Obama can’t define gun control
Evidently people have forgotten that in October 2009, the Obama administration launched Operation Fast and Furious. This fiasco basically involved handing more than 1,200 or so guns (primarily assault weapons) to Mexican drug cartels. The intent was to track the weapons and further understand the cartel’s movements. In reality, the outcome was quite different. Numerous weapons were lost and some were found to have been used in fatal shootings and notably, the death of a United States drug enforcement agent.
The operation was deemed a total disaster from top to bottom.
My point is that this same president and this same administration are now preaching gun control reform and claiming to have the end all solutions. He has even gone so far as vowing to circumvent Congress if necessary to enact those changes. What I’m wondering is how far we should trust an administration wanting to tamper with second amendment rights when it has such a dismal track record on gun control?
They sold the very weapons that he wants banned to people who are known to have no problem using them; they lost track of the majority of them, our people got killed by them and now they want us to believe that they know how those weapons should be managed? Isn’t that like asking Bernie Madoff for investment advise?
What really puzzles me is why nobody in media has pursued this line of questioning. I don’t care if it’s Obama, Bush, Clinton or whoever. To justify Fast and Furious, to blindly defend the Justice Department when it failed, and then turn around and decide that you are qualified to define gun control in the United States is a stretch.
Notice about comments: