Not so Fast and Furious

U.S. Officials Behind ‘Fast and Furious’ Gun Sales Should Be Tried in Mexico, [Meixcan] Lawmaker Says

While the investigation continues into the U.S. operation that helped send thousands of guns south of the border, Mexican lawmakers say they’ll press for extradition and prosecution in Mexico of American officials who authorized and ran the operation.

“I obviously feel violated. I feel my country’s sovereignty was violated,” Mexico Sen. Rene Arce Islas told Fox News. “They should be tried in the United States and the Mexican government should also demand that they also be tried in Mexico since the incidents took place here. There should be trials in both places.”

Murdoc doesn’t necessarily agree, but he’s going to insist that those involved get the full treatment here. He’s also prepared to be quite disappointed.


Mexico doesn’t completely understand Operation Fast and Furious, the American plan to help send assault rifles and revolvers to Mexico as a means of exposing the gun trafficking rings that operate along the border.

It ain’t just Mexico that ‘doesn’t completely understand.’

Via Instapundit, who writes

They told me if I voted for John McCain we’d see demands for the extradition of Administration war criminals. And they were right! They just didn’t tell me it was the war on guns. . . .

6 thoughts on “Not so Fast and Furious”

  1. I am split on this issue. First, the best way to catch the big fish is to run operations like this and track the goods. However, letting the guns get out of control is unforgivable and needs to be punished. I am not in support of sending these guys to Mexico for trials. It sets a bad precedent to start following international law instead of us law.

  2. Mexico is a country? I thought it was a loose confederation of peoples living in an area killing each other, or leaving North…

  3. Michael Bane: “The ONLY way Fast & Furious makes sense is as a direct attack on the Second Amendment. Otherwise, it makes no sense at all.”

    This was an operations directed at the lawful gunowners and those who may purchase in the future. How does it feel to be the target?

    1. To be honest, I gotta say I don’t quite agree with that assessment.

      It makes sense in principle if done in a careful, controlled manner in order to uncover supply lines, communication networks, and end users.

      However, it appears to have been done in neither a careful nor a controlled manner. In fact, the manner was so lacking in care or control that it appears to have been purposefully so. That COULD be the case, but then that would require us to give them a lot more credit than I think they’re worthy of.

  4. As I watch more and more of this coverage, I can’t help but get more and more pissed. I mean, there is nobody that has any records, memos, tapes, meeting minutes, etc. of how this all came about. I mean, who’s idea was it, why weren’t the weapons permenantly disabled to keep something like this from happening.

    This thing reads like a bad B-grade movie. We need to find some leaders that have a conscious.

Comments are closed.