![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsFor the last year or so there has been a nasty rumor floating around that the BATF, the agency in charge of regulating firearms and explosives, has been actively supplying arms to the the Mexican drug cartels. The exact reasons for doing this vary depend on who's telling the story but they range from "Being a gangster pays better" to "the CIA is trying to bring down the Mexican government".
While the first option is depressingly plausible, the rumor had been dismissed (even by bitter clingers such as myself) as just another conspiracy theory. Now its seems that I may owe the folks in tin-foil hats an apology.
CBS Evening News: Documents point to ATF "gun running" since 2008
Regardless of your opinions on gun-control, or the drug war I think this revelation raises a deeper and more interesting moral conundrum, namely...
Is an informant or undercover cop who breaks the law as part of thier cover any less of a criminal?
If not, Why?
Keep in mind that we are not talking about a drug sting where someone substituted some cocaine for a tracking device and some flour. ATF agents intentionally bypassed thier own system of background checks to allow known cartel members to purchase functional firearms and then didn't arrest anyone. Where is the line between "gathering evidence" and "accomplice"?.
While the first option is depressingly plausible, the rumor had been dismissed (even by bitter clingers such as myself) as just another conspiracy theory. Now its seems that I may owe the folks in tin-foil hats an apology.
CBS Evening News: Documents point to ATF "gun running" since 2008
Regardless of your opinions on gun-control, or the drug war I think this revelation raises a deeper and more interesting moral conundrum, namely...
Is an informant or undercover cop who breaks the law as part of thier cover any less of a criminal?
If not, Why?
Keep in mind that we are not talking about a drug sting where someone substituted some cocaine for a tracking device and some flour. ATF agents intentionally bypassed thier own system of background checks to allow known cartel members to purchase functional firearms and then didn't arrest anyone. Where is the line between "gathering evidence" and "accomplice"?.
