Like so many other Wars on Some Institutional Evil declared in the past by governments that may have meant well… Mexico’ War on Drugs seems to be taking a turn for the worse.

According to this article from a series by the LA Times (not my normal choice of reading materials, mind you) it seems that the wealth and power that these thugs and smugglers trafficking narcotics and humans (illegal immigrants, or the more clinical-sounding and multi-culturally sensitive “undocumented workers”) over our very porous borders.

There are two things I would like to point out to our high-minded liberal friends who are so quick to point out that we are to blame - with such worrisome sounding statistics that upwards of 90% of weapons used by Mexican drug cartels are imported (illegally, of course) from the US.

First, while we do share some measure of guilt for consuming the nefarious products (primarily heroin and marijuana, among other drugs), and while regrettably, there is a trade amongst gun-runners for weapons.

A caveat: I’d venture to say that this is largely in the form of handguns, as automatic and semi-automatic US-manufactured long weapons such as Colt AR-15s and heavier caliber police weapons that fire .308 munitions tend to be much more expensive, and require harder to source ammunition.

.308 and 30.06 rifle rounds, and .50cal for sniper-grade weapons tend to be much more expensive and less ubiquitous than .762mm ammo, and the plentitude of cheaper, mass produced rifles that use it such as Chinese knock-offs of Russian AK-47 and SKS rifles which can be had at a 10th of the cost of a US military grade weapon, and certainly cheaper than high-end H&K or Steyr assault rifles.

Now this is not to say that these knock-off weapons aren’t sourced in the USA, but rather, to imply that these weapons present such a danger (concerning what could rightfully be considered an insurgency or an insurrection in another sovereign nation) that liberals would choose to enact even *more* Orwellian “gun control” laws is a fallacy. That is, law-abiding citizens should not be impeded from the liberty to buy, sell, and trade firearms and munitions nor should their Constitutional rights per the 2nd Amendment as recently supported by the DC v. Heller case be abridged because some criminals choose to traffic in these weapons.

The criminals themselves, should be caught, disarmed, and upon conviction in a court with due process be incarcerated - and hopefully, should we ever gain the courage to do so, enact laws that do not PUNISH the law-abiding gun-owners of our nation, but rather, to enact such severe punishments to include the death penalty for any such crime aggravated by use of deadly force (particularly in the case where the guilty has already built up a record of gun crimes or violent crime).

The other item that bears mentioning is that the nature of the Mexican drug war - concerning which there is (very much belated) discussion of deploying National Guard or possibly even active-duty regular Army on the border to combat incursions by Mexican (drug/human traffickers) into US territory.

Gentle readers, when we get to that point - when the regular police forces and the Mexican Army itself are taking casualties (over 7,500) in ONE year that make the body count for our invasion and occupation of Iraq for past eight years pale by comparison… when the weapons of choice for these drug warlords and kingpins are grenade launchers and anti-tank missiles… we have gone well beyond some gang of gun-runners selling cheap SKS-clones out of the back of a Ford Van, and have graduated to what are in fact REAL assault weapons: weapons meant for armed forces to actually engage in heavy assaults against fortified emplacements - in this case, police stations and paramilitary units.

What should our next steps be? Why not recall the military home to its true and originally constituted purpose - to suppress insurrection and repel foreign invasion: in this case, the invasion of Mexican traffickers across our southern borders - and sealing that long border with whatever means - even if it means regular Army patrols with helicopters and UAV assets with “shoot-first, ask later” rules of engagement.

I think the narco-gangs might think twice about bringing their war across our borders if it meant certain death, or at least a substantial barrier to their continued operational fitness.

The other step might be unthinkable, to a generation reared under the watchful eye of Mrs. Nancy Regan’s admonitions to “Say No to Drugs”, the motherly face of yet another failing War Against Some Social Evil (the War on Drugs).

Anything that involves the appointment of a titular “Czar” (in this case, the so-called “drug czar”) is an indicator of a bad thing - where the last real Imperial Czar - translatable from the Latin”Caesar” were the Romanovs of Russia, who along with most of his family had a most unhappy meeting with a few Bolshevik bullets more than 90 years ago. I’d say that would show that use of a title to be quite inauspicious.

That is all to say, that perhaps we should consider repealing the prohibition styled laws against certain “recreational” narcotics, while at the same time putting together a highly regulated and tax-revenue generating stream much like is already in place for the sale of alcohol, as well as making health insurance options reward those individuals who choose the better option of keeping their bodies away from the will abuse of destructive substances.

Such a *gasp* libertarian alternative just might staunch the flow of weapons, drugs, illegal migrants, and bloodshed on both sides of the border.