While engaging a friend-of-a-friend in conversation and debate on the subject/issue, I was 'asked' to watch the following video:
Manuel De La Rosa (2010:Feb.17). "South Texas Gun Trafficking into Mexico," KIII-TV.
Man, what a steaming pile of...
responsible journalism. [/sarcasm]
Note: The video is 3 minutes and 46 seconds long, and the video format uses a "time-remaining" counter (so at the very beginning of the video, the counter will read "-3:46").
Several points...
- Ah, good old reliable KIII-TV...
(disclosure: Corpus = my old stomping grounds) - Ah, good old reliable [anti-gun] Manuel De La Rosa...
- -3:36 | "So you may wonder, how do they get it south of the border?"
KIII-TV (via co-anchor Katia Uriarte, a native of Honduras, whom I'm sure has no axe to grind in retaliation for our intervention in the country of her birth, or any vested interest in making her native country [or its neighbors] appear blameless for Mexico's problems) starts off by framing the debate in their favor, insinuating that the reason there are weapons in Mexico is because they've flowed south from our border into Mexico, rather than from Central American countries (including Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and... oh look, Honduras!) north into Mexico. - -3:19 | "This is like a cannon. This will go through a vest"
That... just depends. Described in the video only as a ".44 caliber" (emphasis mine) handgun, we can't know the exact chambering for certain (Wikipedia's List of Handgun Cartidges shows 11 variants of ".44 caliber" ammunition using a tight definition, and as many as 17 using a looser definition). But let's err on the side of caution and assume it's chambered for the evil baby-killing .44 Magnum cartridge. Will a .44 Magnum round penetrate ballistic armor ("a vest")? The answer is... that depends. It all depends on what level of armor (or "vest") the person is wearing. Type IIIA armor will generally stop .44 Magnum rounds (read the chart in the Wikipedia entry for details, for the Devil is in them). - -3:13 | "This 44-caliber handgun was picked up during a traffic stop in Jim Wells county."
It was picked up during a traffic stop... so what? What's the point of that bit of information? Was there any indication it was headed south? If not, then why mention it? If so, then why not mention it? - -3:09 | "On a routine stop in Robstown along Highway 77, an officer found this AR 15 assault rifle packed in three boxes..."
There's no such thing as an "AR 15 assault rifle." Journalistic integrity fail. An AR-15 is a civilian-legal semi-automatic rifle that may be obtained new by undergoing a background check and purchasing it from an FFL (FFL = Federal Firearms License, which is also commonly used to refer to holders of said license).
An "assault rifle" is a weapon capable of select-fire (usually either full-auto or a three-round burst). They are generally not civilian legal (the process is lengthy and expensive), and their possession is tightly controlled under the National Firearms Act of 1934. If this was a [rare] civilian legal assault rifle, we would be hearing about it from the ATF, not from some local yokels. To date, no civilian legal assault rifle has ever been used in a crime... by a civilian. Two have been used in crimes, but by members of the law enforcement community (one Fed, one non-Fed).
They can also not be purchased new. Manufacture of new assault rifles was halted in 1986 by the Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA). With a permanently-fixed supply (dwindling, actually, as machinery does not last forever), the price has soared. The barrier to entry into the "machine gun" market (technically sub-machine guns, which fire pistol ammunition) is usually $5k, and the "assault rifle" portion of that market generally starts at $10-15k. So, in closing, it's either an AR-15, or an assault rifle. Not both. - -3:02 | "... and also found this cop killer handgun..."
What was the "cop killer handgun"? It looks like an FN Five-seveN, but it's impossible to tell without being able to see the nose/bbl area, which is obscured at -2:59 into the video. Even if that is the case, the Five-seveN isn't a "cop killer handgun." - -2:58 | "... armed with special bullets that can penetrate a bullet proof vest."
What were the "special bullets?" The 5.7x28mm "SS190" round is the only ammunition available for the pistol that is defined as armor-piercing, and it is available only to military and law enforcement. The import, sale, and possession of this type of ammunition is extremely controlled, and were it to end up in the hands of non-military or -law enforcement personnel... well, let's just say now *that* would be a story! If there is any factual evidence to back up any of the assertions (read "bald-faced lies") perpetuated by this intrepid KIII-TV reporter which I have addressed in points 7 and 8, I would like to see it. - -2:55 | "In Kingsville , this a mini machine gun was discovered by officers while out on patrol..."
Without a closer look, it's impossible to tell if that "mini machine gun" is actually what they claim it to be. If it is, it will be registered to someone, and they can prosecute that. - -2:48 | "and a Kleberg County deputy picked up this grenade launcher on a Highway 77 traffic stop"
It's also hard to tell whether that "grenade launcher" is actually what they claim it to be. Spike's Tactical sells something similar, and all proles like you and me can get for it are 37mm flare "grenades."
If it was actually a "grenade launcher," it would be 40mm, and classified as a "Destructive Device" under U.S. Code, and... you guessed it: tightly controlled. Thus it would be registered to someone, and they could (and would!) prosecute that. I didn't see them measuring the tube with calipers, but I would imagine it probably measures out at 37mm, not 40mm.
It would be a little more believable were it an ATF agent instead of some local yokel who probably doesn't know a great deal about guns and probably even less about Federal firearms law... - -2:17 | "Local officials said smugglers are using Highway 77 and 281 to take some dangerous weapons across the border."
And then they show a 9mm S&W (probably a 5906... and possibly a target model, at that) as the associated image! Pure Comedy Gold! [TM] - "These are not old rinky dink 38's," Lt. Mendoza said. "There high caliber weapons that law enforcement utilizes and military utilizes."
First of all (this is directed at Manuel De La Rosa, who is at least listed as responsible for the transcript), it's ".38s" (with a period, and no apostrophe), not "38's" (notice no period, and the insertion of an apostrophe where one does not belong). My high school English teacher would have asked, mockingly, "38's... what?" (as the apostrophe in this case makes it possessive, and as far as we can tell from the story, this particular [sic] "38" does not own/possess anything. Also, it's "They're," not "There." "They're" is a contraction of "they" and "are" and, thus, would be correct in this case.
Second, these are not "high caliber weapons!" That is just factually inaccurate! - -1:47 | FYI: the "machine gun looking weapon" that is hoisted for the fawning camera here isn't a machine gun at all... it's a semi-automatic 1919 (a 1919A4 variant, I'm assuming). It would still be illegal in Mexico, but I mention it because they seem to be pulling out all the stops here and I want the viewer to be informed. These are perfectly legal for [non-felon] U.S. citizens to own.
- -1:46 | "There not per se criminals that have a criminal history," said Lt. Mendoza.
Here I have an objection to the transcript itself. If you listen to it, I am 98% certain what Lt. Mendoza actually said was "There not per se criminals... they'll have a criminal history."
(again with the "There" / "They're" thing, Manuel De La Rosa... shame on you!)
Anyhow, it may not seem to make sense at first blush, but I believe that is what he said. I think he may have been trying to make a very Alberto Gonzales-like distinction (re: "otherwise law-abiding members of society"). - -1:30 | "Over the last year, agents have stepped up enforcement to stop the flow of guns and ammunition into Mexico."
So... they've stepped up enforcement, and are therefore recovering more guns. Stop the presses! Seriously, I don't see the news here. This says nothing about whether the actual rate has increased!
For a similar "statistical" problem, see NORML's criticisms of ramped-up drug enforcement skewing the numbers of marijuana arrests (and therefore, giving America an "incarceration problem," with a ratio surpassing the rest of the world, and with predominately nonviolent offenders, at that). - -1:14 | FYI: the gun being "manipulated" here (of course I'm going with the double entendre), is a semi-automatic weapon, as well. Granted, it would still be illegal in Mexico, but it's not at all illegal here, and I bring it up because it doesn't match the "evil, deadly assault rifles" rhetoric we keep hearing on this [non-]issue. I'm 99% certain it was a Hi-Point carbine.
- -0:44 | FYI: the "machine gun looking weapon" shown here is also a 1919a4. Again, illegal in Mexico, but perfectly legal here.
- -0:30 | FYI: the "AK-47 looking weapon" shown here is mostly-likely a semi-automatic AKM (see this discussion in the American Journalism Review for more).
- -0:22 | FYI: the [most likely] AR-15 that this anonymous officer was sporting had its magazine removed (perhaps attributable to department policy and not officer's lack of knowledge/preparedness), and I also noticed that the dust cover was flipped open (down). The only good/legitimate excuse for this latter faux pas would be while shooting, but the aforementioned absence of a magazine (while the rifle was slung, no less) would tend to indicate that this was probably not the case, and [that] he probably walks around with it like that all the time.
No comments:
Post a Comment