Mixican drug cartel seized guns firearms
Courtesy VOA
Previous Post
Next Post

By Lee Williams

The New York Times has seized upon a lawsuit filed by the Mexican government against six American firearms manufacturers – which even the newspaper’s own experts admit is frivolous – as if it’s a holy writ, in order to add their political support to the Biden-Harris Administration’s calls for increased gun control.

Using cherry-picked data taken out of context from a report from the Government Accountability Office, the Times reporters boldly state that “70 percent of the firearms submitted for tracing in Mexico between 2014 and 2018 originated in the United States.” However, that is not what the data says. That’s not the whole picture. It’s the submitted for tracing part that’s misleading – misleading in a big way.

According to the GAO report, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) found that 70 percent of the firearms seized in Mexico from 2014 to 2018 and submitted to ATF for tracing were manufactured in the United States. But the GAO report points out that “ATF does not receive complete data about thousands of firearms, such as those recovered by Mexican states, because only Mexico’s federal Attorney General’s office submits trace requests to ATF.”

That last part never made it into the Times’ story. Why? Because it doesn’t fit their false anti-gun narrative that American-made firearms are flooding into Mexico.

In their response to the story, the National Shooting Sports Foundation pointed out that less than 12 percent of the 30,000 firearms seized in Mexico during 2008 were of U.S. origin.

The NSSF also noted that the actual number of American guns is even lower than 12 percent.

“The ATF has noted that more than 20 percent of the firearms submitted for tracing are duplicates. With such errors distorting the statistics it is clear that even fewer than 12 percent of these firearms originated in the U.S. And of the small number that did come from the U.S., many did not come from retail firearm sales,”

Again, this fact was omitted from the Times’ story.

(AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews, File)

What wasn’t left out of the story was a slam of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) – a 2005 law that protects gun makers from frivolous lawsuits such as this one – which the Biden-Harris Administration has specifically targeted for repeal.

“Legal experts questioned the lawsuit’s ultimate chances, given that U.S. federal law guarantees gun manufacturers a strong shield against being sued by victims of gun violence and their relatives,” the Times reported. “But some said the lawsuit could lend political support to the strengthening of gun regulations in the United States, which are among the loosest in the hemisphere.”

Questionable appeal

Using the lawsuit to buttress their biased narrative, the Times claimed American gun makers “knowingly facilitate the sale of arms to criminal groups in Mexico by marketing their wares in ways that appeal to drug traffickers.”

They cite as an example a Colt “Emiliano Zapata” limited edition 1911 in .38 Super, which they say was used by a Sinaloa cartel leader to murder a Mexican journalist in 2017.

I find this claim somewhat racist, and while I have not spoken to Colt’s marketing department or their distributor, I am fairly certain the Emiliano Zapata commemorative 1911 was not marketed toward cartel leaders, but rather to history buffs, 1911 collectors, .38 Super collectors and other people who just like a good gun.

Besides, Colt has produced hundreds of collectable firearms that commemorate John Wayne, NRA’s Centennial, the WWI battle of Meuse-Argonne, the Golden Spike, John Browning, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the USS Arizona, the OSS, Colt’s Sesquicentennial, the Pony Express, the 50th Anniversary of the Vietnam War, the USMC, Texas Rangers, the US Cavalry and the Age of Flight.

If some Mexican narcotrafficante now uses a Colt “John Wayne” Commemorative 1911 in a murder, that’s on him. It certainly shouldn’t reflect poorly on Colt or the Duke,

“Even if it’s carless, they’re not liable,” Tim Lytton, a law professor at Georgia State University, told the New York Times.

Who’s really at fault?

To be clear, the blame for the thousands of lost lives in Mexico should be placed squarely on the corrupt and feeble Mexican government and the powerful drug cartels, not American gun makers.

Besides, the cartels are also using AKs, RPGs, RPKs, Uzis, FALs, AUGs, Tavors and a host of other foreign military weapons, which they smuggle into the country or steal from Mexican law enforcement. These are not coming from the United States, nor were they ever submitted for tracing by ATF.

A pickup truck with signage identifying affiliation with the “Northeast Cartel” in Mexico. Image via YouTube.

The NSSF agrees.

“The Mexican government is responsible for the rampant crime and corruption within their own orders,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel, said in a press release.

Mexico’s criminal activity is a direct result of the illicit drug trade, human trafficking and organized crime cartels that plague Mexico’s citizens. It is these cartels that criminally misuse firearms illegally imported into Mexico or stolen from the Mexican military and law enforcement. Rather than seeking to scapegoat law-abiding American businesses, Mexican authorities must focus their efforts on bringing the cartels to justice. The Mexican government, which receives considerable aid from U.S. taxpayers, is solely responsible for enforcing its laws – including the country’s strict gun control laws – within their own borders.

Brady lawyers involvement

The lawsuit Mexico v. Smith and Wesson, was filed in federal court in Massachusetts on behalf of the Mexican government by the Texas law firm of Hilliard Shadowen, which specializes in class-action lawsuits, and by Jonathan Lowy, who is chief counsel for the Brady Center, one of the country’s leading gun-control groups.

Jonathan Lowy Brady
Jonathan Lowy, Vice President, Brady Legal Action Project (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

Brady’s involvement should tell you the goal is not to win the lawsuit, but to milk it for free publicity – such as a story in the country’s largest newspaper – to further Brady’s goal of total civilian disarmament.

The lawsuit doesn’t state how much money the Mexican government is seeking, but the Times story says the Mexican Foreign Ministry estimates there could be “$10 billion in potential damages.”

The real gunrunners

If the Mexican government is looking to go after those responsible for flooding their country with American firearms, they should look no further than the ATF and its “Operation Fast and Furious.”

Between 2006 and 2011, the ATF allowed more than 2,000 firearms to be smuggled across the border into Mexico. Only 700 were ever recovered.

The goal of ATF’s flawed operation was to target Mexican drug cartels, but it failed miserably. Instead, the guns were used by hardcore criminals on both sides of the border.

In December 2010, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed with of the firearms the ATF allowed to walk across the border. In addition to Terry, more than 150 Mexican civilians have been murdered with ATF’s guns.

The Mexican government should take another look at this bloody debacle. They’ll see it wasn’t American firearms manufacturers who are arming the drug cartels with advanced weapons. The ATF already took care of that.

The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn’t be possible without you. Click here to make a tax deductible donation to support pro-gun stories like this.

This story is part of the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project and is published here with their permission.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Mexico should build a wall that keeps uncontrolled people and cargo from crossing the border or something.

    S&W should find some people who have been victims of drug violence to sue Mexico for their ties to the Cartels and failure to weed corruption out in their government.

  2. “30,000 firearms seized in Mexico during 2008”

    … that’s all? podunk iowa has more than that.

    • The feds run guns over the border so you shouldn’t be allowed to have them.

      The feds share kiddy porn online so all of your traffic needs to monitored.

      The feds instigate terrorism so all your communications must be monitored.

      The feds orchestrate color revolutions across the globe so your kids have to die in wars oversees.

      The feds can print money at will but if you don’t pay your taxes the whole nation will collapse.

      There’s definitely an entity that needs suing. I’m sure the feds courts will hear it fairly.

      • well yeah, the “feds” don’t want anyone else horning in on their territory. “us. just us. only us.”

      • If you ask me, the feds are the ones who should not be allowed access to firearms. Obviously, they would not know how to aim a rifle or pistol and wind up shooting themselves in the foot or some other “unmentionable” area. The rest of us in this country who know how to use and take care of firearms, should have no problems carrying. In my home state of SC, it will soon be allowable for concealed carry license holders to carry either concealed or openly. Definitely don’t need Biden and associates, especially Biden and Buttegeig.

    • to them it’s not lying, it’s cattle herding. “(whistle) hey hep hep get along little doggie (whistle)”.

  3. Anyone who believes anything the New York Pravda, AKA the new york times AKA the gay lady, has to say needs to be Permanently limited to travel only within the five burrows of that Slum,

    • interesting to see an ardent leftist…[on Bill Maher’s show]…say that the New York Times is often full of shit….

  4. “Brady’s involvement should tell you the goal is not to win the lawsuit, but to milk it for free publicity – such as a story in the country’s largest newspaper – to further Brady’s goal of total civilian disarmament.”

    No, the goal is to enter into a collusive settlement agreement with the Biden administration, to weaken Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, to achieve through litigation what is unachievable through rule making or Congress.

    The fact that the litigation has not merit is irrelevant. 1) its the 2nd circuit. “because guns” is all they need. 2)Google the Kids Climate case to understand what kind of horse shit is allowed. The DOJ is entering into settlement negotiations even after the Ninth circuit ordered the case dismissed. Yet, the judge is still allowing settlement and possibly a consent order. smh.

    • With $10B on the line, hopefully they won’t fold, like Remington did. It may take them a while, but they should eventually get a court to recognize PLCAA as applying. At that point, Mexico will be on the hook for all the legal fees. They can’t cry bankruptcy like the suckers Brady recruited to go after Lucky Gunner.

    • Yeah, families of those waylaid by drugs from Mexico, ought to sue the pants off Mexico. Sounds like a good idea to me.

  5. Will GM, Ford, and Chrysler get sued for being the cartel’s method of transportation?

      • Anyone else notice the pickup truck in the photo ?…Texas plate, misspelled ” D N C ” , is about twenty years old. Also, eff Mexico whom does absolutely nothing about their northern border while taking their southern border VERY seriously.

  6. Another country suing another countries gunm companies for gunms is ludicrous.
    I think some gunm control advocate from America with money went down to Mexico and swung some deals.
    If I was the president of the U.S. I’d tell Mexico, “you stop the flood of immigrants and I’ll stop the gunms coming to Mexico.” Naturally that will never happen so the gunms continue.

  7. The dems are working with Mexico to make good on their plan to bankrupt and exterminate the gun and ammo manufactures in the USA. ANY lawsuit that further destroys the 2A is a good one to the filthy dems. Plus the Mexicans don’t want all these guns around when they finally take control of what used to be the Western United States via Reconquista. It is win win all around for Mexico and the dems.

    Back in ’16, if Hillary had got in her plan was to stack the SCOTUS in her favor, then she would have bankrupted the gun companies with class action suits. The gun companies would have been allowed to stay in biz only if they made smart guns that can be remotely licensed and turned off and on like a cell phone. 

    That is how she would get around the 2A. Traditional guns will be outlawed, only smartguns will be legal. Once the Dems had the vote, then they would move to abolish the 2A. Smart guns are only pushed by Dems and gun haters and not gun lovers. 

    The dems can also expand SCOTUS to add some lackey dem leaning justices. Then they will translate the 2A to mean…you are allowed muzzle loaders only. Always remember, the 2A is not a right…it is an opinion.

    You reps get that through your head…the 2A is not a right…it is an opinion.

  8. Isn’t the NY Times the same paper that looked the other way when AG Eric Holder sent 2,000 guns to Mexico in order to trace them. He violated Federal, State and International laws in doing so. The guns were responsible for over five hundred deaths through Cartel violence and still counting. The NY Times looked the other way because it was Democrats who broke the law. The NY Times a a garbage publication by political elites out of the Democratic Party who spend most of their time lying on most subjects. So if you read the times your are wasting your time that you’ll never get back reading tripe.

  9. “Stolen from the Mexican Military?” More likely sold by individuals in the Mexican Military. A Military as corrupt as the Mexican government.

  10. “The goal of ATF’s flawed operation was to target Mexican drug cartels, but it failed miserably.” That line is bullshit. The goal was to attack the 2nd amendment with the news reports of that 70% of guns in mexico come from the US lie. That was the goal. Don’t let those lying shits get away with it AND DON’T REPEAT THEIR COVERUP LIE. There was no attempt to track where those guns went therefore it could NOT have been a legitimate law enforcement reason. It was political, from the top, and Obama, Holder and Clinton’s dirty hands were all over it. Never forget! They’re willing to kill people to gut the 2A.

  11. Many of my work employees ask where I get such high-quality legal assistance and can I help them with this issue, knowing that to find a good specialist, I do not just recommend them one office where they will always help anyone with any problem https://www.paulmankin.com/

Comments are closed.