Short summary of “Fast and Furious”

Many blogs have covered all this for a long time, in great depth, among them Human Events.  I am not going to do so, but I need to mention such an important event, if only for my own records:

To create favorable publicity for gun control, and to make true the oft repeated lie that ninety percent of Mexican drug cartel weapons come from the US, the US government supplied two thousand guns to Mexican criminals who were legally prohibited from buying guns in the USA.  Sixty of the guns were found at crime scenes in the US, and hundreds of deadly crimes were committed using the weapons in Mexico.  Thirty four of the weapons were 0.50 sniper rifles. The government department that actively did this was the ATF, but every major government department and the entire mainstream media have been accessories after the fact.  “Fast and Furious”  has been vigorously investigated by some elements of the Republican party – and equally vigorously ignored by other elements of the Republican party.

“Fast and Furious” confirms what we all know: That the government wants criminals armed, and productive citizens disarmed, in order to make its subjects dependent on the state.

My position on guns is that the difference between honest people and criminals is pretty obvious, and that honest people should be armed with any weapons they deem appropriate, including full auto guns, rocket launchers, mortars, and the like, and criminals disarmed, of everything including sticks.  Unfortunately, if government is allowed to define who is a criminal, it is apt to decriminalize burglary of an occupied residence, while criminalizing the use of “gay” as a curse word, even if one manages to elect politicians who disagree quite vigorously with this.  Observe today’s Britain.

Reflect that even if we elect Herman Cain president, with a Republican house and senate, the government criminals that implemented “Fast and Furious” will still be employed by the government, will still be in power, and will be immune from firing, or even from having their power diminished.  Consider:  A civil servant can easily do a great deal to get a politician to lose his seat, but a politician cannot fire a civil servant.  Who then has the power?  Consider that if a private citizen, or even a politician, ran guns to criminals, he would be in jail for a very long time, but no one imagines that any of the very large number of civil servants involved in “Fast and Furious” will suffer any adverse consequences thereby.  To punish these men would constitute regime change, would require armed revolution and fighting in the streets.

And now back to my regular blog topics.