Arsenals for the Juarez Cartel
{Guest post by See-Dubya}
This week the ATF arrested a fellow named Victor Varela at a border crossing in New Mexico. CNN articles are here and here. They claim he’s a gunrunner who’s fueling some of Mexico’s worst drug violence, and they say he was trying to procure a full-auto M60 machine gun for use the cartels’ war on public order. He allegedly used (illegal) straw-man purchases to assemble his shipments–which may have included especially powerful .50 BMG Barrett-style sniper rifles. A .50 BMG sniper rifle was used to kill a Juarez police commissioner in Juarez.
As is usually the case for MSM reporting on gun crime, CNN’s video, here, pings my BS meter at a couple of points. They show you, at four minutes in, an ATF officer taking out some Romanian-made “AK-47 type knockoff” rifles, thirty of which have been intercepted. Note the thumbhole stock; it’s likely a semi-automatic version made for the American market. But CNN then cuts to video of an agent firing a full-auto AK-47, with a visibly different military-pattern stock and pistol grip. And the announcer claims that these rifles–still talking about the intercepted Romanian rifles–were fully automatic.
For reasons detailed here, I don’t buy that at all. Full auto AK-47s are rare, highly regulated, and expensive in the United States, and require a Class III licensed dealer who gets regular colonoscopies from the ATF. You can’t just walk into a gun show and walk out with a full-auto AK. I can’t see getting together thirty of them for a shipment south, especially since there are plenty of alternative sources for old AK’s in Latin America. Mexico intercepted a shipment of “hundreds” of AK-47s from Venezuela in 2005, for example. I think CNN has either deliberately–out of anti-gun bias or sensationalism–or out of ignorance given us a distorted view of that aspect of the problem.
Actually, there’s more crapola in that CNN video. They’ve intercepted four Barrett rifles in Mexico, and now they say it’s become the “gun of choice in a war erupting just south of our border”. Four. As for the 5.7mm FN pistols being called “matapolicias”, a colorful nickname does necessarily indicate an effective weapon, and it certainly wasn’t designed to kill cops as the reporter claims. The ATF guy says it’s in high demand precisely because of the colorful nickname.
I’m not disputing, of course, that gunrunning is a problem we need to do something about, and I don’t have a lot of good ideas on how to do it. Recently, AG Mukasey announced that there would be more cooperation between Mexican and U.S. personnel to track down gun suppliers in the U.S. Mukasey also called for a tightening up of US enforcement on gun dealers who don’t do their due diligence, which is a measure I can get behind. Ultimately, the system worked in identifying Varela’s network and catching him. But it worked awfully slowly, and there are probably dozens of crooks ready to take his place.
However, will it do very much good? Even if we tighten up our own system, there is always the possibility of a wannabe Viktor Bout from another nation meeting the cartels’ demand.
_________________
Oh, one more armchair rifleman note: Here’s a quote from one of the Mexican policemen charged with trying to keep a lid on this mess:
Officer Cesar Quitana patrols a dangerous barrio in Juarez, Mexico. He is armed with an M16 assault rifle — a weapon that would be no match in a gunfight with drug lords.
“I think most of us feel scared just to bring this with us,” he says, pointing to the rifle in the front seat of his patrol car. “But this is what we use to defend ourselves.”
I’ve got a lot of respect for what Mr. Quitana does, but I have to ask what sort of weapon he does want? The selective-fire M16 is, as much of the MM.com readership knows better than I do, a flawed weapon—but it has been the rifle of the United States military for years. If it’s good enough for our troops patrolling in Iraq, why wouldn’t it work for patrolling in Juarez?
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Guns, Media Bias, Southern Border
Jihad Watch
» What we should be fighting for this July 4Gates of Vienna
» Schoolboys Punished for Refusing to Pray to Allahprotein wisdom
» Obama’s European Fans [Dan Collins]Redstate
» What Did You Do on Independence Day?TigerHawk
» RubeWatch: The Pivot!Stop The ACLU
» Jesse Helms aka ‘Senator No’, Dies at 86protein wisdom
» Polling patriotism for Independence Day [Karl]
Drugs, guns, crime, gangs, diseases..
Like we need another reason to fortify our border.
Where is the liberal outrage from the weapons crossing our border?
Both of those articles are full of hype and conjecture. Typical anti-gun reporting from the MSM. Nothing to see here…
The Barrett Semi automatic 50 BMG (M82) weighs over 30 pounds. As used in the military, it requires a 2 man team to man it. Hardly a “weapon of choice” for drug dealers.
As for the M-16, which is currently in use by our troops, it is an effective urban weapon against personnel if you have the ability to use it properly. To do that requires marksmanship, and not a “pray and spray” approach.
From all I know, the M16 is good weapon, however, it has to be kept clean in order to work correctly. And I know that you cannot keep it pristine in battlefield conditions.
But, I think part of the reputation of being a “flawed” weapon, as you say, still comes from it’s first introduction to combat in Vietnam.
Leaders in the field told “McNamara’s Whiz Kids” that the reciever and other parts needed to be chromed in order for it to work correctly. The Whiz Kids response was that “if the designer didn’t include it, it wasn’t needed.”
The military at first was also using a different type of gunpowder than the M16 was designed to use. They type they used burned slower, left residue in the barrel, and caused it to jam from being dirty. Once they got those items worked out, the M16 became a much more reliable weapon.
I agree with you posters, above, lots of HYPE and anti-gun bias.
I’m not a cop, but have several friends who are. I also shoot a lot (everything from pistols to shotguns). My, civilian, experience with various weapons tells me a.) You use the right “Tool” for the right job and b.) You use the right “Technician” for the right tool (i.e. you don’t snipe at someone from 600 yards away with a .20 gauge shotgun). Drug barons are NOT fools and would - OBVIOUSLY - know this.
Why then would the “Objective Reporter” report a 50 cal., 30 lb, 2 man crewed weapon as the “Weapon of choice”?
It’s either because they didn’t investigate their subject before writing their piece (rather than Blogging themselves to death). Or they have and want to present their own anti-gun biases to the public.
Thank God for conservative bloggers and the NRA for at least showing these gun grabbers for what they are!!!
The M-16 was originally called the AR-15 when initially introduced within the US Military … the problem with the story being cited is that it keeps saying “M-16″ … the M-16 actually comes in multiple models and versions which all the more calls into question the CNN articles …
For more see the following link …
M-16 Assault Rifle
Isn’t it wonderful when the MSM proves itself to be biased and ignorant?
Might I add that it is laziness too. But is that becaue of their anti-gun bias?
I’ve seen too many times to count the utter incompatence of the MSM.
Doggonit. I went and clicked the wrong button. Here’s what should have appeared:
Might I add that it is laziness too? But is that because of their anti-gun bias?
I’ve seen too many times to count the utter incompetence of the MSM. I am not surprized one bit they can’t tell the difference.
Our military has proven time and time again that a good marksman can do wonders with any rifle. I don’t know why that police officer would have a problem carrying the M16. As you said; if it’s good enough for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, it should be good enough for Juarez. Certainly the streets of Juarez can’t be any more dangerous than the streets of Sadr City or Kabul…
Jim C
I suppose a Barrett would indeed be a rifle of choice for a drug lord, considering they are some of the few who could afford the $8000 price tag. Good luck finding one for less than that.
M16s are indeed fine rifles. But a Barrett is a far more powerful long range sniper rifle with a maximum effective range just shy of 2000 meters. It’s sort of an apple vs. orange thing. If the drug lords in Juarez are truly armed with .50s, then the police officer’s fear of going after them with an M16 is duly justified. If he should find himself in the sights of a Barrett, he will likely be disintegrated long before he could ever hope to be in range.
The .50 rounds in CNN’s picture were probably purchased already belted. That’s how they come. If these were intended to be unbelted and used with a Barrett, that’s one thing. If the drug lords have themselves an M2 however, that’s something entirely different. Juarez police should indeed be afraid if the drug lords are sporting .50 caliber machine guns.
I also have to take issue with See-Dubya’s description of the 5.7mm FN pistol.
The FN Five-seveN was designed as the counterpart to the FN P-90 PDW (personal defense weapon) so that they both use the same ammunition. The 5.7 mm bullet is specifically designed to penetrate body armor.
There is a war going on on our southern border. It’s time we start treating it as such.
What does he want? A minigun?
Smuggling the guns that Americans won’t smuggle?
Another poorly reported and biased story from the dying media of CNN. I hope those at the helm of our Federal enforcement agencies do something about the porous border before we end up with this war spilling over into the gang infested barrios of the Southwest.
It’s natural to want more firepower when you are in danger. It’s also natural to equate weapon and bullet size with combat effectiveness. However, “bigger” does not always mean “better.” He might be happy to trade in his 5.56mm assault rifle for a Barrett Light-Fifty, until he got into a real gunfight and realized just how heavy, cumbersome, and slow his new weapon is. (Not that I hold that against .50 BMG rifles. It’s just that they are like the SR-71 spy planes. Both are the best there is at what they do, but what they do is very specialized) Officer Quitana’s understandable desire does not, IMO, truly relate the effectiveness or lack thereof of his assigned rifle. Of course, if I had a M-16 and someone was shooting at me, I’d want a minigun too.
I do have two questions regarding the Mexican police: one, just how well trained are they with their assigned firearms; two, are their patrols in dangerous areas of sufficient size in men, vehicles and firepower?
I would be scared too, this paticular sniper rifle can shoot thru an armored vehicle and bullet proof glass used in aircraft up to a mile away, take a look here If the cartels have this paticular weapon they can hit there target and never be detected, the victim and anyone around will hear nothing but a thump when it hits it’s intented target. Any law enforcment is out gunned with this deadly jewel.
I have only moderate shooting experience and no law enforcement/military training, but it would seem to me that a patrol rifle would need to have the following characteristics:
1) Be reasonably lightweight.
2) Have a fairly high capacity
3) Be reasonably reliable in the environment it will be used in
4) Fire a round large enough to incapacitate a target but small enough to be carried en masse.
There is much debate about #4 (5.56 vs. 7.62×51) in some circles, but I have yet to meet anyone who enjoyed getting hit with a 5.56. Otherwise, I would say the M-16 is a fine weapon for the cop’s purposes, and the Barrett is the LAST weapon they would want to carry.
Why would the cartels buy AK 47s in America, usually cheap Romanian semis, rather than import them from Columbia (FARC)where where the autos are far more available. And Mexico is actually rather ideal for the M16. At least with the M16 you can hit a target at 200 yards, unlike the average AK47.
I fired the M-16 a2 and it jams at the drop of a hat. In the hands of a person without adequate training it’s no match for the sturdier and seemingly unjammable ak-47 (which is why gangs like them)
Ballistically though the ak is similar to a 30-30 so the fact is a few hunting rifles and cops trained to keep their distance in a raid are all the Mexican cops need to clean up the cartels foot soldiers Eliot Ness style.
If cops here in the 30s stood up to gangsters armed with tommy guns and B.A.R.s then the Mexican cops should be able to pull their wait with whatever the government provides, asssuming the cops have the training to use the guns properly.
So Mexico “exports” marijuana, narcotics, illegal aliens, gang members and firearms across the border into the US for decades and expects us to give them special considerations and treatment as they suck off the teat of the American tax payer. But import a few guns from the US into Mexico and we suddenly have a problem that the US needs to fix for them. Give me a break.
Sounds like Cesar Q. needs a little weapons training from someone who knows what he’s doing,and a good Colt .45 sidearm for when the longarm jams; either that or someone needs to kick a little backbone into him. My squad went up against a Russian .51 Cal.MG in Vietnam. It did scare the hell out of us,but with good training and disaplin, well I’m still here. It sounds like all those billions we’er giving to Mexico to fight drug lords are going to a bunch of pussies who’ll never get it done.
What you need is an open border port on the Mexican coast line for Mexican trucks to ship goods from China without being checked.Then, we will really see what gun running is all about.
#4, the M16-A2 version that I had during my active duty time was so sweet, I bulls eyed a man size target center mass at 500 meters eight out of ten times. I understand the M16-A4 is scope mountable. Dam fine weapons.
Everyone should get one, and BZO theirs for the MS-13 types that like to home invade, and the moon god worshiping POS that are BZOing their weapons on their compounds.
One word: Discipline. The AR family of weapons (of which the m16 is a member) are excellent weapons, but they are messy eaters. In order to maintain a functioning weapon, it requires DISCIPLINE to keep the weapon clean. Once a day, minimum.
JHSII, #12
The 5.7mm round, whether fired through the FN P90 or the Fn FiveSeveN pistol, leaves much to be desired, ballistically. Yes, it penetrates armor. However, the actual damage that it causes, whether going through armor, or straight into flesh, is neglible. An aquantince of mine is on the Miami-Dade SWAT team. Until recently, this team issued FN P90’s to their pointmen. However, after an incident where one SWAT officer put 25 rounds into a suspect and only stopped because the suspect yelled, “Stop, that hurts,”, they have since reissued their old M4s and MP5s.
I have a proposal for the Mexican government. You stop allowing your citizens to illegally come into our country, and we’ll stop the weapons from coming from ours. I think a wall will do the job nicely.
#23……………..
…….I aced (10 shots, 10 bullseyes) that center mass from 500 meters at Ewa Beach Rifle Range in O’Ahu, Hawaii back in 1989…during a Marine Division Match in the Islands :)Yup, just like you, no scope required. I have yet to get me an M-16 for home defense and sports shooting. I do have a 9 mm Beretta Cx4 Storm carbine for home defense, with a holographic sight on it. I can hit a 6 inch bullseye from 50 meters with its 9 mm round. Simply Sweet!
That Mexican cop not only has a training problem, but he also has the problem of currupt Mexican cops. Bad place he’s in.
Rio
Semper Fi!