Connect with us

2nd Amendment

ATF Caught Red-Handed Covering Up Fed Gun Trafficking

The seal or symbol of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, portrayed with the US flag

In a recent development, a former Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) investigator is facing accusations of involvement in gun trafficking to Mexico, and these allegations, along with potential ATF cover-up actions, have ignited strong concerns among ardent supporters of the Second Amendment.

Jose Luis Meneses, a Mexican national, was employed by the ATF to work out of the U.S. Consulate in Tijuana with a mission to combat the illegal flow of firearms from the United States to Mexico. However, instead of addressing the challenge of gun smuggling, Meneses has confessed to his involvement in gun parts trafficking across the border into Mexico, involving three individuals, including his brother, a police officer, a state judicial official, and a former member of Mexico’s military. These allegations have come to light thanks to the courageous act of an ATF whistleblower who disclosed this information to Senator Chuck Grassley’s (R-IA) office.

Shockwave Mini

As per the whistleblower’s accounts, Meneses initiated these operations in 2017, using a car with diplomatic license plates to transport firearm components from an unnamed California gun shop back to Mexico. Notably, the gun shop in question was neither accused of nor involved in any illegal activities, and they promptly reported the suspicious activities to the Consulate. With diplomatic license plates on his vehicle, Meneses was able to cross the border without inspection.

Gun show where people can buy and sell guns and related items

The sale of these firearm parts took place within Mexico, raising concerns about their ultimate destination. Senator Grassley’s office rightly emphasized the risk that these firearms might end up in the hands of the Mexican criminal underworld. It is well-known that drug cartels in Mexico consistently purchase firearms from Mexican military personnel, and the military member involved in this case did indeed resell AR-pattern rifles. However, the ultimate recipients of these rifles remain unclear.

These allegations come at a time when violent crimes in Mexico have surged due to ongoing battles among drug cartels for territory and control of the highly profitable drug trade. Murders in Mexico have reached an all-time high, leaving its citizens living in constant fear. It’s crucial to highlight that Mexico’s strict gun control laws have left law-abiding citizens with limited means to defend themselves, while criminal organizations continue to obtain a wide array of firearms, from handguns to miniguns.

Shockwave Mini

The Mexican government has consistently claimed that the majority of firearms used by narco-terrorist groups originate from the United States, alleging that 70% of all crime-related firearms are smuggled from the U.S. However, these claims are challenging to verify, as Mexico has not released the necessary documentation to substantiate their assertions. This has led to ongoing tension between the Mexican and U.S. governments, with Mexico insisting that the United States is not doing enough to curb the flow of firearms southward.

Disturbingly, the whistleblower’s memos revealed that when the ATF uncovered the gun-running activities, they deliberately refrained from conducting a thorough investigation. Instead, they severed ties with Meneses and issued a notice to the Mexican government, choosing not to share this vital information with their Mexican counterparts. Senator Grassley has voiced deep concerns that the ATF was neglecting criminal actions committed by its employees.

Guns, handguns, AK-47s and .50 caliber rifles, on display during an announcement about arrests and weapons seizures made during Operation Fast and Furious.

This episode is not the first time the ATF has faced allegations of involvement in gun-running activities. The notorious “Operation Fast and Furious” during the Obama Administration saw the ATF allowing guns to cross the border, which were later used in violent crimes, including the tragic killing of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in 2010.

Mexico is now demanding a comprehensive investigation into Meneses and the alleged crimes, expressing dissatisfaction with the level of cooperation from the United States. A Mexican official stated, “We will demand they get to the bottom of this in order to bring those responsible to justice and ensure that this type of action never happens again.”

Shockwave Mini

On the other hand, a U.S. official has staunchly defended the actions taken, asserting that the embassy responded appropriately by revoking Meneses’ access and conducting a swift investigation. They contend that firing him within a month was the right course of action.

Nonetheless, lingering questions remain about the ATF’s handling of this case, particularly in light of their stringent enforcement against individuals for far less serious offenses, such as the sale of firearm-related items like a lightning link. The inconsistency in enforcement raises grave concerns about transparency and accountability within the ATF, sparking the need for further examination and accountability to protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and strengthen the Second Amendment.

(Visited 27 times, 1 visits today)

2nd Amendment

Forces of Freedom Push Back Against National Red Flag Laws

hand-gun-on-red-background-man

The upcoming visit of Vice President Kamala Harris to Florida isn’t just a routine affair; it’s a strategic move to promote yet another assault on our constitutional rights by the Biden administration. The so-called National Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) Resource Center, presented as a tool to prevent violence, is actually a thinly veiled attack on the Second Amendment. Let’s delve into why conservative voices and Republicans are vehemently opposing this Orwellian initiative.

A Closer Look at ERPOs: A Conservative Stand for Freedom

Under the guise of preventing harm, ERPOs grant authorities the power to strip individuals of their firearms based on vague and subjective criteria. Modeled after domestic violence protection orders, these laws trample on the rights of law-abiding citizens, eroding the very foundation of our freedoms.

Erosion of Due Process: A Fundamental Concern for Conservatives

At the heart of conservative values lies a steadfast commitment to due process and the rule of law. ERPOs flagrantly disregard these principles, allowing for the seizure of firearms based on mere allegations, often without the opportunity for the accused to defend themselves in court. This erosion of due process sets a dangerous precedent that conservatives cannot abide by.

Targeting Law-Abiding Citizens: Conservative Opposition

Despite claims of targeting individuals deemed a threat, ERPOs have the potential to be weaponized against law-abiding citizens. By exploiting vague criteria and subjective judgments, authorities can effectively disarm individuals without just cause, infringing upon their constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Conservatives recognize this blatant overreach and refuse to stand idly by as their rights are trampled upon.

A Federal Overreach: Conservative Concerns

Conservatives staunchly oppose the creation of the National ERPO Resource Center as a blatant overreach of federal authority. This centralized bureaucracy threatens to undermine the sovereignty of states and the rights of their citizens. Conservatives believe in the principles of limited government and federalism, and they refuse to allow the federal government to dictate firearm policies that should be left to the states and local communities.

Resistance from the Right: Conservative Leaders Speak Out

Republican leaders have been at the forefront of the opposition to this Orwellian initiative. Voices like Reps. Thomas Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene have sounded the alarm, urging Americans to resist this assault on their freedoms. Conservatives across the country are uniting to defend the Second Amendment and push back against the Biden administration’s agenda.

Conservatives understand that the true path to safety lies not in surrendering our rights but in upholding the principles of liberty and justice for all. The Biden administration’s relentless pursuit of gun control measures is an affront to these principles, and conservatives will continue to stand united against any encroachment on our freedoms. It’s time to reaffirm our commitment to the Constitution and reject any attempts to erode our Second Amendment rights.

What do you think of the push for national red flag laws? Leave your thoughts in the comments below. 

Continue Reading

2nd Amendment

Federal Judge Rules Second Amendment Protects Gun Rights of Illegals

court-law-trial-session-honorable-female

In a groundbreaking decision, U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman of Illinois has ruled that the Constitution extends Second Amendment protections to illegal aliens who enter the United States illegally. The ruling comes in response to a case involving defendant Heriberto Carbajal-Flores, challenging a federal prohibition on illegal aliens owning firearms.

Constitutional Protection for Second Amendment Rights

Judge Coleman’s ruling, delivered on Friday, asserts that while there exists a federal ban on illegal immigrants possessing firearms, this prohibition is unconstitutional as applied to Carbajal-Flores. Despite the federal law being deemed “facially constitutional,” the court found that there is no historical basis for firearm regulation that justifies denying Second Amendment rights to noncitizens who have not been convicted of violent crimes.

Judge Coleman stated that the statute violates the Second Amendment. Consequently, the court granted Carbajal-Flores’ motion to dismiss the charges against him.

Legal Precedent and Constitutional Interpretation

In reaching her decision, Judge Coleman referenced the landmark Supreme Court ruling on Second Amendment rights, emphasizing the absence of a historical tradition allowing the government to deprive noncitizens of their constitutional right to bear arms. This interpretation underscores the fundamental principle that the Second Amendment applies not only to citizens but also to noncitizens residing within the United States.

Implications and Future Proceedings

The ruling by Judge Coleman carries significant implications for the legal landscape surrounding gun rights and immigration. By affirming that the Second Amendment protects the rights of non-citizens, the decision challenges existing federal laws and sets a precedent for future cases involving similar circumstances.

Moving forward, the decision is likely to spark debates and legal challenges regarding the intersection of immigration status and constitutional rights. As the case progresses, it will be closely monitored by legal experts, advocacy groups, and policymakers alike, shaping the ongoing discourse on gun rights and immigration policies in the United States.

Conclusion

Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman’s ruling represents a significant development in the ongoing debate over Second Amendment rights and immigration laws. By affirming that noncitizens, including those who enter the country illegally, are entitled to constitutional protections, the decision highlights the importance of upholding fundamental rights regardless of citizenship status. As the legal proceedings continue, the implications of this ruling will reverberate throughout the legal and political spheres, shaping future policies and interpretations concerning gun rights and immigration in the United States.

What do you think of the federal court’s ruling? Leave your thoughts in the comments below. 

Continue Reading

2nd Amendment

South Carolina Embraces Permitless Carry: Strengthening Second Amendment Rights

south-carolina-flag-us-state-gun

In a resounding affirmation of Second Amendment principles, South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster has signed permitless carry into law, making it the second Republican-led state in as many days to adopt constitutional carry gun laws.

Governor McMaster’s Stance on Permitless Carry

Governor McMaster hailed the new legislation as a crucial step towards enhancing public safety and ensuring that law enforcement agencies possess the necessary tools to combat illegal gun use and possession by criminals. Speaking on the significance of the law, Governor McMaster emphasized its role in enabling law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges to keep career violent offenders behind bars, thereby safeguarding innocent South Carolinians from harm.

The NRA-Backed Bill: Key Provisions

winneconne-11-may-2018-nra-sticker

Backed by the National Rifle Association (NRA), the permitless carry bill allows eligible citizens aged 18 and older to carry a firearm in public without the need to obtain approval and a permit from the government. This legislation represents a significant departure from the previous regulatory framework, which required individuals to undergo a permitting process before carrying a firearm in public spaces.

Bolstering Public Safety

Proponents of permitless carry argue that it enhances public safety by empowering law-abiding citizens to exercise their inherent right to self-defense without bureaucratic impediments. By removing the requirement for a government-issued permit, permitless carry ensures that individuals can protect themselves and their loved ones promptly in critical situations.

Legislative Approval and Support

Ammunition-and-American-flag-on-US-Constitution-History-of-the-Second-Amendment

The bill garnered substantial support in both chambers of the South Carolina legislature, with the state Senate passing the legislation in a 28-18 vote and the state House approving it with a vote of 86-33. This bipartisan support underscores the broad consensus among lawmakers regarding the importance of upholding Second Amendment rights and promoting individual freedoms.

Addressing Concerns and Misconceptions

Critics of permitless carry have raised concerns regarding potential risks associated with expanded firearm access. However, proponents assert that responsible firearm ownership, coupled with stringent penalties for criminal misuse, mitigates these concerns and promotes a safer environment for all citizens.

South Carolina’s embrace of permitless carry represents a significant victory for proponents of Second Amendment rights and individual liberties. By enacting legislation that empowers law-abiding citizens to exercise their inherent right to bear arms, South Carolina reinforces its commitment to upholding the principles enshrined in the United States Constitution. As the national discourse on gun laws continues to evolve, the passage of permitless carry in South Carolina serves as a beacon of hope for those who champion individual freedoms and the preservation of constitutional rights.

Leave your thoughts about the victory of the Second Amendment in South Carolina in the comments below. 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 Guncountry. All Rights Reserved