Guns Without Roses
in Mexico
By Kenneth
Emmond
It’s heartening to see that U.S. President
George W. Bush has at last found time to spend a few days with his “top priority” Latin American neighbor nations
to the south, though most haven’t merited a second glance for the past six years.
When Bush got to Merida on March 12 to meet with
his Mexican counterpart, Felipe Calderón, the main agenda items were familiar: immigration, border security, money-laundering,
and the illegal drug trade. One equally important item was pretty much glossed over.
It’s the massive logistical support Mexico’s
drug cartels receive from the United States, though if it’s talked about at all it’s not framed in those terms.
Instead, like the illegal “export” of drugs, it’s called the illegal “import” of arms and ammunition,
as if there were only one, Mexican, side to the transaction.
Whatever the nomenclature, the cartels use these
arms not only for battles among themselves but also against the police and the army.
Even as the American administration lectures Mexico
about controlling those drug cartels, it’s making it harder to maintain control here by its indifference to the fact
that American gun manufacturers provide the cartels with ordinance equal to or better than standard police issue.
This isn’t just about pistols and assault rifles,
although they’re part of the arsenal. It’s about armor-piercing firearms and submachine guns that fire 600 rounds
per minute.
It’s at least as big an issue as the commerce
in illicit drugs. Despite being off politically correct agendas, it’s impossible to separate arms sales from drug sales.
In fact, this robust two-way trade could be celebrated as a classic example of Ricardian comparative advantage in illegal
international trade.
It’s next to impossible for an honest Mexican
to get a gun permit. It involves a huge license fee plus a long wait, and must be renewed every two years. That effectively
disarms most honest people.
Meanwhile, about 250 pieces a day are seized, according
to José Luis González, the former head of the Special Prosecutor’s Office for Organized Crime. The only statistics available
are on arms confiscated, but if it’s anything like the drug trade, this represents only a fraction of the volume involved.
The United States is the world’s biggest exporter
of arms, legal or otherwise. Studiously little is done to ensure that all deals are legal.
“Studiously” is the correct term because
in 2005 a breathtakingly cynical law was passed in the U.S., which effectively protects arms manufacturers from lawsuits related
to the legality of gun sales.
The Law to Protect Legal Trade in Arms, which would
be more appropriately named “The Law to Please the National Rifle Association” (which lobbied for it for seven
years), says in effect that it’s legal to manufacture guns; how they are sold, or to whom, is a separate issue.
That same year the Canadian government was looking
for ways to sue U.S. gun manufacturers for selling illegal weapons. The initiative was eventually dropped, but a report released
at the time noted that half of all gun-related crimes in Canada involved illegal weapons imported from you-know-where.
Whatever the possibilities of that approach to arms
control, there’s a better one.
Chicago gangster Al Capone was never called to account
for most of the crimes he committed. He was convicted in 1931 of a relatively innocuous crime, income tax evasion, and went
to jail for that.
Mexico could pass a law that would put drug dealers
in jail without having to convict them of drug-related charges. This law would jack up the penalty for illegal possession
of arms as high as the Constitution permits.
Then, when a drug criminal — or a kidnapper
or bank robber or common thief — was found to be in possession of an unregistered gun, whether it be a pistol or an
AK-47, he would be subject to penalties for illegal arms possession.
For a defendant caught in flagrante — with the illegal weapon in hand — it would be hard even for the most corrupt judge
to throw out the charge due to “insufficient evidence.”
Whether or not he ever faced drug-related charges
— something much harder to prove — the miscreant would end up in jail, which is where prosecutors and the general
public want him.
Best of all, this strategy would work with or without
the cooperation of the vendor nation. It might even mean that, at some future meeting of American and Mexican presidents,
drug control and illegal arms would be off the agenda altogether.
——————————
Kenneth Emmond, an economist, market consultant and
journalist who has lived in Mexico since 1995, is also a columnist with MexiData.info.
He can be reached via e-mail at Kemmond00@yahoo.com.
