Yup. Ultimately the NRA, through intense lobbying and 100s of millions of dollars has put exponentially more guns in the hands of Mexican cartels than F&F ever could. And F&F was a disastrous accident, not a deliberate well-funded and unapologetic campaign.
Let me be clear: in no way, shape or form do I find F&F and its predecessor under Bush to be "disastrous".
I come from a background in science so I understand the desire to map, chart, and delve into the flow of arms to better understand how to control it in a targeted manner. I see nothing wrong with the methodology because there are actual structural issues with our country's and individual states' laws on the sale and transfer of weapons that are infinitely more important to address first.
If you are not serious about fixing those first, then F&F and other gunwalking operations should be the
least of your concerns because it's 1) such a small, insignificant number of arms and 2) the criminals would have been armed in any case because of our weak laws. F&F and gunwalking in general are completely legitimate to me. That one of the guns may have been used in the murder of a US citizen or law enforcement agent is irrelevant because it assumes that the perpetrator would not have had a weapon if not for F&F, which is a patently absurd statement.
If one is up in arms over that, then one should be up in arms over the NRA continually cock-blocking legislation to control the sale and flow of arms.
So anyone that wants to be in an uproar over F&F needs to check their own positions first.
