Mexico is screwed

[Peter Cremer]

This is what happens when the government makes it illegal for citizens to own firearms. You don't hear the anti-gun groups bragging about Mexico's unarmed citizens. Only the army, police, and drug cartels are allowed to have guns. Having corrupt army units and police forces doesn't help.

[Von Due]

Originally Posted by Peter Cremer

This is what happens when the government makes it illegal for citizens to own firearms. You don't hear the anti-gun groups bragging about Mexico's unarmed citizens. Only the army, police, and drug cartels are allowed to have guns. Having corrupt army units and police forces doesn't help.

You are pro gun. I get that but the pro gun arguementation is really out of place here. The reasons then? Try poverty and rampant corruption since pretty much day 1 in Mexico's existence. Hand in hand, they make the breeding ground for drug gangs -> cartels. More guns is not how you solve that.

[Catfish]

Most probably a drug cartel murder. If you read one of Winslow's books.. the situation is really unbelievably ugly. I can understand anyone who wants to flee from there.

Guns, of course. But even if all Mexicans were allowed to bear arms, it would just be a neverending civil war, against the drug animals.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Most probably a drug cartel murder. If you read one of Winslow's books.. the situation is really unbelievably ugly. I can understand anyone who wants to flee from there.

Guns, of course. But even if all Mexicans were allowed to bear arms, it would just be a neverending civil war, against the drug animals.

True, but at least it would be a fight

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Peter Cremer

This is what happens when the government makes it illegal for citizens to own firearms. You don't hear the anti-gun groups bragging about Mexico's unarmed citizens. Only the army, police, and drug cartels are allowed to have guns. Having corrupt army units and police forces doesn't help.

Mexicans are allowed to buy and own firearms.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Mexicans are allowed to buy and own firearms.

i see your 1 eye roll and raise you 1 eye roll as Pete seems to make a good point. I wonder too if the gun used was part of 'Project Gun Runner'.


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mexican...ns-but-few-do/

MEXICO CITY - There’s just one place in all of Mexico where you can legally buy a gun. It’s tucked away in an anonymous building on an army base in the capital, staffed by soldiers.
Mexico’s constitution guarantees citizens’ right to own a handgun and hunting rifles for self-defense and sport. Legally getting your hands on one, however, requires clearing a series of bureaucratic hurdles far stricter than in the U.S. and, for many customers, traveling great distances to reach the country’s lone gun store.
In fact, most of Mexico’s 120 million inhabitants probably don’t even know about the Directorate of Arms and Munitions Sales – it’s prohibited from advertising any of its goods or the mere fact that it exists.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

i see your 1 eye roll and raise you 1 eye roll as Pete seems to make a good point.

He tries to make a pro-gun case by saying "Look! This is what happens when the government makes it illegal for citizens to own firearms" which in this case is incorrect since one can buy and own a firearm in Mexico.

[Catfish]

Since the main problem is the cartels and drugs, it would be better to concentrate on that.
Or, to rephrase:
From where do the drug cartels get the money for their 'infrastructure', and arms?
Where do they mostly sell their drugs?
Any chance to come to grips with drug consumption, or to handle that aspect?

How would those cartels fare if drugs were legalized, in the US? I mean it won't happen and i'm not a friend of such policies, just a what-if

[Skybird]

I recently read a bit about the city satate oif Singapore. Singapore has some of the most "draconic" laws in rule one could imagine. For exmaple, drug offences all too moften trigger the detah penalty. But it is a city that has no major drug problems, and is one of the safiest citie son the planet.


The firat amndinstrator of the city experienced the occupation of China by the Japanese. This man said that although people were poor, were suffering and had not much to own at all, they remained to be hoinest and stayed away from becoming criminal. That was becasue the Japanese punished even minor crimes and offences with very drastically. Dratsical punishment does work, he concluded, and form the views of Behaviorism and the research for it done in the 50s and 60s, I also would say that it is expected to work.


What this man also concluded was that the Western law philosphy of resocialising b efore punishment, and endless patience, and that if people are well situated and live in a socially stable environment they would not become criminal, does not work. And that is my reasoning, too: it works at least extremely badly.



Somebody has to go into Mexico, and enforce a draconic sanctioning of crime and malicious anarchy. Three eyes for one eye, six teeth for one teeth - this kind of law and order. Were you see corruption, kill the corrupted. Wipe the cirminals out, no matter whether small fishes or big bosses.


This is th eonly thing that will work. Nobody likes ot hear that, I do not olike to say it. But that is the only thing that could work. Mexico more and more becomes a growing wound inside thr two Americas, and like any bodily infection it will start to - and already does - spread.



Not just since reading about Singapore I think that the Western law system is very severly messed up with it resocialising prioprity. It just does not work. I also do not like it for always putting emphasis on the interests and outlook of the perpetrator, and minimises the attention and interest for tzhe victims.



A wall is only a temporary measure a slong as it is not as tight as the inner German deathzone was, or the NorthKorean-SouthKorean border is - including shoot-to-kill orders. Mexico must be pacified, and you cannot have that without a full military invasion, and a super-tough crackdown on corrupted elites and organised crime. The US has messed arpound for far less riobust interests in Irak, afghanistan, Soimalia, and elsewhere. But Mexico it leaves untouched although of all these possible and/or real scenarios Mexico is the clearest and biggest danger to the US?


Okay. Not my place, not my interest. Just saying. Just one thing is clear by now: Mexico by now is a 100% failed state. With all negative consequences that come from that and that radiate into the neighbouring states.

[Catfish]

^ All good and well in theory.

Of course an invasion and killing all of the bastards will work. We have seen this in Germany after WW2, when all the former elites were instantly re-installed, to get at least a bit of control over a wrecked country. 'De-Nazification', my donkey. This was the reason for the '68 student revolts, when the young found out about reality.
Singapore is a very bad example, Asians are way more easily brought under control by draconic measures, while Mexicans will more probably revolt. Of course "you" can shoot them all.

What you and a lot more seem to completely misunderstand is where the root of the problem is. Even shooting them all will not cure the problem, only the symptom – if at all.

The US agency DEA fights a decades long war against the drug cartels, against corrupt politicians and against the Mafia. And both are situated in.. the US.
Another problem is the CIA. When Reagan (ab)used the CIA to deal with drugs and finance some of his invasions, the DEA, while having a hard time doing so, exposed all of those lies and drug deals. This information was not directly suppressed, it was just that nobody wanted to hear about it.
The genereal philosophy is like "There is always going to be a drug trade and a drug cartel, it might as well be our drug cartel."

If you invade Mexico and "kill all", Columbia will gladly get into business. And then there is Afghanistan. And so on.
There is a heroine epidemic in the USA, but also in parts of Europe. As long as this persists, there is no easy final solution.

Some more info on one of the drug lords:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/don-wi...about-el-chapo

[Armistead]

Originally Posted by Dowly

Mexicans are allowed to buy and own firearms.

Legally they can per their constitution, but there is a catch. It's rather costly and regulated, but the kicker is, there's only one location ran by the govt in all of Mexico a gun can be purchased, so legal ownership is very low. However, say some law was passed with a mass arming of citizens, I don't know that would solve anything since there's no true system of law and order in many towns. You would almost need a revolution of righteous people, but the economics aren't there to back it up. Mexico is really in a state of war and I would put our military on the border to shut it down.

[Aktungbby]

Originally Posted by Armistead

I don't know that would solve anything since there's no true system of law and order in many towns.

NUTHIN' GOOD GOES OUTTA STYLE...HOMBRE!

[Spectre-63]

Originally Posted by Armistead

Legally they can per their constitution, but there is a catch. It's rather costly and regulated, but the kicker is, there's only one location ran by the govt in all of Mexico a gun can be purchased, so legal ownership is very low. However, say some law was passed with a mass arming of citizens, I don't know that would solve anything since there's no true system of law and order in many towns. You would almost need a revolution of righteous people, but the economics aren't there to back it up. Mexico is really in a state of war and I would put our military on the border to shut it down.

This is exactly the problem! When the government limits access, particularly on this scale, the right to firearm ownership is there in name only.

[Von Due]

A hint of how crazy the situation is
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-44597807

[Rockstar]

NSFW - NSFW - NSFW but very very relevant and hilarious