Perry Blasts New Federal Rules for Gun Dealers
Gov. Rick Perry Wednesday lambasted new Department of Justice reporting requirements for gun dealers in states on the U.S.-Mexico border, calling the new rules “misguided” and “constitutionally questionable.”
The new requirement from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, announced Monday, means firearms dealers from Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California will have to notify the federal government whenever an individual buys two or more semi-automatic rifles. Gun dealers are already required to notify the government of multiple handgun purchases.
Mexican President Felipe Calderón has repeatedly claimed that 85 percent of the 100,000 guns seized ...
Comments (38)
Mary McAllister
Hey Perry needs that gun he carries while jogging!
Mike Openshaw via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Holder's Fast and Furious program has been busy, hasn't it?
Karen Cummings via Texas Tribune on Facebook
This is beyond stupid.
Pat Kelley Bradshaw via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Wasn't that part of the plan?
Leif D. Johnson via Texas Tribune on Facebook
So what? Perry will pray for them & all will be well.
Aldo Merino via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Continue to endorse and support loose gun laws, bitch about violence in Mexico and on the border.
That sure sounds like a winning formula.
Richard Stewart via Texas Tribune on Facebook
A man walked into a barber shop here in dallas he did not like his haircut he got so he pulled his gun and shot the barber. This happened in the light of day. See the good thing gun laws do for Texas?!
Ed Covington via Texas Tribune on Facebook
sounds like a pretty apt description of Perry himself: misguided and constitutionally questionable...
George Krieger via Texas Tribune on Facebook
He says this out of one side of his mouth while the other side complains about "lack of border security."
Ben Martinez via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Perry is so irrelevant. He is a waste of a governor.
Jason Stradtner via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Richard, that's a pretty piss-poor argument for gun laws. You can't control stupid people, they are going to do stupid stuff. And what if this unhappy customer had a knife or a bat or a car that he used as his weapon? Should we then ban each of those?
Jason Stradtner via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Can't wait to see what Perry DOES about this. He is FED UP, you know. Maybe he'll just SAY something about it so that people will see that he's really ticked off about it, but then shrug his shoulders when the action part comes around.
Danny Wier via Texas Tribune on Facebook
I dunno, I'm not a big fan of gun control, but whatever offends Perry, I'm much more likely to support.
Jason Stradtner via Texas Tribune on Facebook
common sense offends him....be for that...lol
Jason Stradtner via Texas Tribune on Facebook
its just the assumption that the gun is to blame. Look, if we have stricter laws, who do you think will have the guns? Law enforcement, military and criminals. Can the first two be everywhere at all times to stop the third from acting...No. And I would argue that criminals are in favor of gun laws because it amounts to protection for them because they will know, with a high chance, that their victim with not be armed. I'm not really in favor of all people having a gun because I realize that there are some crazies out there. But I also realize that if that crazy person really wanted to get a gun, they could, regardless of any law that is passed to restrict LAW-ABIDING access to guns.
Don Wade via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Oh humm 85 percent Ok well 100 percent of Mexican trafficked drugs seized by law enforcement, came thru Mexico.
Don Wade via Texas Tribune on Facebook
oh and 100 percent of the people killed in Mexico by the cartel were killed in Mexico.
Don Wade via Texas Tribune on Facebook
85% are ya sure it's not 85.789809% WTF. Political Jackassery.
Tim Tukaram Spotswood via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Hey Calderon if you don't like our guns crossing your border why don't you at least try to secure your border? Maybe you could build a fence? What a dick.
Karen Hawkins via Texas Tribune on Facebook
who cares what he say's. he's a bigger flake than Bush was.
Wallis Parnelle
Machinegun Perry, is the violence on the border, then his extreme religion backers. If Perry decides to run for Prez, voting rates against him will be through the roof. He really is a first class weirdo. With the deaths of over 40.000 women, men, police officer, soldiers, and children in and around the border, Perry would make this his Iraq.
Extreme Religion, Guns and Murder, define Perry.
hans5162@ix.netcom.com Graff
This governor is the most irresponsible governor in the nation. He complains about violence from Mexico, yet he resists reasonable efforts to simply require notification of ATF when someone purchases more than one semi-automatic rifle. Would he say the same thing if a muslim group were purchasing semi-automatic weapons?
Aldo Merino via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Tim: Probably because reducing gun flows and building a fence are two entirely different things.
Jose B. Gonzalez via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Supply and demand... If there is a drug demand, there will always be a supply. Close the southern borders and larger drugs loads will begin to flow from our northern neighboring country. Well, let's close the Canada border as well - then larger drug loads will flow from the Caribbean (gulf of Mexico) and so on... Drugs will always make their way to the USA. Why?? Simple... The ENORMOUS demand... Our country is filled with citizens who love and enjoy illegal drugs and they don't care who suffers in the process of getting the drugs to their nearest corner street drug dealer. The drug problem solution is within the USA, not in any other country. Eliminate the demand and everything else will fall into place. BUT - that will NEVER happen, the American people can't live without their drug fix - so, we will continue to fight a loosing drug war and blame everyone else but ourselves.
Luisa Newton via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Perry continues to be an ass in all he says or does
V Marshall
Don't get me wrong. I support this rule. However the Constitution specifically prohibits the Federal government from treating states differently. I am troubled by those on the left who remain silent or even support this President every time he does something through executive directive simply because he can't get it done the proper way. I realize the frustration of our current hyper partisan climate but he is a huge contributor to that climate. People seem to be willing to overlook the fact that he is setting precedents. I want everyone here to remember this when the next President (God forbid it be Perry) uses the same tool to get the things done that he wants done but can't get through Congress. We have checks and balances for a reason and I for one don't want ALL the power to rest with one individual and his/her appointed advisers even when it is the guy I voted for.
Todd Benzkofer via Texas Tribune on Facebook
If the U.S. Government stopped shipping them over there we could cut that number by 95%......
Aldo Merino via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Glad to see the new meme among the usual suspects is to blame the US government for shipping guns or fault a bungled ATF operation rather than actually even acknowledge part of the root of the problem. And then people wonder why we can't ever come to a consensus on even the most basic issues.
Rudy Bechtel
General Douglas Fraser, head of the US Southern Command, told a Senate hearing in April,
"Over 50 percent of the military-type weapons that are flowing throughout the region have a large source between Central American stockpiles, if you will, left over from wars and conflicts in the past,"
Fraser said that US authorities believed there were between 45 million and 80 million weapons circulated in Central America, much of those left over from civil wars and other conflicts.
Fraser also said US authorities have "a lot of focused efforts" to limit those stockpiles to stem violence in the region. But he added that "there's a lot of funding available with these transnational criminal organizations."
Plus, the recently released Wikileaks cable entitled ‘Honduras: Military weapons fuel black market in arms’ states that the serial numbers of arms taken from drug gangs coincide with those supplied by the U.S. to the Honduran Armed Forces.
Couple the above info sources about illegal guns with the Venezuelan AK47/AKM/AK103 factory producing since early 2009 and you wonder if the Texas Tribune has a reporting or an editorial problem.
Come on guys, do the math and ask more questions.
Todd Benzkofer via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Obama says he's "working on gun control under the radar"? You do the math.....
Doug Graham
"Mexican President Felipe Calderón has repeatedly claimed that 85 percent of the 100,000 guns seized in Mexico in the last four years originated in the United States."
So, we're basing our response on a known lie? Giving up some liberty because a corrupt Mexican President wants to blame the U.S.A. for his deserting soldiers, leaky arsenals and corrupt police?
Why does that sound like a bad policy decision?
Actual number of guns based on a percentage of total recovered that are sourced from the U.S. ( and this includes U.S. weapons gifted and sold to the Mexican Government by the U.S.) <20%
J B
1. This is Obama trying to write law and doing an end-run around Congress
2. If they don't keep records the guy can buy a gun, come back tomorrow, buy another, go to another shop and buy another, etc.
3. If they keep records to cope with number 2 then it's de-facto registration.
4. Gun control has never worked. Mexico is proof enough of that.
Wallis Parnelle
Mr. avidshooterTX .........Your comment is just fact manipulation, period. It is against the law to keep computer records of gun sales, or transactions in the US, thanks to the NRA. People like you spout opinions and leave out the most important facts, about par. Then the NRA, state by stae, lobby to cut funds for record keeping. Your side of the truth aisle, teeters on small ground.
Perry, the NRA, and people like you are just closet murders.
Wallis Parnelle
Well sundog5. You stated number of guns at 20% because of confiscation? What kind of stat is that. I buy 50% or 85% og guns from Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico, thank you very much. And Perry and the NRA are certainly arming the US another War. This time with Mexico?????
Outlaw automartic weapons, per the Brady Law. There is no other choice. Read all about weapons of mass destruction in a book, why don't you. I don't want another $trillion of my tax's going to some weirdo idea of socialpaths, like we saw in the 2000s.
The world is getting too crowded for this silly frontier attitude of gun owners.
Doug Graham
Wallis Parnelle, we'll try and keep it real simple for you, since English isn't your first language.
The U.S. gifts and sells U.S.-made weapons in large quantity to Mexico through both military and police assistance programs, as well as outright sales. When a Mexican police or military official gives in to corruption or threats, or both, those U.S. made weapons 'leak' into the black market. They are then eventually recovered at a crime scene and 'traced' back to the U.S.. They were never sold at a gun shop in the U.S. The Obama Administration wants to use the alleged sales of guns to reinstate another so-called "assault weapon'" ban. By repeatedly and dishonestly conflating the recovery of U.S. government supplied military & police weapons at crime scenes with alleged sales by lawful gun dealers in the U.S. The Obama Administration hopes to build consensus for another pointless ban on civilian firearms. You've obviously been taken in by their ploy.
"Outlaw automartic weapons"
Any weapons sold across the counter lawfully by U.S. gun dealers are NOT "automatic" weapons.
Such weapons require a very involved and lengthy process of approval by the ATF and are statistically not used in crimes. The Brady Law outlawed no automatic weapons, only look-alike semi-automatic weapons.
"Read all about weapons of mass destruction in a book, why don't you".
I was trained as a small arms repairman and have spent a lifetime handling weapons safely and effectively. It is you, Wallis, who sorely need to educate yourself in the political realities of the present situation. It has very little to do with guns and everything to do with control by the Obama Administration.
"I don't want another $trillion of my tax's going to some weirdo idea of socialpaths, like we saw in the 2000s. The world is getting too crowded for this silly frontier attitude of gun owners."
Wallis, if you'll but read a bit of history, you'll see that surrendering your weapons on the command of government never turns out well for the citizen. Mexico is living proof of this. The Mexican people, forbidden by a tyrannical Mexican Government to legally own arms, are being slaughtered by criminals with guns who do not obey the law as well as by the forces of government who are either mistaken or corrupt. It is not a "frontier attitude" to own guns, Wallis, it is the hallmark of a free citizen. Long may it continue to be so!
a l
Wow, you read this story it's like Fast and Furious never happened! Hey when you guys do articles on WWII do you leave out the Holocaust too?
Wallis Parnelle
Condescending as you come across, the “fear of government” argument for supporting machine guns, or any gun is no longer valid, as just pure silliness. Why? If your standing in the middle of Afganistan, as an example, and the government want so kill you, a coffee sipping person in a bunker in Las Vegas, merely has to push a button, to turn you into raw compost. That argument is over sir. And if we did not produce and/or stop producing the senseless weapons, and selling them, or giving them away, there would be no leak of materials. So there is no way to prove, your argument, guns sold here don't go to Mexico or anywhere. It reported everywhere from diferent perspectives, the guns come from Texas, and the NRA members absolutely don't care about the carnege andf murders. No, we can go around picking up weapons, a stupid expensive senseless task. STOP the production, and limit the selling, make them more expensive, so only people with money can afford, period, thus contracting the supply, to every idiot, with violence in their hearts. Face it, with populations growth everywhere, there are fewer places to hurt per volume of hunters, and the growing “legitimate weapons” market, is shrinking.
Protect your rights, stop making guns, keep track of them on computers, and save yourself your paranoid visions of taking your gun away.
Doug Graham
Well, Wallis Parnelle, you do take some convincing!
Not my intent to sound condescending, but your writing indicates that your first language is not English. Simple fact, nothing to be ashamed of, we just happen to be on a site on which the language of choice is English. Would you feel more comfortable conversing in your native language?
I can probably find a translator, or translate myself if it's Spanish.
Wallis, so long as there are free people, there is an entirely valid argument for the possession of arms. If government does not fear the people, there is no reason for it to respect their rights. None.
Afghanistan?! Uh-huh Wallis, that's not a good example for your argument. First, we're talking more of a civil war scenario, not a foreign intervention. Secondly, we're more likely to be the guys that shoot the coffee-sipping tech in the bunker than to be the target half a world away.
No Wallis, the argument is alive and well. Sophisticated weaponry cannot defeat a well-armed and resolute people on their ground-THAT is your Afghanistan example. :)
There will always be a use and a market for weapons, and thus they will always be produced.
The question is, who should be armed?
Definitely NOT only governments, as history demonstrates that they eventually usurp all power to themselves. Preferable not criminals, because they prey upon the peaceful and productive. Again, history demonstrates there will always be criminals who choose to prey on those weaker and more vulnerable than themselves.
So, Wallis, in the interest of preserving individual liberty and the freedom to conduct our affairs as we see fit, it is essential for the population at large to be armed with weapons capable of defeating not only the criminals but also a rogue government who would prey upon honest people.
The proof that guns sold in the U.S. aren not the problem in Mexico is already available to anyone willing to see, Wallis. Only 17% of the total weapons recovered in Mexico are sourced from the U.S. As I wrote before, that includes those military and police weapons provided by the U.S. to Mexico's corrupt and demoralized military and police which 'leak'. Do the research yourself, the numbers are available online.
The "reporting" you allude to is agenda driven misinformation from the Obama administration, intended to provide popular support for another round of gun-banning. Surely a pointless objective, given that over 80% of the weapons in Mexico are coming from its southern neighbors and direct sales to the cartels from nations such as China.
NRA is America's oldest civil rights organization. It works to preserve the essential and unalienable human right to arms. Your attempt to demonize NRA is both pointless and completely inappropriate, Wallis.
Once again, Wallis, the production of weapons cannot be stopped. That is a dysfunctional fantasy of those who also think alcohol and drugs can be prohibited by laws. See Mexico as an example.
Ultimately, the 'prohibition' of weapons only results in criminals, whether individual or government, possessing them.
The Second Amendment is not and never was about "hunting" Wallis. That word appears nowhere in the Constitution. We as a free people are in possession of our unalienable right to keep and bear arms. Sorry about your nation, perhaps one day you also may have such liberty.
I would suggest it is you who are paranoid Wallis. Afraid of a mechanical device to which you incorrectly attribute the ability to form intent. Guns are not evil or bad, Wallis, people are.
Good people need guns to protect themselves against bad people, including those in government who would disarm them. We'll keep them, thanks.