Um, Mexico has a $10 billion lawsuit against U. S. Gun manufacturers. And of course, you know, we have a law that was put in quite some back in the 90s because they knew this was going to be the tactic of gun controllers and the Democrat party. And so they passed a bill saying that if a gun manufacturer making a gun, there’s nothing illegal about that. As a matter of fact, they have the right to do that under the second amendment.

It’s protected, and they should not be interfering with that. It’s actually a God given right to do that, just like it’s a God given right to grow our own food. And yet you continue to see people coming after this, and Mexico is now doing this. And so it was shut down, rightfully so, by the first court, and they appealed. And now this $10 billion lawsuit that alleges that the companies, quote, deliberately enabled firearms trafficking into the country.

Peel’s court has ruled that this can go forward. Well, good luck proving that these gun manufacturers are trafficking guns. You understand that this has been a very long term strategy for gun control from the UN, and it’s been a bipartisan strategy for gun control. The gunwalker program began under George W. Bush. They said, well, you know, and of course, the ATF that was there, we’re going to essentially do a false flag.

We are going to traffic. And it was the government, it was the ATF that was deliberately, and that’s the key word here, deliberately. But they were deliberately trafficking guns, the gunwalker program, in order to make an argument that we have to have domestic gun control because we are a source of violence and death with our guns going out of the border into Mexico. It’s just the other way around.

Anyway, so that was the argument that was being made. The UN had a small arms trade treaty, the UN ATTT, and they wanted to come after small arms. They don’t care if you’re sending tanks and planes and f, it’s the ar 15s they want to get. And so it was the attempt to ban small arms for Americans and to use the UN. And so George Bush worked with them, and then Obama did it as well.

And with Obama, they called it the Fast and Furious thing, but it was still the gunwalking program. And as part of that, if you recall, there was an american law enforcement officer who got killed as part of that. And the whole thing then blew up. And even the New York Times said, this is a false flag to argue for gun control. Ship the guns over there. Make it be known that these guns were the source of crime.

So therefore, we have to control and mark everything. Every gun has to have an id and be registered and tracked everywhere it goes and every piece of ammunition. That was the conclusion that would happen once they created this problem. The solution that they already had was to ramp up all gun control in the United States and all monitoring of each and every weapon. And so when that blew up in their face, seemed like it was kind of dead.

And yet the United nations is still going forward with this arms trade treaty vote. And I was working, doing some video work for a gun rights organization, and we were in New York, picked the boys up. They were doing camera work and stuff. And they had just a week before, not even a week before the UN vote was scheduled, you had the aurora, Colorado shooting. Right. That very suspicious shooting.

I believed then, now that I’ve looked at it more closely, I’m absolutely certain that that was a false flag. And the purpose for that was to get people to forget what had happened with Fast and furious and to push support for this UN arms trade treaty. Fortunately, it failed. But now they’ve got the same tactic, essentially, and so they’re still coming after the same thing. But now they’re using a lawsuit, and they’re using Mexico.

In a lawsuit, the lawsuit filed by the mexican government against seven american manufacturers and a distributor back in 2021 alleged that the companies, quote, deliberately facilitate gun trafficking, unquote, into Mexico. The complaint was initially filed at a federal district court in Massachusetts, and they dismissed the lawsuit after deciding that U. S. Companies were protected by the Protection of Lawful Commerce and Arms act, the PLCAA. However, the appeals court said that Mexico’s complaint potentially alleges a type of claim that could be statutorily exempt from this PLCAA rule.

I don’t think so. And look, the principle of this, we had the guy who killed a bunch of people, for example, in the Waukeshaw Christmas parade. How did he do it? Oh, with an AR 15? No, he didn’t do it with an AR 15. He do it with a Ford SUV. So should we shut down Ford because this guy misused their product? This all comes from the idea that is common with Democrats and common with gun controllers, that guns were designed to kill.

So we just got to stop them. Now. Guns are deterrent to evil. They can be used for evil, but they’re also a deterrent to evil. It’s a tool. It can be used either way. And so they said, we therefore reverse. The district court’s holding that the PLCAA bars Mexico’s common law claims, and we remand for further proceedings. So the court, we conclude that the complaint adequately alleges that defendants aided and abetted the knowingly unlawful downstream trafficking of their guns into Mexico.

I think that we need to file a suit against Mexico while we talk about all this border stuff. Let’s go against Mexico. Let’s take their oil, as Donald Trump said. But instead of sending in the military, we’ll do it with lawyers and pins. Okay, let’s sue them for sending. And look, let’s just take the same language out of this. Mexico has aided and abetted the knowingly unlawful downstream trafficking of people from Mexico into our country.

Let’s sue them for that. We know that they are aiding and abetting and knowingly breaking the law by pushing this stuff. We know they’re involved in that. And we also know that they’re involved with the international gun control stuff as well. The group that is running this lawsuit for Mexico, Jonathan Lowe, is the president of global action on gun violence. And so it’s Mexico, globalist, Biden Democrats that are conspiring to destroy this country with open borders and to take away our God given right to self defense as well.

They say they also pierced the unfair legal shield that gun companies have been hiding behind since 2005. It’s not an unfair legal shield. Again, take away Ford’s suv because some guy used it to kill people deliberately. And so who are the companies that are involved in this lawsuit? We have Barrett, Barretta, Glock, Ruger, Smith, and Wesson. Mexico has accused those manufacturers of engaging in a practice that results in the trafficking of tens of thousands of guns across the border into Mexico.

Empowering drug cartels. You know what empowers the drug cartels? Our unlawful, unconstitutional prohibition, our war on drugs has empowered them. Not Barrett, Barretta, Glock, Ruger, Smith and Wesson. They wouldn’t have the money that they have to essentially challenge the mexican government, such as it is, if it wasn’t for the drug programs. They go on to say the entire country has only one gun shop housed in a Mexico city military complex, a situation where only the government and the cartels have guns.

Not much has changed, has it? From the magnificent seven. Remember that you have the peasants, farmers, the peons who are out there, and they’re being victimized by both the federalis and by the banditos, the thugs that are out there. Nothing changed. Nothing has changed. The government’s got the guns. The bandits have got the guns. And so the villagers go to the US, and they hire some mercenaries, seven of them, and get them to come in and it’s not that they’re going to sit back and watch these seven guys take on this massive gang.

They want them to train them in self defense. Too bad real life is not like that. Actually, it is. There were some movements, some local movements, where they tried to do that very sort of thing. And guess what? Federal rallies came after them. Shut them down. The people who are trying to organize into a militia to defend themselves against these drug cartels. Because you see, there really isn’t.

Here’s a big secret. There’s really no difference between the government and the drug cartels. Two sides of the same coin, whether you’re talking about America or you’re talking about Mexico. And of course, it’s the CIA, these people running this stuff, CIA creating the crack cocaine epidemic, and CIA and the Pentagon turning Afghanistan into the world’s supplier of drugs that they’re growing there, the opium. It’s just amazing to see this stuff.

Yeah. By the know, why would they only have one gun? Mean? Well, you know, it’s much more lucrative to manufacture drugs in Mexico than guns, isn’t it? Much more profitable. And when we look at these lawsuits, I don’t know how this is going to roll out. I mean, it should just be dismissed as it was at a lower court. But in 2018, Remington went bankrupt. And as part of when they finally settled this, the company’s assets returned over to JP Morgan.

JP Morgan and another company essentially owned Remington. And then the Sandy Hook people sued them and they decided, and it wasn’t Remington. The gun company a lot of people got upset with mean it’s now owned Morgan. People of that elk, why would you settle with this? Because again, the PLCAA protected them. They didn’t do anything wrong with anything. Regardless of what you say about Sandy Hook stuff, that should have been a no brainer to shut that down.

But instead, J. P. Morgan paid them $73 million. And I guess that was a cheap price to pay to try to help, to chip away at the PLCAA. And it was more than worth it to people like Jamie Dimon, who, you know, is dirty as can be, conspiring with the government on all these different things. I’m sure maybe that was one thing they perhaps behind closed doors, just speculating.

Maybe they offered to go easy on him, on some of his many criminal enterprises and convictions if he does that little favor for them. But, yeah, Remington didn’t try to defend the right of a gun manufacturer who didn’t kill anybody. They just complied with it. And that’s essentially what happened on the other side of the Sandy Hook thing with Alex Jones. He did not defend the first amendment.

He chose not to participate in discovery. And we all saw what happened. That’s not even his narrative. Well, I gave him everything. Well, no, he got caught in that lie on the stand. He chose not to defend the First Amendment. He preferred to put money in offshore counts and bitcoin and other things like that. The David Knight show is a critical thinking super spreader. If you’ve been exposed to logic by listening to the David Knight show, please do your part and try not to spread it.

Financial support or simply telling others about the show causes this dangerous information to spread favour. People have to trust me. I mean, trust the science. Wear your mask, take your vaccine, don’t ask questions. Using free speech to free minds. It’s the David Knight show. .

See more of The David Knight Show on their Public Channel and the MPN The David Knight Show channel.