A couple of months back, I heard Rush Limbaugh say that the Fast and Furious operation was part of a cynical effort by people in the Obama administration to make the case for more gun control laws.
I thought, well, that’s a little far-fetched. I mean, nobody would ever infect a patient with disease in order to make the argument for more medicine, right?
Boy, was I wrong.
Fast and Furious, as you are probably aware, was the botched Justice Department effort to send guns into Mexico so that ATF agents could track them and monitor drug dealers. The guns were used in killings, including the murder of a U.S. Border Control agent.
Sharyl Atkisson of CBS, one of the few mainstream media reporters making a consistent effort to investigate Fast and Furious – let alone any aspect of the Obama administration – has come up with evidence of an actual, real live plan to use sales of guns under Fast and Furious to make the case for, yes, greater gun control.
ATF officials didn’t intend to publicly disclose their own role in letting Mexican cartels obtain the weapons, but emails show they discussed using the sales, including sales encouraged by ATF, to justify a new gun regulation called “Demand Letter 3”. That would require some U.S. gun shops to report the sale of multiple rifles or “long guns.” Demand Letter 3 was so named because it would be the third ATF program demanding gun dealers report tracing information . . .
“It’s like ATF created or added to the problem so they could be the solution to it and pat themselves on the back,” says one law enforcement source familiar with the facts. “It’s a circular way of thinking.” . . .
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, is investigating Fast and Furious, as well as the alleged use of the case to advance gun regulations. “There’s plenty of evidence showing that this administration planned to use the tragedies of Fast and Furious as rationale to further their goals of a long gun reporting requirement.
This is the realization of the worst fears conservatives have about government regulation and intrusion in the private lives of citizens.
It’s one thing to put a company out of business by adding regulatory costs to its bottom line. But it’s whole new level of Big Brother tyranny if there were actually bureaucrats planning to foment violence – i.e., put guns on the street – in order to achieve a policy end.
Such thinking does not occur in isolation. A government that continually accumulates control over the lives of its citizens eventually makes its way toward the use of arbitrary power to inflict death in order to achieve what it views as the greater good. It’s not a aberration. It’s an inevitable consequence, recognized by the Founders, of the abandonment of limited government.
This is why Sarah Palin’s perfectly correct invocation of the term “Death Panels” stuck such a chord. It describes the final destination of the Obamacare health law, where government bureaucrats will be charged with making decisions about the acceptable costs of end of life care.
This is about the worst news I’ve seen related to Fast and Furious. Of course, it’s hardly caused a ripple in the mainstream press.
Every person who had a thought in their head about putting guns on the street to advance gun control needs to exposed. And now, even more than before, senior officials who new about Fast and Furious and did nothing to stop it must be sent packing, whether they were in on the gun law scheme or not.