The Shrinking ‘Vast Majority”: NSSF Responds to ATF Mexican Trace Report

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

By Larry Keane

ATF [recently] released a report on firearms submitted by the government of Mexico for tracing since 2007. One screaming headline referred to the “Vast Majority of Mexican Crime Guns Originate in U.S. New ATF Trace Data Reveals.” If you have been following the issue of Mexican gun traces on this blog, you will realize the truth is a rapidly shrinking “Vast Majority” and the so-called “flood” of guns going into Mexico moves at glacier-like speed.

The mainstream media has consistently falsely claimed that 90 percent of all firearms recovered in Mexico come from the United States. The “90 percent myth” stems from a misstatement by then-ATF Deputy Director Billy Hoover during congressional testimony in 2009. The myth spread like wildfire and the smoke from that firestorm still obscures the facts. We have put the lie to the 90 percent myth in past blog posts. A report by the independent research group STRATFOR has shown that it is erroneous and grossly misleading to say the majority of firearms recovered in Mexico came from the United States. In fact, only 12 percent of the firearms misused in Mexico were originally sold at retail in the United States.

In 2009, a report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) showed that only about 80 percent of firearms recovered in Mexico and submitted for tracing were originally sold at retail in the United States, not the 90 percent the media keeps reporting.

But it shouldn’t surprise anyone to learn that many of the firearms recovered and traced come from the United States. That is because U.S. law requires markings on firearms precisely so they can be traced by law enforcement through commerce. It is sort of like tracing the VIN number on cars on a Ford dealership lot and be surprised to learn that most are Fords. What the 90 percent myth does not account for, and the media turns a blind eye to, and what yesterday’s ATF report does not shed light on, is the fact that you know nothing about the firearms recovered in Mexico but were never traced — like the firearms that the 150,000 or so Mexican soldiers took with them when they defected to go work for the drug cartels over the past several years.

Logically, Mexican officials wouldn’t bother to trace the U.S.-made firearms they know belonged to the Mexican government or law enforcement, the results of which would be highly embarrassing to Mexican officials. Nor does yesterday’s report account for guns that have been smuggled into Mexico from South and Central America.

As Professor Gary Kleck has observed, “It’s likely that police in Mexico submit for ATF tracing only those crime guns that they believe originated in the U.S. This would be reasonable, since those are the ones that the ATF is likely to be able to trace, but it is not a sample from which to generalize. Even if guns of American origin account for only a small share of all Mexican crime guns, they would comprise nearly all of those submitted by the Mexican authorities for tracing by the ATF.”

It is important to note that these percentages do not reflect the total number of firearms recovered. In fact, in 2009 then-ATF Acting Director Kenneth Melson sent a letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) admitting, “There are no United States Government sources that maintain any record of the total number of criminal firearms seized in Mexico.”

[The latest] ATF report shows that this “vast majority” continues to shrink.

Ted Nugent’s newsworthy comments on Romney overlooked in flap over comments about an Obama second term

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

by Chad D. Baus

Every year, the anti-gun media look for something with which to paint the NRA Annual Meetings in a negative light. This year was no different, and the media frenzy took shape when NRA Board of Directors member Ted Nugent stated in an interview on NRANews.com that he will “either be dead or in jail by this time next year” if Obama is re-elected. (Rather innocuous comments, if you ask me, when compared to recent comments spoken just days earlier by Louis Farrakhan: “people tomorrow, maybe in a few days, are going to kill their leaders who have been sellin’ them out”.)

But lost in all the hub-bub over a sentence or two was a very detailed discussion of the conservative rocker’s thoughts on presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

Turning to the convention hall crowded with onlookers, Nugent began:

Op-Ed: Stand Your Ground makes sense

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

These are sane laws that protect people

by John Lott

Call them what you will: “Stand Your Ground” or “Castle Doctrine” laws. Mayor Bloomberg and members of Congress, speaking on the House floor, go so far as to label them “shoot first” laws.

This is a gross exaggeration — a slander, in fact, against legislation designed to reform a flaw in our treatment of self-defense. Earlier statutes affirmatively required potential victims to retreat as much as possible before using deadly force to protect themselves, sometimes putting their lives in jeopardy.

The supposedly infamous laws passed in Florida and elsewhere, in contrast, use a “reasonable person” standard for determining when it is proper to defend oneself — requiring that a reasonable person would believe that another individual intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death on them.

Pundits who’ve had a field day ripping apart Stand Your Ground laws repeatedly fail to mention that crucial “reasonable person” standard.

The wild speculation that the laws give broad license for vigilantes to go around recklessly shooting people are a totally irresponsible caricature. Ultimately, it is judges or jurors who determine what constitutes a reasonable fear under such a law, not the person who fires the gun.

A few examples: Under a Stand Your Ground law, you can’t shoot a fleeing criminal in the back. You can’t provoke an attack. You can’t use unnecessary force to stop an attack. Anyone who thinks that the law lets them “shoot first, ask questions later” will end up jail.

And no, I’m not going to get into the twisted case of George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin, the facts of which are still not fully understood. But, whether Zimmerman acted in self-defense with Trayvon on top of him and no place to retreat — or whether, in the other version of events, Zimmerman initiated the attack — the Stand Your Ground law isn’t relevant.

“Turn Tail and Run” Law Proposed

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

Editor’s Note: We typically reserve our satirical posts for April Fool’s Day, but this one is too good to pass up.

by Evan F. Nappen

Washington, D.C. – Senator Lousenburg (D. NJ) has filed the “Turn Tail and Run” (TTR) bill in the U.S. Senate which, if passed, would preempt ALL State “Stand Your Ground” (SYG) laws. The new bill would impose a national duty to retreat at all times when one encounters a criminal threat or is about to become a victim of violent crime. New York City Mayor Bloomingidiot has made passage of the “TTR” a centerpiece of his national “Second Chance at Shoot First” campaign. The mayor heartily approved of TTR, especially since bodyguards of celebrities, VIP’s, and political figures were exempted.

When the President was asked about TTR at a recent press conference he expressed his eager support. He said “Great Britain has long banned self defense” and “Americans need to be brave, like Sir Robin.” The President then quoted a passage from the classic British tale of Sir Robin:

“Brave Sir Robin ran away. Bravely ran away, away. When danger reared its ugly head, he bravely turned his tail and fled. Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about. And gallantly he chickened out. Bravely taking to his feet. He beat a very brave retreat. Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin!”

He further pointed out four simple rules of how TTR would apply:

Does YOUR financial institution support your Second Amendment rights?

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

by Chad D. Baus

Two recent pieces of news drive home the importance of making sure that your bank respects your Second Amendment rights.

Earlier this month, McMillan Group International, LLC announced that Bank Of America had severed ties with their company specifically because, in the years since they’d opened their accounts, McMillan had transitioned into a firearms manufacturing role.

From a statement released by McMillan on April 19:

McMillan Fiberglass Stocks, McMillan Firearms Manufacturing, McMillan Group International have been collectively banking with Bank of America for 12 years. Today Mr. Ray Fox, Senior Vice President, Market Manager, Business Banking, Global Commercial Banking came to my office. He scheduled the meeting as an “account analysis” meeting in order to evaluate the two lines of credit we have with them. He spent 5 minutes talking about how McMillan has changed in the last 5 years and have become more of a firearms manufacturer than a supplier of accessories.

At this point I interrupted him and asked “Can I possibl[y] save you some time so that you don’t waste your breath? What you are going to tell me is that because we are in the firearms manufacturing business you no longer what my business.”

“That is correct” he says.

I replied “That is okay, we will move our accounts as soon as possible. We can find a 2nd Amendment friendly bank that will be glad to have our business. You won’t mind if I tell the NRA, SCI and everyone one I know that BofA is not firearms industry friendly?”

“You have to do what you must” he said.

“So you are telling me this is a politically motivated decision, is that right?”

Mr. Fox confirmed that it was. At which point I told him that the meeting was over and there was nothing left for him to say.

I think it is important for all Americans who believe in and support our 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms should know when a business does not support these rights. What you do with that knowledge is up to you. When I don’t agree with a business’ political position I can not in good conscience support them. We will soon no longer be accepting Bank of America credit cards as payment for our products.

Kelly D McMillan
Director of Operations
McMillan Group International, LLC
623-582-9635
www.mcmillanusa.com

After posting this message on its Facebook page, the news immediately went viral.

When contacted by Snopes.com, Bank of America spokeswoman Anne Pace stated that she could not comment on the bank’s relationship with McMillan Group, but added that Bank of America “has no policies that would prohibit us from doing business with clients in [the firearms] industry.” As evidence, Snopes.com reports she pointed to a recent financial news article that mentioned a $250 million business deal involving Bank of America with Freedom Group Inc. Asked for a response, Mr. McMillan maintained to Snopes.com that his account accurately describes what took place at the meeting.

A bit closer to home, Ohio’s gun owners are familiar with the discriminatory policy taken against them by Fifth Third Bank, which chose to begin posting its Ohio branches with “no-guns” signs following passage of concealed carry reform law in 2004.

As has been documented on this website again and again and again (and again and again and again and again), and as could be seen most recently after a five hour standoff between robbers and police in southwest Ohio, criminals still don’t seem to be getting the message that guns aren’t allow inside Fifth Third Bank.

“Change” one vote at a time

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

by Sean Maloney, Esq.

But I’m only one person; what can I do?

The statement that “I’m only one person; my vote doesn’t mean anything” has been discredited over and over again by razor-thin election victories throughout history. Remember “hanging chads” or “dimpled chads”?

My point is, don’t underestimate what you, one person, can do to change the outcome of, well, the world. Take this year’s presidential election for example; does anyone have any doubt that four more years of Barack Obama, as lame duck President, will change the world? President Obama thinks so.

After all, Obama urged outgoing Russian President Dmitri Medvedev to tell incoming president Vladimir Putin to give him time: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved – but it’s important for him to give me space.”

Medvedev replied: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…”

Obama then elaborated: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”

Medvedev responded: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

Sneaky, sneaky, our president, yours and mine, made these comments when he thought the sound was turned off and we his loyal subjects would not hear what Obama believes his power will be after he wins his reelection.

I’m only one person; what can I do? Start by changing the world. Our Founding Fathers gave us many things. Second to none is the power to use our voice to be heard, protected by the 1st Amendment; and a voice for change at the ballot box during an election.

To change the world, you don’t need anything other than what you already have. You use it every day. It’s the greatest single advertising, game-changing tool we all have: our voice, speaking our opinion, giving our advice, backed by the credibility we have spent a lifetime creating. Chris Matthews, Dan Rather, or Katie Couric may not care what I have to say, but my friends, co-workers, family, acquaintances, and people who take the time to listen DO care.

If you want to change the world, start talking! Educate yourself about the issues you care most about and prepare a 30-second “commercial” about how you feel and why. Need help with your commercial? The information is just a GOOGLE away.

Buckeye Firearms Association Responds to Attack on Representative Conditt’s “Shooting” Fundraiser

Posted on by Buckeye Firearms Association

Several Democrats have joined with a gun control group to publicly attack State Representative Margy Conditt (Liberty Township, District 55) because of a fundraising event she has scheduled for May 12 at the Middletown Sportsmens Club where participants will have the opportunity to shoot GUNS.

The group linked her fundraiser to a recent Ohio shooting where three students died and called her fundraiser “absurd” and “highly inappropriate.”

In response to these attacks, Buckeye Firearms Association today announced the fundraiser to their hundreds of thousands of supporters in Ohio and are pledging to match any donations made to this event, up to a total of $1,000.00.

“This attack on State Representative Conditt is ridiculous,” said Jim Irvine, Chairman of Buckeye Firearms Association. “We realize that a handful of politicians don’t like guns. But to link this innocent fundraiser to a tragic mass murder is shameful. And Representative Conditt deserves an apology.”

Sean Maloney, a West Chester lawyer and one of the organizers of the event, expressed his shock at the attack. “I’m simply stunned,” said Maloney. “Most fundraisers are a little boring. The idea of this event was simply to let people have some fun. Millions of people all over the country enjoy shooting. It’s one of the most popular activities in the U.S. To compare people who shoot targets or skeet or who want to enjoy a few hours of good, clean fun to a school shooting is unacceptable.”

© 2002-2024 Buckeye Firearms Association