Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

It's starting to look like Mexico is falling apart

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: It's starting to look like Mexico is falling apart
    Posted: 02-Mar-2009 at 18:35
Hello to you all
 
Tell me es_bih, how many celebrities have been caught with heavy drugs and got away with it?
 
As for prison problem, it is PC politics that made the situation worse, oh my god these criminals have rights crap. This guy's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio) approach is the ideal approach to deal with gangs. The US has many islands, send the criminals (the most dangerous of course) there and while at it, if these prisoners misbehave in prison, put them with a rival gang and you will see all kinds of good behavior.
 
AL-Jassas
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Mar-2009 at 00:47
Originally posted by Al Jassas

Hello to you all
 
Tell me es_bih, how many celebrities have been caught with heavy drugs and got away with it?
 
As for prison problem, it is PC politics that made the situation worse, oh my god these criminals have rights crap. This guy's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio) approach is the ideal approach to deal with gangs. The US has many islands, send the criminals (the most dangerous of course) there and while at it, if these prisoners misbehave in prison, put them with a rival gang and you will see all kinds of good behavior.
 
AL-Jassas


This is what I wrote:

Originally posted by es_bih

Marijuana is a misdemeanor rightly so in a few states, but hard drugs aren't people are still serving multi-year sentences for them. It is the ones that have the money to get a lawyer-and pay off a judge that get house arrest and or a lesser sentence. That is at least the case in Chicago for years now. 


Celebrities are but a small number of the overall population or even the overall population of "drug users." Do not think that their treatment is standard operation procedure for the rest of the residents of either state in the Union. Normal people (with no money) end up in jail daily for simple drug offenses. While at the same time people that distribute them get off nor get mentioned due to a lot of corruption in government on state and federal levels. Putting more mislead gang bangers in jail will only create a flood - our prison population is ridiculous as it is. A kid that grew in up in a bad neighborhood with an ounce of Marijuana shouldn't be persecuted or put in jail in the same manner than a high level trafficker would.
The only people in Chicago that get away with a half a year of house arrest after getting arrested with a high level of hard drugs are the ones that can afford to pay 20k to get off that charge. While at the same time a kid with a tenth as much would get 30-40 years depending on number offenses, etc...

Putting people in prison never solved anything, because the people that are being and have been put in prison are on the bottom of the ladder - and there are enough misguided, eager, and most importantly poor kids in this country to hang off the bottom of the ladder if another one falls (goes to jail).

Robert Downey Jr. and co. represent 0.1 % of that overall figure - and have no bearing on reality - because such high profile people with money usually do not have much to do with reality (R Kelly is free and acquitted of any crime - even though he taped himself having sex with a minor). That isn't even a drug related offense, but a very serous one; a pedophile without money would be in jail for at least 20 years.




Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2800
  Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Mar-2009 at 00:47
Al Jassas its almost socially accepted among certain celebrity circles to snort coke and smoke the mary J.

Al Jassas
As for prison problem, it is PC politics that made the situation worse, oh my god these criminals have rights crap. This guy's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio) approach is the ideal approach to deal with gangs. The US has many islands, send the criminals (the most dangerous of course) there and while at it, if these prisoners misbehave in prison, put them with a rival gang and you will see all kinds of good behavior.


It sounds good but just isn't realistic, there are an estimated million gang members, meaning there are millions connected directly or in-directly with gang related issues. There is a social underclass where this type of lifestyle and behaviour is normal. This is the real issue which needs to be tackled, everything else is superficial and intended to make the majority who don't live in such an environment to feel safer.

      What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Mar-2009 at 00:54
Originally posted by Al Jassas

Hello to you all
 
Tell me es_bih, how many celebrities have been caught with heavy drugs and got away with it?
 
As for prison problem, it is PC politics that made the situation worse, oh my god these criminals have rights crap. This guy's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio) approach is the ideal approach to deal with gangs. The US has many islands, send the criminals (the most dangerous of course) there and while at it, if these prisoners misbehave in prison, put them with a rival gang and you will see all kinds of good behavior.
 
AL-Jassas


PS:

It isn't PC crap - it is a realistic issue. We have over crowded prisons full of people that either have done a crime, or when it comes to a drug crime - that haven't done as much as they are serving for. There used to be people caught with a baggy of a few grams ( a user or addict if you will) serving hardcore criminal sentences... that is the problem that caused the overflow in the first place... and going back to that won't fix the problem.

Like I said in the previous post - a gang banger isn't necessarily a drug runner - nor a criminal (yet or in some cases ever). These are social and criminal clubs-organizations that exist in areas where people are of lesser economic means (of various ethnic backgrounds from white American, to black, to Hispanic, to European newcomers...) So simply arresting these people won't stop the problem because a portion are just there for social reasons and the rest that aren't are going to be replaced by the next graduating (drop-out) class... It is an on going phenomena that is tied to economical situation and society in genral that can't be stopped by simply imprisoning a few lowly criminals or hang arounds...

Think of a weed - once you cut it out - it grows back on another part of the lawn, in order to stomp it out you have to go to the cause of it.

Unless you want to have anyone that could potentially turn to crime in jail, but then you'll have a population of 10 million left in the USA that isn't in jail.


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Mar-2009 at 00:55
Originally posted by Bulldog

Al Jassas its almost socially accepted among certain celebrity circles to snort coke and smoke the mary J.

Al Jassas
As for prison problem, it is PC politics that made the situation worse, oh my god these criminals have rights crap. This guy's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Arpaio) approach is the ideal approach to deal with gangs. The US has many islands, send the criminals (the most dangerous of course) there and while at it, if these prisoners misbehave in prison, put them with a rival gang and you will see all kinds of good behavior.


It sounds good but just isn't realistic, there are an estimated million gang members, meaning there are millions connected directly or in-directly with gang related issues. There is a social underclass where this type of lifestyle and behaviour is normal. This is the real issue which needs to be tackled, everything else is superficial and intended to make the majority who don't live in such an environment to feel safer.



True.
Back to Top
Maharbbal View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
  Quote Maharbbal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Mar-2009 at 10:38
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

Many of the police that are killed work for rival gangs. The police force in Mexico is totally demoralized. Armed citizenry, by historical evidence, have greater morale, because they have an incentive to be organized in order to protect their families.

Armed citizenry? Please, we're not talking about repealing the Wermacht here. We're talking organized crime, steps away from civil war. No tell me how the "armed citizenry" of Bagdad, Belfast and Bilbao have been doing in favour of peace lately... How many bandits and mafiosi origin from armed citizenry. I see some hysterical evidence, little historical. European history is rich in concerned and organized citizen who end up fighting like dogs destroying their country in the process (check up Greece, Italy and the Ukraine right after WWII).

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

Guns are an incentive for citizens to be organized and ready... without guns, there is no point for civilians to be organized against crime, because they can't to anything without guns. All they can do is duck and cover, and hope that some bureaucrats from the capital (many of whom are secretly part of this cartel war) send the army to the north for an indefinite period. This is why law-abiding citizens need to be armed. The army can't be everywhere at once, and no one has a greater incentive to protect the city than the citizens who live there.
As it happen, there is a little something called specialization: you do half my workload, I do half yours and every one benefits.
Secondly, lets take into account some cultural traits for a second: it is Mexico we're talking about here not Switzerland. Law-abidingness does not reach the same levels (just stating a fact, the same way as a Frenchman will drive as fast as he can without getting caught while a German will drive as fast as s allowed).

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

And you're right, even armed people die, but that doesn't disprove that a citizen's freedom to own guns curbs violence (curbs, not stops). All genocides and mass murders were made possible because citizens were stripped of their firearms.
We're not talking genocide yet, and anyway you're getting it the wrong way around: every mass murder starts with someone picking up a firearm.
 
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

The southern states of the US are seeing unprecedented increases in drug violence, because there is virtually no border patrol. Most authorities from these states confirm that this violence is, by definition, a spillover from northern Mexico.
C'mon I'm sure any Northern Mexican state would happily exchange its murder rate for any Sourthern US state. Not the same league.
 
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

Good point. Drug prohibition is a major cause of all this. The same way all the powerful American mobs of the 30's were propped up by alcohol prohibition.
 If memory serves, they were killing each others with legal tommy guns, not non-existing banned firearms.
 
In economy there is such thing as the "border effect" which has a huge opportunity cost attached to but also benefits a small minority. I believe that's what we have here (since there's a border). Firearms or not are not really the matter, bad guys would kill each other with forks if necessary! The only thing I know is that it is more difficult to kill someone with a fork than with a 9mm pistol, so I tend to prefer having a concern citizen with a fork than with a pistol. But hey that's personal, I tend to like being alive than dead... granted my set of preference and I have no right to impose it on any one.
I am a free donkey!
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Mar-2009 at 11:50

Originally posted by Maharbbal

Armed citizenry? Please, we're not talking about repealing the Wermacht here. We're talking organized crime, steps away from civil war. No tell me how the "armed citizenry" of Bagdad, Belfast and Bilbao have been doing in favour of peace lately... How many bandits and mafiosi origin from armed citizenry. I see some hysterical evidence, little historical. European history is rich in concerned and organized citizen who end up fighting like dogs destroying their country in the process (check up Greece, Italy and the Ukraine right after WWII).

 

You said it yourself in your previous post, and I agreed: Criminals and mafiosos have guns no matter what. Making guns legal for citizens simply evens out the playing field because most citizens in any part of the world are law-abiding. As for your examples, do you really believe a militia committed to dominating the country or overthrowing the government, is going to be concerned about what the government says about the right to carry guns? Right-to-carry laws only benefit the average citizen, since criminals and militias will get their guns no matter what.

 

 

Originally posted by Maharbbal

As it happen, there is a little something called specialization: you do half my workload, I do half yours and every one benefits.
Secondly, lets take into account some cultural traits for a second: it is Mexico we're talking about here not Switzerland. Law-abidingness does not reach the same levels (just stating a fact, the same way as a Frenchman will drive as fast as he can without getting caught while a German will drive as fast as s allowed).

 

Obviously the army is more efficient and powerful, what I'm saying is the army shouldn't be the only form of security, because every human has a right to protect their own family. As for the cultural traits, I don't agree or disagree, you make an interesting point.

 

 

Originally posted by Maharbbal

We're not talking genocide yet, and anyway you're getting it the wrong way around: every mass murder starts with someone picking up a firearm.

 

You're implying there were never any mass murders before firearms were invented. This simply isn't the case.

 

 

Originally posted by Maharbbal

C'mon I'm sure any Northern Mexican state would happily exchange its murder rate for any Sourthern US state. Not the same league.

 

All the more reason why its citizens should have the right to protect themselves with a fraction of the deadly force that the criminals possess.

 

 

Originally posted by Maharbbal

In economy there is such thing as the "border effect" which has a huge opportunity cost attached to but also benefits a small minority. I believe that's what we have here (since there's a border).

 

Sure, they get it cheap and go north and sell it for 10x the original price without paying any tarrifs. There is a border, but there is no border security. The U.S., being heavily involved in the drug trafficking industry, and planning a future North American Union, has no incentive to spend resources on border patrol. This is evident with the millions of illegals we have in this country. The border exists in paperwork and on maps, but the de facto border no longer exists.

 

The bottom line is, Americans are the consumers of the drugs sold by these drug-runners. They have an incentive not to kill or make a lot of noise in their main market. If northern Mexicans were their main market, they would never have had crime at this scale. But since they do have rampant crime, they should have right-to-carry laws.

 

 

Originally posted by Maharbbal

Firearms or not are not really the matter, bad guys would kill each other with forks if necessary! The only thing I know is that it is more difficult to kill someone with a fork than with a 9mm pistol, so I tend to prefer having a concern citizen with a fork than with a pistol. But hey that's personal, I tend to like being alive than dead... granted my set of preference and I have no right to impose it on any one.

 

In this comment you make the switch from "bad guy" to "concerned citizen" as if they are interchangable or synonymous terms. I simply don't agree with the fundamentals of what you're saying, so we should leave the gun discussion for another thread.
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Mar-2009 at 12:12
There is a simple solution to stop criminality. You put emergency state, close a whole neighbourhood and put the army to inspect house by house everybody.
There the guns, drugs and everything else appeares, and the criminals that oppose are shot in site. For the rest, you pick the people involved in drugs, that own guns, etc. and send them to a concentration camp.
 
Democracy is soft to stop countries that are in state of anarchy. Sometimes tougher measures are requered.
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Mar-2009 at 17:24
Whoa, I discovered this topic much too late. Anyway, a few responses to other people's posts:

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival


And northern Mexico, in terms of crime rate, is not that different from the rest of the country--- Look at Mexico City, geographically in the middle of the country, and one of the most crime-infested areas in the world.

Mexico City is not even one of the most crime infested areas in Mexico. I can easily name a dozen cities in Mexico that are much more violent and criminal.

Again, because citizens are unarmed and armed criminals know this. Even southern Mexico is infested with crime, with major rebellions in Oaxaca and Chiapas.

Not only are those not 'major' rebellions, those rebellions are actually nonexistant by now. The 'rebellion' in Oaxaca, which was rather escalated civil unrest rather than a real insurrection, has been crushed in 2006 already, and in Chiapas there hasn't been any serious fighting since 1994.

Originally posted by Pinguin

Well, in the possitive side, what's going on in Mexico could mean the beginning of the end of the tolerancy to crime.
 
Twenty years ago, Colombia was in a similar situation. The guerrilla and the drug lords literalilly dominated that country, killing each politician and military that tried to prosecute them. They even asaulted the supreme court and killed a hundred people. Fear had that country helpless. But though people came and started to persecute and kill the bad elements. When Uribe arrived he started to destroy sistematically every single source of crime and violence, and today they have the FARC and drug lords diminished in theirs violence and power.
 
Mexico will have to follow a similar path. It will happens sooner or later. They are concient the situation is escaping from theirs hands. What they need is more decision and a couragious man as Alvaro Uribe in Colombia.

No, I don't agree. The mess in Mexico started after the Mexican government declared a war against drug cartels. Mexico has never been exactly crime free, but death tolls have only started to get four or five digit numbers since the government involved the army and started a war on the cartels.

Besides, the most fearsome narcos, the Zetas, are made up of deserters from Mexican and Guatemalan paramilitary organizations. Police cooperating with the drug cartels is bad enough, so you don't want to have the same thing happen to the army.

And ironically, the democratization of Mexico might also have something to do with it. Before the 1990s criminal groups were supported or part of the PRIs vast corporatist apparatus. The government (especially state and local goverments) and organized crime were basically allies of each other, so the drug bosses had no reason to go on a killing rampage. Now the corporatist system has been dismantled the cartels have to fight for their turf.

Originally posted by pikeshot

With the possibility of previous cooperation between Hugo Chavez's government and FARC (widely suspected but not yet proved), what might the probability be of Venezuelan involvement in Mexico's current problems?  There is still plenty of narco-business in Colombia, regardless of improvement, because of the money involved.

Do you have any sources for that or is it just plain speculation?
The only time I heard somebody claiming Chavez had anything to do with Mexican drug violence was Glen Beck on Fox News, and he also hinted Al Qaida and Putin could be involved.

Originally posted by Armenian Survival

Many of the police that are killed work for rival gangs. The police force in Mexico is totally demoralized. Armed citizenry, by historical evidence, have greater morale, because they have an incentive to be organized in order to protect their families. Guns are an incentive for citizens to be organized and ready... without guns, there is no point for civilians to be organized against crime, because they can't to anything without guns. All they can do is duck and cover, and hope that some bureaucrats from the capital (many of whom are secretly part of this cartel war) send the army to the north for an indefinite period. This is why law-abiding citizens need to be armed. The army can't be everywhere at once, and no one has a greater incentive to protect the city than the citizens who live there.
 

An armed citizenry like in El Salvador? Over there there are numerous citizen militias, private death squads and other nongovernment groups cracking down on gangs.

Coincidentally El Salvador has the highest homicide rate of the entire world.



Edited by Mixcoatl - 08-Mar-2009 at 17:26
Back to Top
whalebreath View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 01-Jan-2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 14
  Quote whalebreath Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Mar-2009 at 04:23
Over the past 25 years I've spent a lot of time in Latina America particularly in Mexico.

It's sad to see the uninformed speculation here and in many places on the net, people who have no information but the worst kind of sensationalist garbage repeating the slander over and over and over.

Mexico today is nowhere near the kind of apocalyptic societal collapse as predicted and given some political backbone and judicious and long term use of deadly force can put those gangs on their heels.

This is what's happened in Colombia-a place I've visited as well-Colombia needed a lot of US military help but now is seeing the strength of narco gangs on the wane.

Bad News-faced with overwhelming force traffickers are relocating to Peru, Venezuela and Ecuador the problem is relocating and will continue to be a conern to democracies everywhere.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Mar-2009 at 12:18
What is funny is that while Mexico, Colombia, Peru, Guatemala, etc. are all praised by the US govenment for their heavy handed antidrug crackdowns and receive aid accordingly, Bolivia, that is constantly being blasted for being uncooperative in the fight against drugs, is the only country where cocaine production and export are actually in decline.
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Mar-2009 at 16:08
How dare you Mixo praise the rogue regime of Evo (the evil himeslf) Morales, that commie SOB who dared to challenge the US and decided that the only way forward was to end the privilages for the rich and declared war on corporate America LOL.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962
  Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Mar-2009 at 16:24
Originally posted by Al Jassas

No, read the articles. 90% of the weapons come from US and particularly from Texas and Arizona which has I think the most liberal gun laws in the US. Plus AK-47 is manufactured in the US so are many Russian and Israeli guns the mob like.
 
Military style weapons (AK-47s, M-16 variants) etc have become increasingly difficult to purchase in large quantities in the USA. This is even true in states like Texas and Arizona. Furthermore, purchases are tracked by the federal government and anyone systematically purchasing large quantities of such weapons in going to get a visit by the FBI.  
 
Military type weapons found in Mexico most likely come from Panama and Columbia. In the case of Panamanian bought weapons, the ultiamte source is either China, or more likely, Chinese companies operating in Singapore.  The US may supply high capacity pistols to the Mexican drug gangs, but I bet that even large scale purchases of pistols in the USA are now tracked and investigated.


Edited by Cryptic - 10-Mar-2009 at 16:24
Back to Top
hugoestr View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 13-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3987
  Quote hugoestr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Mar-2009 at 18:05
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival


You have it backwards. The reason why the violence is much more concentrated in northern Mexico as opposed to the southern US is precisely because most people in the southern US own guns, while Mexicans throughout their country are victims of the tightest gun regulations in the hemisphere. Thats why, despite complete freedom of movement due to an ungaurded border, and freedom to own guns in the US, the drug violence is more than 10-fold inside Mexico than in the US. Because cartels know that the citizens (and even police) in northern Mexico are sitting ducks, and unless there are full-time army patrols in northern Mexico (which they started lately), the people are defenseless. Not the case in Texas, where you can create citizen militias out of a couple of city blocks, and you don't even need police protection from drug criminals, since even granny knows how to use a rifle. Cartels know that everyone in Texas owns guns, which is exactly why they operate a few miles away in northern Mexico.

 

And northern Mexico, in terms of crime rate, is not that different from the rest of the country--- Look at Mexico City, geographically in the middle of the country, and one of the most crime-infested areas in the world. Again, because citizens are unarmed and armed criminals know this. Even southern Mexico is infested with crime, with major rebellions in Oaxaca and Chiapas.


You got this one wrong.

Gun ownership has no relation with crime rates. If that were so, the American South should be a sea of peace. Instead, it has the highest gun related murder rate in the country.

And having Mexicans own guns is a bad idea. At one point, back in the 60s, Mexico was one of the top 10 countries with the highest rates of gun murders. Once guns became practically banned, the murder rate went down quickly.

Why was this? Because Mexico has a honor culture, similar to the American South. If people live in a cool-headed culture, such as New England or Canada, you can have most of the population armed and the murder rates can stay low.

But if you have hot-honor culture, and you have to fight any perceived insult to your honor, adding guns to the mix makes things a lot worse. Specifically, take guns out of honor cultures, and you end up with a lot of fights. Give them guns and you end up with a lot of murders.

For every one else the situation in Mexico is not a hard one to figure out: if the U.S. had sane gun laws, you know, where criminals wouldn't be able to easily buy guns, then drug lords from Mexico wouldn't have the arsenals that they have.

And the reason why the violence is in Mexico and not in the US is simple: the Mexican government is fighting them there, whereas the American government refuses to fight them here. Have the American forces fight them in the US, and you will start seeing beheaded heads in coolers in Texas.
Back to Top
hugoestr View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 13-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3987
  Quote hugoestr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Mar-2009 at 18:30
Originally posted by Cryptic

Originally posted by Al Jassas

No, read the articles. 90% of the weapons come from US and particularly from Texas and Arizona which has I think the most liberal gun laws in the US. Plus AK-47 is manufactured in the US so are many Russian and Israeli guns the mob like.


Military style weapons (AK-47s, M-16 variants) etc have become increasingly difficult to purchase in large quantities in the USA. This is even true in states like Texas and Arizona. Furthermore, purchases are tracked by the federal government and anyone systematically purchasing large quantities of such weapons in going to get a visit by the FBI.


Military type weapons found in Mexico most likely come from Panama and Columbia. In the case of Panamanian bought weapons, the ultiamte source is either China, or more likely, Chinese companies operating in Singapore. The US may supply high capacity pistols to the Mexican drug gangs, but I bet that even large scale purchases of pistols in the USA are now tracked and investigated.


Research has found that most weapons that Mexican drug lords use are from the U.S. And the NRA and its nut ball competitor work hard to keep all kind of legal loopholes where you can sell weapons without a check. For example, in Virginia the loophole that allows people to sell guns at gun shows without a background check was going to be closed after the Virginia Tech massacre. Yet the NRA and the rest of the gun lobby fought to keep it there. and the NRA won.

I think that these fantasies that the drug lords' weapons don't come from the U.S. is from the strong denial of radical gun advocates not being able to accept that their ideas have consequences. Well, guess what, they do. Keep fighting to make gun purchases easier than getting a traffic license, and arming organized crime is one of the by products.
Back to Top
eaglecap View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 15-Feb-2005
Location: ArizonaUSA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3959
  Quote eaglecap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Mar-2009 at 22:38
Originally posted by Al Jassas

One of the reasons why drug cartels thrive in Mexico is the US itself. All weapons that the cartels have come from the US and US citizens sell these weapons which they can get easily without any checks, especially assult weapons, to the cartels and the US refuses to accept that it is partially responsible for the mess especially in the border cities where Cartels have more weapons than the federales:


 

Al-Jassas


This is a false assumption with only a grain of truth. Even if all the guns were confiscated by the government the black market would fill the void. China was caught via COSCO smuggling fully automatic machine guns through San Pedro port and selling them to LA gangs. It was in the LA Times and I saw the article but later.
Al Jassas PLEASE read:
Drug cartels' new weaponry means war from LA Times.

Most of these weapons are being smuggled from Central American countries

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-mexico-arms-race15-2009mar15,0,229992.story

Hugostr read up on gun ownership and how legal gun owners have prevented incidents:

Here you can contact them if you want to really know the truth, that is up to you. I leave it up to you because I do not like to argue with you.

http://gunowners.org/

Edited by eaglecap - 14-Mar-2009 at 23:00
Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Mar-2009 at 01:38

Originally posted by Mixcoatl

Mexico City is not even one of the most crime infested areas in Mexico. I can easily name a dozen cities in Mexico that are much more violent and criminal.

Originally posted by Mixcoatl

Not only are those not 'major' rebellions, those rebellions are actually nonexistant by now. The 'rebellion' in Oaxaca, which was rather escalated civil unrest rather than a real insurrection, has been crushed in 2006 already, and in Chiapas there hasn't been any serious fighting since 1994.

You're probably right about Chiapas and Oaxaca. But my only point of mentioning that as well as Mexico City, was a response to show that crime is a problem all over Mexico, not just its northern states (check the post I was responding to).

 
Originally posted by Mixcoatl

An armed citizenry like in El Salvador? Over there there are numerous citizen militias, private death squads and other nongovernment groups cracking down on gangs.

Coincidentally El Salvador has the highest homicide rate of the entire world.

I'm not an expert on El Salvador, but I would imagine the problem is not guns, the problem is probably weak central government and little or no precedent of law, which leads to many different groups vying for power (I'm sure there are several other factors as well). Does El Salvador fit this description?

Plus, if you describe these groups as "death squads", I don't think they would give a crap about gun laws, because they're already breaking more serious laws like murder. This is besides the fact that most militias don't carry legal models of guns, but rather military-grade weaponry (unless the militias you're referring to only carry handguns and shotguns, which would be a first).
 
 
Originally posted by hugoestr

You got this one wrong.

Gun ownership has no relation with crime rates. If that were so, the American South should be a sea of peace. Instead, it has the highest gun related murder rate in the country.
 
The top 10 states in the U.S. with the lowest crime rates are all states where you can carry a concealed weapon. Actually you can carry a concealed weapon in 40 states, and these states don't have higher rates of crime than the other 10 states. On the other hand, the states with strict gun regulations (California, New York, Illinois, Washington DC, etc.) are consistently among the leaders in crime per capita, especially violent crime.
 
Also, you're completely ignoring the fact that firearms prevent a countless number of crimes per year, as eaglecap mentioned.
 
 
Originally posted by hugoestr

And having Mexicans own guns is a bad idea. At one point, back in the 60s, Mexico was one of the top 10 countries with the highest rates of gun murders. Once guns became practically banned, the murder rate went down quickly.

Why was this? Because Mexico has a honor culture, similar to the American South. If people live in a cool-headed culture, such as New England or Canada, you can have most of the population armed and the murder rates can stay low.

But if you have hot-honor culture, and you have to fight any perceived insult to your honor, adding guns to the mix makes things a lot worse. Specifically, take guns out of honor cultures, and you end up with a lot of fights. Give them guns and you end up with a lot of murders.
 
If we assume you're right, you're just proving my point that guns are not the problem--- people with bad intentions are the problem. Someone with bad intentions will not be stopped by the word of law, but he will be stopped if you point a gun at him and make him think twice.
 
And you're assuming that if guns are illegal, people won't kill each other with guns. Well, murder has always been illegal, but that hasn't stopped any murderers now, has it? And when they prohibited alcohol, it didn't lead to any decrease in consumption. In short, the word of law won't stop a criminal. The threat of deadly force will.
 
 
Originally posted by hugoestr

For every one else the situation in Mexico is not a hard one to figure out: if the U.S. had sane gun laws, you know, where criminals wouldn't be able to easily buy guns, then drug lords from Mexico wouldn't have the arsenals that they have.
 
First of all, the drug lords don't use legal models, they use banned military-grade weapons (unless you want to argue that I can legally buy grenade launchers and automatic rifles). And again, criminals don't get their guns legally from gun stores, because you could trace every bullet shell back to the owner via individual serial numbers and bullet 'fingerprints' which are engraved when the bullet travels through the shaft of the gun, and this 'fingerprint' is unique for every single firearm. Even small-time criminals are not dumb enough to use a registered weapon for a crime. This is why almost all guns used in crimes are not bought legally, but bought off the black market, which can be done whether or not guns are legal. Thus, gun control only prevents law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves.


Edited by ArmenianSurvival - 17-Mar-2009 at 01:40
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Maharbbal View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
  Quote Maharbbal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Mar-2009 at 16:27
Originally posted by pinguin

There is a simple solution to stop criminality. You put emergency state, close a whole neighbourhood and put the army to inspect house by house everybody.
There the guns, drugs and everything else appeares, and the criminals that oppose are shot in site. For the rest, you pick the people involved in drugs, that own guns, etc. and send them to a concentration camp.
 
Democracy is soft to stop countries that are in state of anarchy. Sometimes tougher measures are requered.
 

You, Chilean joker, always ready to start a military dictature ain't ya?

Armenian survival, I don't sincerly hope to convince you but let me expose my point calmly:

Letw take a world where people can allocate their ressources whether to productive endeavours, or to "protection". We'll all agree that it is best to have every one investng as much as possible in production. Of course to preserves one's production comes a point when one has to invest in protection.

Protection is like any other activity: best done by professionals. You don't brew your beer, bake your own bread, teach math to your own kids or build your own car. You know it would be a loss of time and energy to do so, you trust professionals. On the other hand, people trust to do for them whatever it is you do best (in your case doctor if I am not mistaaking). Why would this be any different for protection? I want my bread to be as good as possible and as cheap as possible: I trust my baker. I want my protection to be as good and cheap as possible (so I can allocate as much resources as possible to production).

So saying that every one should get a gun is about as smart as saying that every one should bake his own bread or teach his own kids math!

There is worth, one's spendings in protection are correlated with one's neighbours' spending in protection. You don't want to be the only one without an alarm in the street. You don't want to be the only one without a gun in the bloc because whose to say that thy neighbour is going to use his in a sensible manner. So every penny I spend on protection induces my surrounding to spend two... meanwhile productive spendings plummet. So the beginning of an arm race is not some begnine event, it's the start of a very vicious circle.

Guns are a very expensive mean of protection (the price of the weapon, the safety devices, ideally the training, the accidents, the stolen firearms used by criminals). I think Mexico is the typical case when a strong and collective protection system ought to be put forward. Just look at C. Juarez, 2000 extra soldiers did in a few weeks what 100,000 guns would have taken years to achieve. The state is rightfully accused of getting a lot of things badly worng; but when it comes to violence and protection (the core of its business) it is still the best.

I am a free donkey!
Back to Top
eaglecap View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 15-Feb-2005
Location: ArizonaUSA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3959
  Quote eaglecap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Mar-2009 at 18:04
Protection is like any other activity: best done by professionals.

You have got to be kidding!!
Home invasions are getting really bad in some of our cities so if this happens you are saying call the professionals- meaning the police. Right, by the time the police arrive the victims would either be dead or very traumatized and the low-lives gone.

Now with a trusty 9mm well it is either them or me!! I would rather not kill someone because I value human life but I also do not believe in taking the chance they have the same values.

Making guns illegal in the USA will not stop them from entering Mexico via the black market and if read the article I posted then you will see most illegal guns are entering Mexico are from elsewhere.


http://www.spokesmanreview.com/tools/story_pf.asp?ID=66561

wait for the police right!!

You know this is a very hot topic and it will only go in circles but the main point is about Mexico where law and order seems to be falling apart and spreading across the border. I live near the Mexican border so that concerns me and if one of these thugs tries to hurt me or any family member I have the right to protect myself; via a gun or any other means.

It also concerns me about the many innocent Mexicans who oppose the violence but are victims. Many of their business men are fleeing to the USA for refuge. I have been to Mexico enough to know that most hate the corruption and violence. In Mazatlan I witnessed a peaceful protest of Mexican citizens against corruptions and violence in government. One way but for another topic end NAFTA and help the small farmers rebuild but that won't happen.
Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Mar-2009 at 18:14
Originally posted by Maharbbal

Originally posted by pinguin

There is a simple solution to stop criminality. You put emergency state, close a whole neighbourhood and put the army to inspect house by house everybody.
There the guns, drugs and everything else appeares, and the criminals that oppose are shot in site. For the rest, you pick the people involved in drugs, that own guns, etc. and send them to a concentration camp.
 
Democracy is soft to stop countries that are in state of anarchy. Sometimes tougher measures are requered.

You, Chilean joker, always ready to start a military dictature ain't ya?

 
Who is talking about military dictatures? This is what our democratically elected government does to control criminality in our worst neighbourhoods. I am talking about today. No kidding. Well, the state don't use the army, but our militarized police. It doesn't proclaim a nationwide state of emergency, but it declare a thoublesome neighbour "out of control" and under direct intervention by the state.
 
 


Edited by pinguin - 17-Mar-2009 at 18:18
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.184 seconds.