Obama Releases 2,000 Guns To Mexican Cartels

Originally posted by normbenign
You well know that Democrats are famous for that type of "gotcha" operation. The disaster at Waco was the result of BATF wanting to put on a spectacular, high impact raid allegedly to get machine guns and hand grenades. They could have picked up David Koresh without violence, but instead got a bunch of federal cops killed and wounded, and then killed need ...[text shortened]... ds by sniper Lon Horiuchi, who was also present at Waco picking off people fleeing the flames.

Your partisan nutjobery is noted. In fact, both parties have routinely used such operations for many years.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Your partisan nutjobery is noted. In fact, both parties have routinely used such operations for many years.

Where?

Originally posted by no1marauder
You know perfectly well they the purpose of the program (which existed prior to Obama) was to arrest members of the cartel for illegally obtaining weapons not to provide them with guns for the hell of it. That the program was badly handled is clear but there is no hypocrisy involved. Nor is there the slightest evidence Obama himself had any knowledge of it.

Personally, I am opposed to such "sting" operations on principle.

Well, the purpose of the program is debatable. Other people believe that the purpose of the program was to provide guns to cartels, so that the cartels would use those guns in crimes. The guns would then be able to be traced back. Yes - I agree with you; it was not to provide cartels with guns for the hell of it. But I'm still not satisfied with Obama's desire to take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens and put guns into the hands of criminals.

Originally posted by sasquatch672
Well, the purpose of the program is debatable. Other people believe that the purpose of the program was to provide guns to cartels, so that the cartels would use those guns in crimes. The guns would then be able to be traced back. Yes - I agree with you; it was not to provide cartels with guns for the hell of it. But I'm still not satisfied with Oba ...[text shortened]... o take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens and put guns into the hands of criminals.

Those "other people" are idiots.

Originally posted by normbenign
Where?

Are you seriously claiming that only Democratic administrations have engaged in "sting" operations? For real?

Originally posted by sasquatch672
You're either for guns or against them. You can't be against law-abiding citizens owning guns, and simultaneously be for criminals owning guns. You don't get it both ways.

Nothing is black and white like that. For example, is it hypocritical to be against legalizing marijuana, yet support medical use of it for people in pain? Of course not.

Or how about being against abortion, but making an exception if the mother's life is in danger?

Likewise, the "either your for it or against it" argument doesn't apply in Fast and Furious case.

Originally posted by vivify
Nothing is black and white like that. For example, is it hypocritical to be against legalizing marijuana, yet support medical use of it for people in pain? Of course not.

Or how about being against abortion, but making an exception if the mother's life is in danger?

Likewise, the "either your for it or against it" argument doesn't apply in Fast and Furious case.

Ah, nuance. Yes. A concept long lost on crusaders.

OK...I'll rephrase.

How can Obama be so vociferously against guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens, and then release 2,000 assault weapons into the hands of vicious gangs on our southern border?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Those "other people" are idiots.

Let me ask you a question. Indulge me. If those guns were not going to be used in crimes, then how were they going to be traced?

Originally posted by sasquatch672
Ah, nuance. Yes. A concept long lost on crusaders.

OK...I'll rephrase.

How can Obama be so vociferously against guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens, and then release 2,000 assault weapons into the hands of vicious gangs on our southern border?

Those guns were bait for those vicious gangs who were supposed to be caught and locked up. Had Obama succeeded, the guns would've been reclaimed, and you wouldn't be able to make this thread, and would be latching on to some other bizzare, yet Republican-appropriate hogwash.

Originally posted by vivify
Those guns were bate for those "nut jobs", who were supposed to be caught and locked up. Had Obama succeeded, the guns would've been reclaimed, and you wouldn't be able to make this thread, and would be latching on to some other bizzare, yet Republican-appropriate hogwash.

You're not addressing the core of the thread.

How is it ok to give 2,000 guns to known, extremely well-organized, and ruthless criminals, but not ok for law-abiding, responsible people to own guns?

EDIT: There's an extremely small statistical probability that a legally owned and obtained gun will be used in a crime. There is an extremely high statistical probability that a gun in the possession of a violent gang will be used in a crime - a violent one.

If Obama wants to prevent gun violence, then why would he create gun violence?

Originally posted by sasquatch672
How is it ok to give 2,000 guns to known, extremely well-organized, and ruthless criminals, but not ok for law-abiding, responsible people to own guns? [...] If Obama wants to prevent gun violence, then why would he create gun violence?

Wasn't it a failed sting operation?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Are you seriously claiming that only Democratic administrations have engaged in "sting" operations? For real?

Tell be of some where the result was as heinous as those I mentioned. How about the MOVE firebombing. There aren't any Republicans in Philly, not according to polling data.

I am certain some republicans screw up stings but dozens of people don't die, and their stings are usually intended to catch crooks, not create public outrage against guns.

Originally posted by vivify
Those guns were bait for those vicious gangs who were supposed to be caught and locked up. Had Obama succeeded, the guns would've been reclaimed, and you wouldn't be able to make this thread, and would be latching on to some other bizzare, yet Republican-appropriate hogwash.

In short, he gave guns to vicious criminals hoping to catch them, and create an upheaval of support for restrictions against gun sales. People would die to support his political agenda.

Originally posted by FMF
Wasn't it a failed sting operation?

Yes. It was. Nothing more. Some ultra-right-wing websites have said that Obama was trying to cause gun violence in Mexico to demonstrate the need for more stringent gun laws here. I think the premise is absurd.

American liberals are avoiding the point here. If you object so much to guns, on principle, then why are you not outraged at the release of 2,000 high-powered assault rifles to violent gangs on your southern border? Americans buy guns legally. An extremely small percentage of those guns are used in crimes. A still smaller percentage of those crimes are heinous and unspeakable.

But you know, with a high degree of certainty, that if you put a gun into the hands of a violent criminal, he will commit a violent crime with the weapon you gave him. Murder. Multiple murders. You don't see the moral turpitude in that? The operation wasn't flawed, it wasn't botched. The operation itself, given the interpretation most favorable to Obama, was immoral, heinous, and reprehensible.

So why the double standard?

Originally posted by FMF
Wasn't it a failed sting operation?

That depends on what failure meant. It failed to create an anti-gun uproar, so I guess it failed. It failed because we found out about it, and it is an embarrassment to the administration, the President and his toadie.