a wall.  We have a great wall (fence, really) here in San Diego and it works very well. 

That said, I don't trust a lying, lifelong New York liberal to build one simply because he said he would.   I trust no liberal, and to those who trust Trump I ask, name another liberal you trust.

I don't trust him on guns, either.   I don't trust him on anything.

By the time the wall gets built, it will be for one of two purposes. To keep us in or stand us against.

[Smokin Joe]

http://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2016/09/01/trump-agrees-mexican-president-u.s.-gun-laws-slack/

The real problem with using drug cartels as the reason to ban our guns is simple.

Why would some of the richest men in the world care? They can obtain container loads of weapons the average American can't afford along with the ammo to feed it, and a heck of a lot more. They don't need to piss around with some semi-auto rifles from the US when they can get virtually anything they want elsewhere.

[Gov Bean Counter]

Build a wall and gradually take away guns. Whatever in the world could go wrong with that???

[Neverdul]

One of the half-wits at TOS told me he doesn't care what Trump's position on guns is as long as he builds the wall.

Yes, they are that shallow racist.

Fixed it.

[Cripplecreek]

Home run?

[ConstitutionRose]

The real problem with using drug cartels as the reason to ban our guns is simple.

Why would some of the richest men in the world care? They can obtain container loads of weapons the average American can't afford along with the ammo to feed it, and a heck of a lot more. They don't need to piss around with some semi-auto rifles from the US when they can get virtually anything they want elsewhere.

What you said.  Doesn't Mexico have a responsibility to deal with its crime issues?  If the cartels were arrested, prosecuted and jailed (or killed in the arrest attempt), gun sources would be a mute issue.  As it is they have allowed the cartels to soil their entire society, to buy off government officials, to buy judges and to murder any law enforcement  person who dares to stand against them. This is Mexico's issue.   

[Crazieman]

Way to go, Mr. New York Liberal.  Way to go.

How's TOS apologizing for it?  Or is mentioning it a zottable offense?

[XenaLee]

By the time the wall gets built, it will be for one of two purposes. To keep us in or stand us against.

Exactly.

[Oceander]

Say good-bye to your Second Amendment rights.  And while you're at it, thank the Trumpkins for taking them away from you.

[Jazzhead]

What you said.  Doesn't Mexico have a responsibility to deal with its crime issues?  If the cartels were atrested, prosecuted and jailed (or killed in the arrest attempt), gun sources would be a mute issue.  As it is they have allowed the cartels to soil their entire society, to buy off government officials, to buy judges and to murder anyy law enforcement  person who dares to stand against them. This is Mexico's issue.

Well, sure.  But the reason it's Mexico's issue is that they happen to be situate on the southern border of the nation with the world's most rabid consumption of illegal drugs.   The cartels furnish the supply to meet American demands. 

The solution isn't to ban guns, but rather to re-think the war on (some) drugs.   

[Smokin Joe]

Say good-bye to your Second Amendment rights.  And while you're at it, thank the Trumpkins for taking them away from you.

The Second Amendment didn't grant those rights, it only codified them. Those Rights will continue to exist, whether they are infringed, or even if the Amendment is removed.

Exercising them will be more problematical, but that will just force people to find a nice, quiet way to do so.

[XenaLee]

What you said.  Doesn't Mexico have a responsibility to deal with its crime issues?  If the cartels were atrested, prosecuted and jailed (or killed in the arrest attempt), gun sources would be a mute issue.  As it is they have allowed the cartels to soil their entire society, to buy off government officials, to buy judges and to murder anyy law enforcement  person who dares to stand against them. This is Mexico's issue.

Obviously....the kickbacks from the drug cartels are just too good to pass up for many, if not most, in the Mexican government and law enforcement.  When you have corruption at all levels, Mexico is what you get.  Coming soon to the USA, no doubt.  I think the main difference thus far is....our law enforcement is primarily made up of idealistic and honest folks.  That is probably going to change for the worse under Hillary, just as it (and our military) has fundamentally transformed under Obama.

[Crazieman]

The Second Amendment didn't grant those rights, it only codified them. Those Rights will continue to exist, whether they are infringed, or even if the Amendment is removed.

Exercising them will be more problematical, but that will just force people to find a nice, quiet way to do so.

I refuse to be quiet.

[mountaineer]

He was never really on our side of the Two Amendment

I agree, but don't see how what he said matches the headline. Don't we all oppose the use of guns by violent drug cartel criminals?
 (Not defending him, as I still believe he would do absolutely nothing positive for American gunowners).

[TomSea]

Never-Trumpers now defend the slaughter of Mexican people with guns purchased in the USA?

What a conscience these people have.

Oh, gun-running and gun-smuggling doesn't go on from North to South?

Difficult to fathom the latest hateful article being pushed.

[Rivergirl]

Poor Tom.   Seek help!

[ABX]

Never-Trumpers now defend the slaughter of Mexican people with guns purchased in the USA?

What a conscience these people have.

Oh, gun-running and gun-smuggling doesn't go on from North to South?

Difficult to fathom the latest hateful article being pushed.

So you believe the fault is our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers and civilians?

[Smokin Joe]

Never-Trumpers now defend the slaughter of Mexican people with guns purchased in the USA?

What a conscience these people have.

That is probably the most ridiculous gob of fecal material you have thrown at the glass yet.

Oh, gun-running and gun-smuggling doesn't go on from North to South?

Sure it does. Ask Eric holder and Hillary Clinton. Google "Gunwalker" and for extra credit Google "Grenadewalker", and if you want to move to the front seat of the short bus, Google "Gangwalker". It seems our government has been running guns all over.

But if I was a Cartel guy with billions to work with, I'd spend the scratch to have a few containers of AKs and some heavier weapons, complete with plenty of ammo, some mines, and maybe even some shoulder launched anti-air and antitank stuff. Why waltz when you can rock and roll? Why pay $600 for a semi-auto AK when you can buy the real deal select fire weapon for less on the world arms market?

Sokay to toady up to Barrack Obammy and bring a couple thousand semi-autos down with part of the money they gave you so they can get their statistics right at the border, that's just a favor among criminals, but for real weapons go to the guys who equip armies.

Difficult to fathom the latest hateful article being pushed.

You must live in a gun-free household.

[LMAO]

Never-Trumpers now defend the slaughter of Mexican people with guns purchased in the USA?

What a conscience these people have.

Oh, gun-running and gun-smuggling doesn't go on from North to South?

Difficult to fathom the latest hateful article being pushed.

@TomSea

You're using the same language the left uses to push for further restrictions on the private ownership of guns

[skeeter]

Never-Trumpers now defend the slaughter of Mexican people with guns purchased in the USA?

What a conscience these people have.

Oh, gun-running and gun-smuggling doesn't go on from North to South?

Difficult to fathom the latest hateful article being pushed.

Is there a principle Trumpsters won't sacrifice if so ordered by the reality show star?