Wasn’t there a movie out a few years back that was called Fast and Furious? I am not much of a movie person, but it seems it was about a car race that was being used to smuggle hijacked goods. By now, everyone has probably heard of the new Fast and Furious, the ATF gun sting operation that was supposed to allow guns to enter Mexico in order to open the drug cartels to prosecution for illegal guns. I am not clear on how that was going to help, being as they are already running drugs, which happens to be illegal, but I will bypass that for the purpose of this post. The main thing I am concerned with is the complete ineptitude of the ATF, clearly shown by how they ran this sting operation. Let’s look at some of the preliminary findings of a report from a House Government Oversight Committee. Fair warning, from what I can see, it’s not a pretty picture that is being painted.
Agents expected to interdict weapons, yet were told to stand down and “just surveil.” Agents therefore did not act. They watched straw purchasers buy hundreds of weapons illegally and transfer those weapons to unknown third parties and stash houses.
ATF agents complained about the strategy of allowing guns to walk in Operation Fast and Furious. Leadership ignored their concerns. Instead, supervisors told the agents to “get with the program” because senior ATF officials had sanctioned the operation.
Agents knew that given the large numbers of weapons being trafficked to Mexico, tragic results were a near certainty.
Operation Fast and Furious contributed to the increasing violence and deaths in Mexico. This result was regarded with giddy optimism by ATF supervisors hoping that guns recovered at crime scenes in Mexico would provide the nexus to straw purchasers in Phoenix.
For weeks, months, years, some of us have been warning that too much government is just that; too much government. In my opinion,
Operation Fast and Furious is a prime example of a government trying to do too much. The ATF deliberately expanded the guns that were being smuggled into Mexico, in the hopes that they would be able to use those guns to slow down or stop the drug smuggling and gun trade. From all appearances, it seems the only thing they accomplished was to supply fuel to fire that was already burning out of control. Keep in mind that the ATF did not “lose track” of the weapons. Instead, they intentionally allowed them to fall into the hands of bandits and criminals on both sides of the border. So much for that idea, huh?
It may sound like I am being overly critical of the Obama administration and I really don’t mean to be. I just think they are going about this in all the wrong fashion. Illegal gun trafficking needs to be stopped, that much is true, but their idea of more government is better government isn’t working, either in the marketplace or in the effort to stop what is happening in the Southwest and in Mexico. They have been claiming from day one, this would be an open and honest administration. So far, it appears that their idea of oversight hasn’t worked out so well.
You’re not being overly critical, Larry. And take that from a person who prides himself on being prudent and not overly critical on Obama.
This was a disaster, as you have said. Although I don’t think it’s an example of the government over-reaching, or trying to do too much, I do believe it’s an example that shows that government is generally made up of morons.
It could be that government is made up of flawed human beings, such as ourselves, and at times we may expect too much out of them, but this is not one of those cases. This is a case where some fools thought of what they conceived to be a brilliant idea, I’m sure, but they didn’t really think it through.
It just goes to show how poor human nature really is. Think about it: would they have supported such a strategy if they knew the guns would be used to kill Americans? My guess is that because they knew that innocent Mexicans would likely bear the brunt of the death-dealing, they considered it to be an acceptable loss, or no loss at all. If they knew they’d be signing the death warrants of scores of Americans, the idea would likely have been shot down (if even uttered in the first place).
I get that the world is a horrifying place, and sometimes we have to be a party to horrifying things if it means our safety, but this is not one of those things born of necessity. This was a horrifyingly terrible idea from the start, and there should be some serious reprisal for those who hatched it and put it into action.
Most certainly, many in our government make me wonder just how they ever reached the place they are in. I am not so sure moron wouldn’t be a very fitting description. The more I think about Operation Fast and Furious, the more I wonder how anyone could have thought it would accomplish anything good.
I think this is a very serious scandal. Before agent Dodson became the whistle blower he warned his supervisor that people were like to die as a result of this program. Dodson’s supervisor told him “if you want to make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs”. Was Brian Terry, the Border Patrol agent murdered with some of these guns one of those eggs? After the whistle was blown, the ATF, Holder, and Obama all denied any knowledge of this operation. As I said in my post yesterday, I hope that Issa’s hearings can find out what Holder and Obama knew and when they knew it.
This is certainly one of those times when the truth needs to be told. I would be more than a little interested in knowing exactly how much President Obama, Eric Holder, and other interested parties knew about the operation.
In my view, the Obama administration is inept and incompetent.
This plan as outlined here was almost certainly doomed to failure from the start.
Truer words were never spoken. The plan was idiotic.
Giving guns to gangs does not stop the underlying problem. These companies are driven underground because drugs are illegal. As such, they can’t be out in the open, and competition is impossible. To end the violence, we need to allow these businesses to come out into the open to freely compete. These means legalizing drugs. I know, you may not like them morally, but practically the policy has been a huge failure.
I see your point, Tony, but I am not so sure that legalizing drugs is the answer. Maybe some changes in policy, to be sure, but wholesale legalization?
With this line of logic, then we should legalize murder and theft? People still murder each other, and stuff is stolen every day. By that logic, those policies are huge failure because they don’t stop people from comitting these crimes.
And to think that opening the drug market up to “competition” is going to solve the problem is fairly pie-in-the-sky, I think. Are the drug lords going to take kindly to the competition? Are they going to suddenly stop being bloodthirsty barbarians?
No. What would be more likely to happen is that any legitimate company or person who would even consider getting into that business would likely just stay out of it for fear of being murdered. Drugs would be legal, but nothing about the destruction they cause, directly or indirectly, would change.
Legalizing drugs to solve the problem relies far too heavily on the notion that human nature is generally good. I simply don’t see human nature in such a positive or optimistic light.
Why am I finally enjoying some come uppance? A GOP with some… well you know.
The “conspiratorial” angle to this, beyond the obvious one, is that the administration may a big deal out of the accusation that most of Mexican violence was done with American guns. However, that claim was shot down as untrue. Then, they ship a ton of guns down there-ones that would have never gotten to the border, and now they can say, “OMG, guns from here are being used to kill people down there!” Reality didn’t fit their narrative. Now it does.
I remember that, Matt. They were throwing all kinds of accusations and statistics around that were meant to make it look like American guns were completely at fault for the violence in Mexico. When that theory was debunked, they seemed to have taken a different tact.
Funny how when the ATF is controlled by a Democrat these things happen. Ruby Ridge, Waco, Operation Gun Runner.
Now that you mention it, I wonder why that is?
Because Democrats push to take people’s freedom away and want to control everything and put overly political people in there?
Great post Larry. I agree this is just another example of an imperfect government coming up with imperfect solutions leading the larger problems.
Lead to a larger problem is exactly what this operation did. It reminds me of the sting operations the FBI has conducted in the past. They spent a lot of time and money, trying to entice certain individuals into concocting a terrorist threat, when they should have been busy working to prevent the real threats that facing our country.
You are not being overly critical; don’t forget that a border patrol agent, Brian Terry, was killed with one of those guns and he was only carrying a bean bag gun due to regulations. Someone’s head has to roll here and it has to be someone at or near the top.
That’s something that has puzzled me from the time I heard the story. Why would regulations require our border patrol agents to carry a bean bag gun, instead of a weapon they could use to defend themselves. Consider the fact that the drug cartels are very well armed and that regulation is made even more ignorant than it is on the surface.
Trackbacks: