Despite Strict Gun Control Laws, Evidence Proves It’s Failing in Mexico


Live from music row Wednesday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 am to 8:00 am – Leahy was joined in studio by all-star panelists, Crom Carmichael and Norm Partin to speak about Beto O’Rourke’s recent calls for gun-grabbing in the United States.

Towards the middle of the segment, the men discussed how guns could be confiscated by the US government and how the gun laws in Mexico have managed to put guns only in the hands of criminals while keeping law-abiding citizens disarmed and in danger.

Leahy: Why can’t we pass some laws to make guns safe here in America. I guess they passed those laws in other countries. What have been those results?

Carmicheal: Well, in Mexico, I saw an article over the weekend. Mexico has a murder rate per 100,000 people has a murder rate of six times the United States. In Mexico, there is one gun store. One.

Leahy: One?

Carmicheal: And it is there to sell firearms to the police. That’s all their allowed to do. And in 1971 Mexico passed very very strict gun laws. Very strict gun laws. And since 1971, the murder rate has exploded. The murder rate from guns has exploded.

And the reason for that, and this is a news flash for Spartacus, (Leahy chuckles) if you take away guns from law-abiding citizens, the only people with guns left are the criminals. Criminals don’t care about the law. And by the way, in Mexico, there are people armed with machine guns. Did you see where El Chapo’s son…

Leahy: Yes did you see this?

Carmicheal: And the one son got away?

Leahy: So the story that I saw, and I don’t know if you saw this too, El Chapo a big drug dealer has been arrested and is in America. Got convicted and is going to be in there for life. He’s got a couple of sons. And one of the sons is captured in Mexico by the police right?

Carmicheal: One son was captured and the other one got away.

Leahy: One’s captured.

Carmicheal: One escaped.

Leahy: So they’ve got this one son captured. The one that escaped put together his crew.

Carmicheal: Called the crew.

Leahy: Called the crew. And they had amazing firepower.

Carmicheal: Oh, it’s the machine guns on the pickup trucks.

Leahy: So they go into the town where the other son is being held. And they assault them dramatically. And the Mexican police are totally outgunned. And not only do they do that, but they also found out who the family members are of the policeman are and they kill them.

They kill them right? So they are brutal. And they’ve got the guns with superior firepower. The President of Mexico calls up the police holding the second son and says,  ‘Let him go.’ And they get away with it. And this is what happens.

Partin: Is this a Clint Eastwood movie?

Leahy: It could be.

Carmicheal: Except. If it was a Clint Eastwood movie Clint Eastwood would end up being dead at the end of the movie. That’s how bad things are in Mexico. This idea is fanciful. First of all, Beto O’Rourke is a fool. And he’s running for President.

Leahy: Robert Francis ‘Beto’ O’Rourke.

Carmicheal: But he’s a fool. And he said we’re just going to take all the guns. There are over 3 million AR-15. And an AR-15 is not an automatic rifle. It’s not a machine gun. You fire one. It’s semi-automatic which means you have to pull the trigger each time it shoots.

An AR-15 is used in one of these mass killings about once a year. That means there’s one out of three million that are being used illegally a year.

Leahy: Beto wants to come to your house if you have one.

Carmicheal: And literally take it. Now, what that would cost. This is what the Democrats have become. The Democrat party needs to go out and buy a bunch of brown shirts so that they will be the brown shirt brigade and have a youth brigade and all this other stuff. Because they’re becoming the party of just thuggery. It’s amazing!

Leahy: In my reading of the constitution the second amendment says the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Now Norm lets just say Beto and his pals come knocking on your door and want to take your guns. What happens next?

Partin: Well let’s back up one step. Anybody comes to my house to take something that belongs to me law enforcement or the boogyman coming in the night, there’s an issue.

Leahy: So if law enforcement were to come to your house without a warrant to take your stuff.

Carmicheal: No, they’d come with a warrant, Mike.

Leahy: For the AR-15’s?

Carmicheal: They’d have to. They’d come with a warrant.

Leahy: How would they get the warrant?

Carmichael: Who gets warrants? The government. If the Democrats are in charge of the government…

Leahy: You think that’s how it would play out?

Carmicheal: Absolutely that’s how it would play out. But you know what, the criminals’ guns wouldn’t be there.

Leahy: Let me just follow on that.

Partin: Nor would mine. (Leahy laughs)

Carmichael: Bingo! Everybody’s gun would miraculously be stolen.

Leahy: Ahhh. So they knock on your door, we’ll go with Crom’s assertion that they would knock on your door with a warrant. There’s Beto and his brown shirts with a warrant for your gun. They knock on your door, and not being a stupid guy you tell them the gun is not here. Is that how you would do it?

Partin: Correct.

Leahy: Is that how you’d handle that?

Carmichael: I think a lot of people would say my gun was stolen yesterday and I haven’t had a chance to report it.

Partin: Say I own an AR.

Leahy: Let’s just say.

Partin: Just say that I do.

Leahy: For speculative purposes.

Partin: If it’s purchased legally and it has not been used in an illegal matter that’s the same as my car. My shoe.

Leahy: It’s a possession.

Partin: Groceries and a six-pack of beer in my refrigerator. What right does the government have to take anything? I don’t care if it’s a firearm or not. What right does the government have to take anything?

Leahy: Let’s go back to the warrant, Crom.

Carmicheal: If the national government passed a law that said that gun ownership is hereby forbidden whatever guns you want to define. And for Democrats, they want to take away all firearms, not just AR-15’s. And then it would go to the Supreme Court.

And if the supreme court ruled that all of a sudden citizens did not have the right to own firearms then the government, that’s why they want a national registration. So that they know everybody who has one. And then they would then get warrants and they would show up at your house to collect your firearms.

Leahy: But what they would have to go through in order for that to happen.

Partin: But who’s going to comply? (Leahy laughs)

Leahy: What gun owner is going to comply?

Partin: What gun owner is going to comply? First of all, you have to get into the head of a gun owner. Why does a gun owner have guns? 99.9% of people that own guns never use them for any criminal purpose whatsoever. Most people today that carry a weapon are doing it for self-protection. And there are times that you need self-protection.

And I’ve been taught, I grew up in a law enforcement household. My father carried a weapon every day. It stayed on the dresser when I was five years old and I knew what it was and what it was used for. I was brought up maturely around firearms. And my dad had this saying, he said, ‘It is better to have it and never need it than to need it and not have it.’

Leahy: I think your dad had some pretty good wisdom.

Carmicheal: We’re talking about two different things. I’m not talking about the philosophy of firearms. I’m talking about if the Democrats were to get their way the police would show up at your house and you would have a choice. You could say, ‘I’m sorry my firearm was stolen. It’s not here.’ Or, you could say, ‘I’m not giving it to you.’ And in which case they’d arrest you.

Partin: Well, that’s probably what would happen to me.

Carmichael: They would take your gun. They would arrest you and then they would go take your gun.

Partin: Well, they’ve got to find it.

Carmicheal: Well they’d have a warrant and they would find it. I’m telling you this is what we’re dealing with here. Mexico has very very strict gun laws and the criminals down there have machine guns. The bad guys down there have all the firepower they want. That’s what would end up in this country. Criminals who are just marauding around cities stealing whatever they want to take. And nobody could stop them because everybody else would be disarmed.

Leahy: It’s a Democrat dystopian view of the world.

Listen to the third hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 am to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio.
Photo “Gun Buyback” by Neon Tommy. CC BY-SA 2.0.








Related posts

One Thought to “Despite Strict Gun Control Laws, Evidence Proves It’s Failing in Mexico”

  1. Ralph

    Forgive me for saying, but the headline is somewhat misleading. It’s not “gun control”, but firearms confiscation. Adopting the vernacular of the tyrants furthers thier objective.

    Moreover, firearm confiscation in Mexico is a rousing success, not a failure. As a result of firearm confiscation, the gangs and the state (which is notoriously corrupt) have a monopoly of force and, with that monopoly, they are able to fully subjugate the law abiding people who just want to live life.

    As for who argue that the gang wars are just about drugs, no, they’re not. I read this article just this morning where a cartel is seeking control of avocado production and packaging. An otherwise remarkable success story lifting many out of poverty. Well, no longer. Increasingly growers have to pay for armed protection by cartel gang members. And, just as in the drug trade, there are gang wars over it.

    The cartel amusingly enough is called the Viagaras after the cartel leader who uses so much hair gel it stands on end.

    If you disarm the public at large, you precipitate the very tyranny our Founding Fathers meant to preclude. And, of course, that’s what the globalists want.

    A closing point here too: the debacle where the authorities released the criminal (he didn’t “escape” custody, they let him go freely after realizing they were seriously outgunned) is indicative that we will soon have a failed state, ala Somalia, on our very southern border. Not good.