Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Dennis A. Henigan

Dennis A. Henigan

Posted: October 1, 2010 12:22 PM

The pressure is building on U.S. officials to take dramatic action to stop the torrent of guns heading directly from American gun shops to the Mexican drug cartels.

One thing is clear. Huge numbers of guns are involved. According to a new report, U.S. Firearms Trafficking to Mexico, by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the University of San Diego Trans-Border Institute, of 75,000 firearms seized by the Mexican government in the last three years, about 80%, or 60,000 firearms, came from the United States. In the last three years, there have been an estimated 28,000 drug-related killings in Mexico, the vast majority by gunfire.

In addition to documenting the southward flow of U.S. guns, the Wilson Center report manages to debunk multiple myths long perpetrated by the gun lobby. The report has a particularly persuasive power because it was not written as a response to the gun lobby's arguments, but rather as a straightforward account of the reality of gun trafficking to Mexico. That reality contradicts the gun lobby's claims again and again.

For example, the National Rifle Association asserts that gun shows have nothing to do with how criminals get guns, even though gun shows are a primary venue for sales by unlicensed private sellers that evade the Brady criminal background check system. The Wilson Center report, however, cites federal law enforcement officials saying that "firearms traffickers continue to purchase firearms at gun shows and other secondary sources, which require fewer checks on a person's identity and criminal history . . ." This is the infamous "gun show loophole," which the NRA says does not exist. One ATF official told the report's authors "a good time to catch firearm smugglers is right after a U.S. gun show in Arizona or Texas."

The NRA and other gun advocates also have long insisted that there is no real difference between semi-automatic assault weapons and other kinds of guns. Apparently, the Mexican cartels disagree. According to the Wilson Center report, of the 85,000 firearms seized by Mexico since December 2006, 50,000 are AK-47 and AR-15 assault rifles. It is astounding that almost 60% of these Mexican crime guns are assault rifles, particularly since we know most of them came from the U.S. and assault rifles have always been a tiny percentage of the American gun market.

This means that when straw buyers for the Mexican traffickers visit American gun shops, they must be cleaning them out of assault rifles and asking for more. Great for assault weapon makers like Bushmaster. Bad for Mexican police. Given the cartels' voracious appetite for assault rifles, can the NRA seriously maintain that they have no special appeal to the most violent of criminals? That they are just like other guns?

Semiautomatic assault rifles are designed to deliver a high volume of firepower - the capacity to fire a lot of rounds quickly and effectively with no pause to reload. Their military features enhance that capacity, from large-capacity ammunition magazines holding scores of rounds, to pistol grips to increase control during rapid fire.

Contrary to the NRA's claim that these military features are merely "cosmetic," in fact they serve valuable functions in combat scenarios, whether the combat is between armies, or between the drug cartels and the police. In fact, the Wilson Center report quotes a former gun trafficker for the Mexican cartels, explaining that "AK-47s are highly valued" especially those with folding stocks (a strictly military feature) because it makes the rifle "shorter, more concealable" and therefore "highly requested" by drug trafficking organizations.

Every major U.S. law enforcement organization supports strong restrictions on assault weapons. Does the gun lobby really believe the police oppose these guns because they merely "look scary"?

Finally, the Wilson Center report destroys what is perhaps the core of the gun lobby's mythology: that strong gun laws are futile because they cannot affect criminal access to guns. Indeed, the very existence of gun trafficking from the U.S. to Mexico contradicts the NRA's argument. Why do Mexican drug cartels have to resort to U.S. gun shops at all?

The answer is plain: because Mexico's strong gun laws are effective. A former drug trafficker told the report's authors "one can sell an AK-47 in Mexico for three to four times its purchase price in the United States along the southwest border." An advanced degree in economics is not required to understand that this price differential reflects Mexico's success in limiting the supply of Mexican assault rifles, thus forcing the cartels to exploit U.S. sources.

On the gun issue, the American people and the people of Mexico have a common cause. In both our countries, the gun lobby's mythology, which long has paralyzed American gun policy, is taking too many lives and destroying too many families.

For more information, see Dennis Henigan's Lethal Logic: Exploding the Myths that Paralyze American Gun Policy (Potomac Books 2009)


 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 606
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
02:36 AM on 10/08/2010
If Henigan's gun control group, Brady Campaign, with their agenda existed during the time of the American Revolution we might still be under British rule because Henigan's group would have taken those so called military features out of the hands of the insurgents since the muskets the Founding Fathers were using were similar or better then the ones used by the British Red Coats. Any features similar to the British military would have been removed. The flint lock, stock and long bore for long rang accuracy would have removed the ability of our fighting Founding Fathers to shot at long distance the Red Coats the result of which gave us an advantage.

The existence of the Brady Campaign and other gun control groups during the American Revolution would have been disasterous to the struggle of our Founding Fathers. It continues to be a threat when it advocates restrictions based on their beliefs about military features that is the result on the evolution of gun technology. The cartridge, repeating rifle, revolver, bolt action, and semi-auto when they first appeared were adopted as a military feature. Military features to ban guns would remove all the guns from the hands of the American people.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:07 PM on 10/06/2010
And again as ever:
In any talk about Mexican drug cartels, it needs to be said that these cartels get their large power and finances from the US marijuana market.
America is the largest user of Pot, it's the destination of the largest portion of the Mexican-grown pot, it's some 60% of the cartel's profits.

huffingtonpost.com/paul-armentano/are-us-pot-laws-the-root_b_502988.html

huffingtonpost.com/tony-newman/bloodbath-in-mexico-drug_b_499378.html
01:27 AM on 10/08/2010
Drug cartels also get their power from their having access to guns that they use to intimidate the local population who have no access to firearms. If it's not the cartels intimidating the defenseless Mexican citizens it's the corrupt Mexican government. The Mexican gov. knows that if it's population is armed it will be able to fight those drug cartels in their neighborhoods. But it's not the problem of drug cartels that the Mexican gov. doesn't want to arm it's people, even if it's just those that are having their mayors killed. Remember, there is the Zapatista insurgency in the south. With the population allowed to be armed the insurgency would spread.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:03 PM on 10/06/2010
When stated properly, this is a good thing.

The fact that =~90% of the guns investigated by the BATFE were made & initially sold in the US means the system is working, mostly.
We're successfully tracking almost all the guns which have ever been in the US, and are now in criminal hands in Mexico. And NONE of the really dangerous stuff is coming from or through the US.
It's a small fraction of all the guns being used in Mexico (many other more dangerous weapons of all sorts), but for the investigative end of the process, we're doing our part.

As for the hype-mongering about the "flood" of guns from the US into Mexico, it makes no sense.
Option 1) go through the risk & expense of buying semi-auto replicas of military arms in the US from either a legal straw-buyer or through private sales, and smuggle them down into Mexico, one trunkload at a time.

option 2) buy a few pallets of cheaper fully-automatic AKs from Asia, Russia, Africa etc, through the relatively porous traffic from overseas. (incidentally, if these weapons are ever caught, there's less of a trail for anyone to investigate how they got in, since they don't have US market markings)
11:27 PM on 10/04/2010
An October 4, 2010 article from the Latin American Herald ( http://laht.com/article.asp?CategoryId=14091%Article=363763) puts the number of guns confiscated by Mexican gov. at 180000 in the past three years. So that 60000 from the W.Wilson Inst. is only 30% of all the guns taken. How could the report miss that fact. The report must be used to set an agenda for more gun control, right, Henigan.
11:49 AM on 10/06/2010
hent--Hennigan's agenda has always been complete civilian disarmament
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
rikilii
Hush, was the first word you were taught...
01:15 PM on 10/06/2010
That's not true.  He only wants "reasonable" gun regulations, like banning the "shoulder thing that goes up".
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Rooster Coburn
Less Gov't + More Responsibility = A Better World
10:36 AM on 10/04/2010
Has anyone else noticed that the issue of drugs flowing north from Mexico and guns flowing south to Mexico is the perfect analogy of what happens when governments try to impose prohibition on their citizens?

Make something illegal and you get an illegal product. Make something legal and you get a legal product.

Don't like illegal products coming into your country? Make that product legal.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Grada3784
God is a Parent, not an abuser.
10:47 PM on 10/03/2010
To Sugarmaker:

Thanks.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbrett480
09:54 PM on 10/03/2010
Gun restrictions would have been useful a long time ago. The cartels have gotten too powerful and if they can't acquire guns from our side of the border they will simply buy them straight from the Mexican military. That being said, we need to start charging US citizens (and Mexican citizens living in America) who supply the cartels with weapons under RICO statues.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sgt stedanko
10:49 AM on 10/05/2010
The cartels are NOT getting their FULLY AUTOMATIC firearms from US gun shops, or US gun shows,Mr. Hennigan simply is manipulating numbers and facts,as usual. There was even an LA times article on this same subject,and in it they say what I am saying-the guns used by the cartels are not coming from US gun shops,or gun shows,they are full auto-military grade weapons. Gun shops,and gun shows do NOT sell grenades,grenade launchers, .50 caliber belt fed machine guns, shoulder fired missiles,or plastic explosives. The cartels get these things from arms dealers,NOT from LEGAL US SALES!
Scare tactics as usual-the cartels do NOT want SEMI auto firearms,folding stocks or no folding stocks. Stocks do not make any difference,the magazines do not make any difference,and Mr. Hennigan is well aware of these facts,as the Clinton "assault weapon" ban was allowed to expire because MANY studies have PROVEN that the ban made ZERO difference!

Mr. Hennigan is simply trying to drum up members for his anti-gun group, which is dwindling,and has less lobbying power, people who actually look at FACTS know the NRA,congress,and the pro-gun lobby is right-"assault weapon" bans have ZERO effect on crime rates-ZERO- NO EFFECT! Scare tactics-like showing a Browning .50 caliber belt fed machine gun on TV, and calling it a "rifle" leading the people who do not know any better to assume that anyone can just walk into a gun shop, and walk out with a machine gun.
photo
Sugarmaker
Act like what you do makes a difference, it does
09:47 PM on 10/03/2010
The Mexican government has some incentive to stretch the numbers on this issue. They're getting some pressure to address the drug flow. Overstating the US contribution to their internal arms race gives them some political cover. It is likely that the numbers they send us are the ones they want us to hear.
09:53 PM on 10/03/2010
There's also the fallacy that "U.S. made" means "made for the U.S. civilian market." American arms manufacturers sell actual NFA Title 2 restricted assault rifles to the Mexican government and its security forces by the crateload, with written approval from the U.S. Department of State, and we *know* that a great many of those are diverted into cartel hands. Don't forget that the Zetas themselves were originally Mexican military, and I believe they do a lot of recruiting from security forces and their logistics chains.

I am also sure that Mr. Calderon isn't well briefed on U.S. firearms law, particularly the National Firearms Act restrictions on all automatic weapons and explosive ordnance. It seems that most Americans aren't familiar with the NFA either.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Rooster Coburn
Less Gov't + More Responsibility = A Better World
12:32 AM on 10/05/2010
Are 80% of 'seized' Mexican crime guns coming from the U.S.?
http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-national/are-80-of-seized-mexican-crime-guns-coming-from-the-u-s
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:14 PM on 10/03/2010
The one thing I've greed with Calderon on, was legalizing marihuana to cripple the drug cartels.
Spot-on.
But on this issue, he's making things up.

Paul Armentano March 17, 2010
huffingtonpost.com/paul-armentano/are-us-pot-laws-the-root_b_502988.html

Tony Newman
March 15, 2010
huffingtonpost.com/tony-newman/bloodbath-in-mexico-drug_b_499378.html
08:51 PM on 10/03/2010
American-made military weapons are coming directly from U.S. manufacturers via exports to the Mexican government (and subsequent diversion), not from the civilian market:

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/04pZcWBfun9ax/610x.jpg

Look closely. Most of those weapons are restricted by U.S. law to the military/police/foreign-export market by the Title 2 provisions of the National Firearms Act, and have been for decades. Some more cartel weapons:

http://www.contempomag.com/seized-Mexican-weapons.jpg

Again, police/military/government-export only, not U.S. civilian market.

FWIW, pistol grips on rifles are designed for more ergonomic wrist position when firing from the shoulder, which is why so many unlimited-class single-shot bolt-action rifles have them:

http://www.potfire.com.au/rlist/ans2013.jpg

That's a high-end European bolt-action competition rifle (Anschutz); note the pistol grip as well as the the adjustable-length stock, another ergonomic feature sometimes mislabeled as an "assault weapon" characteristic.

Ergonomic stocks and handgrips are here to stay; not only is the AR-15 platform the top selling centerfire rifle in the United States, but it absolutely dominates recreational and competitive target shooting in this country. More Americans now own all styles of "assault weapons" than hunt, so you'd have an easier time banning hunting...

Finally, rifle crime declined *again* this past year (2009); rifles continue to be the least misused class of firearm in the nation.

http://www.fbi.gov/page2/september10/crime_091310.html
09:01 PM on 10/03/2010
The FBI tracks rifle crime via the Uniform Crime Reports. See Table 20, Murder, by State and Type of Weapon, for 2009:

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_20.html

If you download the table in Excel and sum the columns, this is what you get:

Total murders, 13,636

Handguns, 6,452 (47.32%)
Firearms (type unknown), 1,928 (14.14%)
Other weapons (non-firearm, non-edged), 1,864 (13.67%)
Edged weapons, 1,825 (13.38%)
Hands, feet, etc., 801 (5.87%)
Shotguns, 418 (3.07%)
Rifles, 348(2.55%)

Rifles are not a significant crime problem in this country and never have been, and U.S. *civilian* rifles are only marginally involved in Mexican cartel violence. And until we take a more thoughtful and rational approach to the drug issue, instead of trying to replay the 1920's militaristic approach to alcohol, diversion of restricted military hardware from the Mexican government will continue to be a problem.
photo
Sugarmaker
Act like what you do makes a difference, it does
09:34 PM on 10/03/2010
Nice bit of research. Thanks for sharing.
photo
drjasonmd
Shalom, compa!
02:44 PM on 10/04/2010
As a physician and surgeon in Mexico (no longer in the north, thank God) I can tell you that the round we pull out of shooting victims most often is the 5.56 NATO round and the weapons of choice are the AR-15 and lately, the M-4 carbine. The handgun of choice remains the Glock 9 mm. They are not being diverted from the army for the most part (those are very rare cases compared to the tens of thousands of weapons the cartels have out there). They come from right across the border from legal purchases. We also see a lot of AR-15s modified for automatic fire (clandestine machine chops/armories are busted all the time).

Regardless of the other odd exotic weapons that are being used here and there, cartels still have to think about compatible ammunition so they tend to use mostly the same stuff.
05:54 PM on 10/04/2010
Yet the fact remains that it would have taken over 20 years for the numbers of firearms they've confiscated to cross the border if the reports numbers are even close to accurate. That, by there very numbers, should have shown a drastic reduction in crime rates.

But it hasn't.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
rikilii
Hush, was the first word you were taught...
06:01 PM on 10/04/2010
You can tell what type of rifle was used by looking at the bullet in an operating room?  A 5.56 NATO round could have come out of a lot of different rifles other than an AR or M16/4.

In any case, M-4 carbines are military only, fully auto assault rifles.  They aren't getting M4s from civilian gun shops.   And AR-15 was the original name for the rifle that was selected and designated by they U.S. Military as the M16.  Now, the term is more commonly used to refer to the civilian version of the M16 and derivatives.  But it's hard to tell from all these stats and articles if that's really what they are referring to, and I'm not even sure if the military versions are referred to by their "M" designations outside the U.S..
01:23 PM on 10/03/2010
Dennis, you continue, as always, to get this issue wrong. You think that because Mexico denies their citizens their human rights, that's a good thing and we should emulate it. You don't bother asking why their are so many cartel murders in Mexico, and not as many here. That question seems to slip your mind. Really, you will convolute ANY argument to try to prove that we should not have our RIGHTS. Why should I ask YOUR permission to protect my family? Why do YOU get to choose when it is ok? Obviously, in Mexico where the opression of rights is more exagerated, you have much more gun violence percapita than here. If you think they have it right, go live there.
07:37 PM on 10/03/2010
Since when is the right to bear arms the same as the right to buy assault rifles without documentation for the sole purpose of illegally exporting them to drug lords in another country? You're failure to offer any specific refutation of the points made by the author highlights the fact that your "argument" has no substance and amounts to little more than fear mongering.
photo
OdinsEye
Korean-Latino cop and combat vet
07:45 PM on 10/03/2010
Assault rifles are very strictly controlled items in the US. You cannot simply walk into a gun store or gun show and walk out with one. The paperwork alone takes months to be processed.
09:39 PM on 10/03/2010
@Hazmat5,

The OP is advocating banning the most popular civilian rifles in the United States (so-called "assault weapons") in order to address the problem of Mexican drug cartels wreaking havoc using restricted military/police assault rifles---thanks to our wrongheaded and ham-handed approach to Prohibition, thereby granting the cartels $40 billion a year in tax-free income.

The reason that Mexico is being invoked at all in this debate is that U.S. rifle crime is far too low to make even the semblance of a compelling case; rifles are the least misused firearms in the United States.
09:18 AM on 10/03/2010
" Military features enhance that capacity, from large-capacity ammunition magazines holding scores of rounds..."

Dennis is wrong to aaume that high capacity magazines were designed for the military only. The Berreta 92f issued to the US military hold 15 9mm rounds; yet the Springfield 9mm XD(m) holds 19 rounds. The XD was specifically designed for the civilian market. So is the the Ruger Mini14 designed for the civilian market even though it has the ability to hold a high-capacity detachable magazine that Ruger produces.

High-capacity detachable magazines have been available to US civilians before it was a general issue to the US Military. The 45 cal. Thompson submachinegun were bought by US citizens back in 1917 before it was issued to the US military in 1938. So it must of been seen practical by US citizens in 1917 to have a high-capacity magazine for personal self defense before the military saw it as a tool of war.
12:08 PM on 10/04/2010
In 1873, you could buy a civilian rifle that would fire 28 to 34 rounds as fast as you could aim. That was the Evans Repeating Rifle, which used an internal helical magazine that was the predecessor of the modern Calico. At the time, most militaries were still using single-shots, even though fast-firing lever actions were popular with civilians.

http://www.armchairgunshow.com/ot57-pix/rrl-evn.jpg
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/blancard/evans.htm

The Evans rifle was an evolution of the 16-shot Henry Repeating Rifle of the 1860's, and was available in compact carbine and full-size rifle variants.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_rifle

Interestingly, as far back as the early 1780's, you could buy a 20-shot ~.50-caliber repeater that was ballistically similar to a modern .45 ACP, with an effective range of 150 yards or so. That was the Girandoni Air Rifle, powered by a high-pressure gas reservoir (similar to a modern high-end hunting airgun, but of much larger caliber and commensurately higher muzzle energy). It appears that Lewis and Clark carried a Girandoni on their famous expedition in 1804 for hunting, defensive purposes, and demonstrations, but it required precision-cast projectiles and users who were much more mechanically inclined than the typical conscript of the time, so it saw relatively little military use.

http://patentpending.blogs.com/patent_pending_blog/2005/08/lewis_and_clark.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_Air_Rifle
08:18 AM on 10/03/2010
Dennis Henigan apparently has never fired a gun when he makes such an ignorant statement about so called assault weapons " pistol grips to increase contol during rapid fire." Pistol grips are there because of the straight line design of modern firearms. That straight line design, with the stock lined up with the barrel is the one that has the effect of controlling rise of the gun fired then the pistol grip which does no part in controlling muzzle rise. Anyone who has fired a semi-auto firearm knows that it's how one holds the forearm ( the front part of the gun, ahead of the chamber) that has effect on muzzle rise in rapid fire. That is why when you watch US soldiers in a firefight in Afghanistan they put pistol grips on the picatinny rail of their fully automatic Assault Weapon to control muzzle rise. This guy should go back to lawyering and not even talk about an item he is ignorant about.
03:58 AM on 10/03/2010
Here is a Youtube video of civilian Todd Jarret, who is a speed shooting competitor and an instructor to law enforcement use both military feature guns that Henigan is teriffying us about and those that have non military features such as the 1911 pistol. Notice they don't make a difference in speed. The 1911 has competition parts not used by the military and the AR15 parts, such as rails and dot sights where first used by the civilians before the military used them. Notice that Mr. Jarret did not use the folding stock option on the AR15 to improve his shooting because it doesn't. This Henigan doesn't know about having not tried it. So he takes the opinion of a gang banger as fact that being able to hide a gun better improves on it's lethality. Pistol is much easier to hide then an AK47 with a folding stock.

http://www.youtube/watch.com/?v=WqaiJV1glBw
03:26 AM on 10/03/2010
Here is one of those law enforcemnet organizations Henigan says supports strong restrictions on assault weapons (www.nacopoline.org/22nd.pdf). A survey on the National on the National Association of Police Chiefs, where 91% of the Police chiefs and Sheriffs support law abiding citizens to be able to buy a firearm for sport or self defense. 71% believe armed law abiding citizens promote justice and help reduce criminal activity.

What assault weapon is Henigan talking about? Those that are black in color since Ruger min30 functions and shoots the same round as an AK47. Both can accept a 30 round detachable magazine. Yet the Mini has never been band here in the Assault Weapon Ban state of California. Just look at the Big 5 Sporting Goods advertisements on CA. Some shotguns that function the same as the ones on the ban list are still for sale here in California like the 8 shot Remington 1100 that is the same as the band Franchi SPAS. Why Dennis?