
The Cartel Gunsmiths - epsylon
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-cartel-gunsmiths
======
hga
_“You could surmise that [the parts] are coming from the US, since most of the
weapons that come down here illegally are from the US,”_

Perhaps, since the largest US source is M16s (and maybe M4s now) donated to
the Mexican government and then stolen (second is Communist bloc stuff bought
on the open market, it's much less expensive than making your own like this).
There's not much utility in tracing any of these guns, except of course to
propagandize for gun control in the US (see Fast and Furious for the most
egregious example).

Which makes me wonder why this cartel felt a need to make their own AR-15s or
M16s (the article didn't mention if these were 3 round burst or full auto, did
it)? If they can get their hands on rocket propelled grenades....

Then again, this whole expose might be a lie (again, see Fast and Furious).

~~~
joshuapants
> Which makes me wonder why this cartel felt a need to make their own AR-15s
> or M16s (the article didn't mention if these were 3 round burst or full
> auto, did it)? If they can get their hands on rocket propelled grenades....

The use case for a rocket launcher is a bit different than the use case for a
rifle. There is probably some overlap, but there are definitely situations
where one is a far better choice than the other.

~~~
hga
Sorry about my lack of clarity.

My question is, what's behind their "make vs. buy" decision. They pretty much
_have_ to buy or steal RPGs if they want them, you really don't want to mess
around with primary and secondary explosives unless you absolutely have to (or
so I gather, I've steered clear of them, I like my hands intact), but if they
can procure RPGs, they can much more easily procure rifles. Don't know what
the cost for a AR-15 pattern rifles is, but I heard some time ago the price
for an illicit AK-47 pattern rifle is around $100.

Lack of access to Mexican military supplies (their fighting with the Los Zetas
might suggest that) plus logistics might be part of the answer, the latter as
in they'd probably rather smuggle more drugs into the country than some
rifles, especially if demand for marijuana exported to the US is low
(everything else is much smaller size and weight). This picture
[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/Matazets-
inte...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/Matazets-
interrogationZetas.png) shows them armed with AR-15 pattern rifles and the guy
in the front right has a LAW, which is a US Vietnam era one shot rocket
launcher
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M72_LAW](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M72_LAW)).

~~~
varjag
You can buy most of AR15 entirely legally, save for a small machining job on a
lower receiver blank: exactly what they were doing. Much easier than raiding
army arsenals.

~~~
hga
Nope, they were not turning 80% receivers into 100%, they were starting with
aluminum billets according to this article (see this page for a 0% receiver
you can buy ^_^: [http://www.80percentarms.com/products/0-billet-
ar-15-lower-r...](http://www.80percentarms.com/products/0-billet-ar-15-lower-
receiver)).

But in either case, why build when you can, in theory, buy?

Each has different levels of difficultly, and in this case, if true, it was
probably harder than buying or stealing. But a different set of risks....

I mean, I've heard of Afgans doing this by hand from scratch, but I've never
heard of this level of organization making rifles, heck, most nation states
don't.

~~~
varjag
Well once you have a CNC mill the only difference between machining the full
LR and finishing a blank is in run time.

As to why, I obviously don't know. But the LRs being the only regulated, and
at the same time trivially machinable parts probably have to do something with
it.

~~~
hga
Per the article and what I understand, there's moderately skilled work
required in sourcing and perhaps adjusting the right CAM data for a complete
billet -> lower receiver machining job. Plus a _lot_ more machining involved;
as I understand it, a drill press can finish an 80% receiver. But I suppose
such skilled people can be persuaded to do this sort of work for a cartel.

~~~
varjag
The difference between programming the 20% finishing and machining the whole
part is not that large. Moreover, the finishing would require manual set up
and zeroing out each semi-finished piece.

Aluminium is cheap material and machines really well, there's not much
downside to machining the whole piece. Plus, you save the expense of buying
hundreds of pre-fab LR blanks.

------
akavel
Wow, an additional gem of an unnerving punchline (at least for me) is close to
the end of the article:

 _" (...) That’s why Mexican cartels are building citywide CCTV networks[1],
forcing kidnapped engineers to build secret radio networks[2], and shipping
stolen iron ore to China in exchange for bulk meth precursor chemicals[3].
It’s not a question of whether cartels beyond Jalisco can’t get their hands on
computerized mills to make their own guns, but how far up they’re willing to
scale."_

 _[1]:[http://motherboard.vice.com/read/cartel-
cctv](http://motherboard.vice.com/read/cartel-cctv) _

_[2]:[http://motherboard.vice.com/read/radio-
silence](http://motherboard.vice.com/read/radio-silence) _

_[3]:[http://motherboard.vice.com/read/inside-the-cartels-
global-m...](http://motherboard.vice.com/read/inside-the-cartels-global-meth-
ring-from-guangdong-to-gulfport) _

------
slr555
Filing serial number off is generally unsuccessful as a means of rendering a
firearm untraceable. Law enforcement can use a variety of methods to reveal
the serial number due to the changes that the original stamping makes in the
metal underneath the actual surface impression. While in theory using an
impact tool or a milling type tool could work to remove the underlying metal
there is a risk that the integrity of the part (in this case the lower
receiver) could be compromised.

I would take exception to the author's statement that the lower receiver is
the primary firing mechanism. While it does contain the trigger and sear the
upper receiver contains the full bolt assembly, firing pin, and gas system (or
piston if you feel like getting fancy).

My biggest question is that if they are creating lowers from billet and other
parts as well, why they just don't equip these weapons with auto sears and
make them full auto. Go big or go home, right?

------
ctdonath
FWIW: the "Ghost Gunner" is hardly a _general_ purpose CNC machine. It's made
specifically to finish an "80% lower".

~~~
Animats
This cartel group didn't bother with the "Ghost Gunner", which is a joke. They
got a real Hardinge 3-axis CNC mill and made parts from solid aluminum blocks.
Hardinge is an old-line US machine tool builder, in business for over a
century.

There's stuff in the article about "where did they get the G-code" to cut the
part. Any good CNC machinist, given measuring tools and a part, can model a
part like that. It helps if you have SolidWorks or Autodesk Inventor.

Or you can just look up "lower receiver 3D model" and download the model from
GrabCAD.[1]

Maybe gun serialization should include barrels. Good rifled barrels are hard
to make, and require special purpose machinery.

[1] [https://grabcad.com/library/ar15-lower-solidworks-
native-1](https://grabcad.com/library/ar15-lower-solidworks-native-1)

~~~
hga
The best rifle barrels are probably hammer forged, and indeed that requires
$$$ machinery and tooling, but I'm under the impression that button rifled
barrels aren't that hard to make.

But certainly a _lot_ more than AR-15 pattern lower receivers, which are not
highly stressed by firing (here's a 3D printed plastic AR-10 pattern lower
receiver! [http://3dprint.com/54163/printedfirearm-
ar10-piece/](http://3dprint.com/54163/printedfirearm-ar10-piece/)), you need
good steel, a big lathe at minimum and I'm pretty sure heat treating is a good
idea.

Any proposal to serialize barrels would be shot down, so to speak, in the US
now and for the foreseeable future.

~~~
Animats
In Germany, serial numbers are stamped on frame, slide, and barrel. Glock puts
serial numbers on barrels. Browning does on some models.

~~~
hga
Certainly, for manufacturing purposes, you frequently want to do that,
especially for guns like the Glock where all three of those are relatively
easily swapped. But making it a legal requirement would be another thing
altogether; heck, in the US gun serial numbers preceded legal requirements by
more than a century, it's only been required since 1968 as far as I know.

Hmmm, there's also the other sort of legal requirement, dealing with lawsuits.
Glock doesn't want to have liability for a FrankenGlock kaboom....

~~~
Zancarius
Kind of off-topic, but one avenue where serial numbers stamped on all major
bits have been useful is to collectors. I've seen a few that Forgotten Weapons
covered that went for a pretty penny at auction because everything had
matching serial numbers...

But that's a really good point about liability since there's _so_ many after-
market replacement barrels for Glocks. Heck, I've been tempted at times to get
one just for the standard rifling (and I don't shoot lead).

------
vernie
What are the differences between an M-16 LR and an AR-15 LR? Is there anything
that's keeping them from manufacturing select-fire M-16 LRs? Are the other
parts of an AR-15 (e.g. barrel, stock, UR) incompatible with an M-16 LR? I
don't understand why they would machine semi-auto AR-15 LRs if they have all
the tools necessary to build their full-auto/burst counterparts.

~~~
Zak
It's just the extra hole to accommodate the M16's full-auto sear. Anyone
finishing an 80% AR15 lower could easily drill that third hole, but in the US
the resulting firearm would be considered "readily convertible" to fully-
automatic and therefore only legal to manufacture or possess under a limited
set of circumstances.

Buying a bunch of M16 trigger parts, while legal in the US might attract
unwanted attention, but I think a cartel with machine tools could easily
manufacture these parts themselves, or a full-auto sear of a different design.

If they're not making select-fire rifles, and it wouldn't surprise me if
they're not, it's because using a fully-automatic rifle effectively requires a
lot of training and discipline. Most people under most circumstances would use
a rifle more effectively without having the option of full-auto; even the US
military has questioned its value for the average soldier, using some models
with 3-round burst instead.

------
IndianAstronaut
Another similar gunsmithing story from Vice.

[http://www.vice.com/video/the-gun-markets-of-
pakistan](http://www.vice.com/video/the-gun-markets-of-pakistan)

------
damoncali
How bizarre. Brand new M16 lowers are like $75 retail. I can't imagine the
motive for making them, unless they're just hobbyists who happen to be drug
lords.

~~~
apr
Just a clarification for people reading this who might be unfamiliar with
legal details. What you meant was probably AR15 lowers, not M16. I doubt you
could buy M16 anywhere in the US sans the black market. You could make one out
of an AR15 lower but that would be illegal.

~~~
damoncali
Neither term is terribly precise. I mean "AR15/M16 platform". They're all
basically the same from the perspective of organized crime.

~~~
slr555
It is true that in the military, much shooting is done in semi-auto mode. That
said there is a huge difference in the volume of fire that can be generated in
full auto vs. semi-auto. Companies like Surefire are now building 100 round
magazines that are far more reliable than the Beta mags which weren't much
more than a gimmick.

------
rasz_pl
Nice propaganda, how about mentioning brilliant operation Fast and furious?

