The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: twyacht on November 30, 2010, 09:17:11 PM
-
And our border are still wide open,....those that step up, are gunned down. She was appointed Oct. 9. Sounds like we're losing a battle that effects OUR borders, and the Dream Act is still pending.
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2010/11/30/woman-police-chief-slain-mexico-1747116950/
News
Woman Police Chief Slain in Mexico
Published November 30, 2010
The woman leading the police department in the northern Mexican town of Meoqui was slain while driving to work, the Chihuahua state Attorney General's Office said Monday.
Hermila García was named last month as chief of the 90-strong police force in Meoqui, located 70 kilometers (43 miles) from Chihuahua city, the state capital.
García was found fatally shot in her car at a spot near her home about 10 kilometers (6 miles) from the town center, the AG's office said.
Authorities suspect the police chief, whose prior experience included working as an investigator for the federal AG's office, was murdered by gunmen working for drug traffickers or other organized crime elements.
Chihuahua, which borders Texas, has three other female police chiefs, including 20-year-old criminology student Marisol Valles, recently appointed the top law enforcement officer in Praxedis G. Guerrero.
***
And our gov't would rather prosecute AZ, send NG troops for logistical/ admin support only, instead of defending our borders. Yet the Minutemen are shunned....
Makes me sick.
-
The only real solutions to the problem are:
1) Legalize drugs, which would cut off the money flowing to the cartels.
2) Aggressively enforce border security on our side AND take the fight to the cartels in Mexico.
These solutions are basically pipe dreams, however. Aside from the social and political objections to either scenario, there are way too many people making way too much money (including our government) on "fighting" the drug war. Just my opinion, FWIW.
Swoop
-
And our gov't would rather prosecute AZ, send NG troops for logistical/ admin support only, instead of defending our borders. Yet the Minutemen are shunned....
That's 'cause the real problem is them danged AZ legislators... not the tons of illegals selling drugs, kidnapping people, robbing 7-11 stores and increasing the costs of education, emergency services and welfare. Ya jus' don' gettit, do ya Sunshine?
It's not easy being Eric Holder, but some a$$hole's gotta do it!
-
The only real solutions to the problem are:
1) Legalize drugs, which would cut off the money flowing to the cartels.
2) Aggressively enforce border security on our side AND take the fight to the cartels in Mexico.
These solutions are basically pipe dreams, however. Aside from the social and political objections to either scenario, there are way too many people making way too much money (including our government) on "fighting" the drug war. Just my opinion, FWIW.
Swoop
1 is a very bad idea. number 2 would solve a bunch of probs.
-
Amen Swoop. If we did both of those things, which are Constitutional in spirit and letter, we would be a lot better off. I'm with Tom. What the Hell is the Army for if not to defend our borders? Why should they be deployed thouseands of miles away to defend against potential threats when there is a real one right here? Why fight a drug war that has failed for 96 years and serves to fund clear and present dangers to our country? It makes no rational sense. Cut off the drug money and seal the border. Its really not logistically hard. Its just a matter of will.
FQ13
-
FQ, The real threat isn't in Mexico, it's in Washington and Ca.
-
1 is a very bad idea. number 2 would solve a bunch of probs.
I should have placed an "or" between the two, as I meant them to be separate solutions. In defense of scenario 1, any shift in the ratio of those who do drugs to those who don't, would be statistically insignificant. Those who would do drugs, more than likely, are already doing them anyway, regardless of legality. Legalization would simply take funding from the violent cartels and street gangs, as well as provide us tax dollars. This will never happen though, because of the vast number of drug related law enforcement jobs that would be lost, as well as the lack of social acceptance. Scenario 2, will never occur either, as I stated in my original post, due to social / political fallout. The demand part of the market will NEVER be eliminated, so until our government grows some cajones, this will continue to be a problem.
Swoop
-
They will just switch to other crimal activitys to make the same money.
-
I'm sure the cartels would switch to an alternate form of criminal activity, but the money definitely wouldn't be as plentiful nor as easily acquired. Just consider how the end of prohibition affected organized crime.
Swoop
-
I'm honestly not worryed about the cartels, I'm worryed about the low level street guys.
They could very easily turn to kidnapping( like they already do thru out latin america), robbery, "protection", slavery, other crimes...
It will happen.
-
I'm honestly not worryed about the cartels, I'm worryed about the low level street guys.
They could very easily turn to kidnapping( like they already do thru out latin america), robbery, "protection", slavery, other crimes...
It will happen.
They already have. Its why I go off the Libertarian reservation and oppose legalizing prostitution until we seal the border. Too many girls are offered jobs as "maids" and then get forced into brothels. Close the borders and the problem greatly decreases as you won't have the super vulnerable population to prey on. As far as kidnaping and such? Drugs fuel it as it lets them buy weapons and lawyers. Kidnap for ransom used to be a thriving business here. The FBI pretty much shut it down outside of ethnic communities who won't go to the police or have vulnerable folks back home. Again, closing the border solves a lot of this problem. It needs to be done. Its hard now. It will be impossible later. There is a point where an un-PC Operation Wetback type program could do a world of good on both sides of the border. As far as "not militarizing the border"? Why the hell not? Who cares if it irritates Mexico? What are they going to do? Drop out of NAFTA? Stop encouraging their citizens to go north? Somehow, I think I can live with that.
FQ13
-
Who cares if it irritates Mexico? What are they going to do? Drop out of NAFTA? Stop encouraging their citizens to go north? Somehow, I think I can live with that.
Big +1, it would be nice if everyone shared that opinion! I would just like to add that Mexico's terrible acts of retribution should also include sending me a fat stack of cash and a beautiful Seniorita. Boy, that would show me! ;D
Swoop
-
Big +1, it would be nice if everyone shared that opinion! I would just like to add that Mexico's terrible acts of retribution should also include sending me a fat stack of cash and a beautiful Seniorita. Boy, that would show me! ;D
Swoop
If they throw in the senorita, I'd be willing to offer a tour of the Alamo. ;)
FQ13
-
I should have placed an "or" between the two, as I meant them to be separate solutions. In defense of scenario 1, any shift in the ratio of those who do drugs to those who don't, would be statistically insignificant. Those who would do drugs, more than likely, are already doing them anyway, regardless of legality. Legalization would simply take funding from the violent cartels and street gangs, as well as provide us tax dollars. This will never happen though, because of the vast number of drug related law enforcement jobs that would be lost, as well as the lack of social acceptance. Scenario 2, will never occur either, as I stated in my original post, due to social / political fallout. The demand part of the market will NEVER be eliminated, so until our government grows some cajones, this will continue to be a problem.
Swoop
The money saved by not funding the obviously ineffectual "War on drugs" could be added to the tax revenue generated by legal sales to cut your taxes, or at least put toward lowering the deficit. Legalization would lower overhead, transportation and risk costs which would lower the sale price which in turn would lower the profit margin .
Third, legalization would give competing retailers a forum to settle disputes in court rather than through killings and drive by's.
Those who argue otherwise are simply indoctrinated to believe lies that ignore the history of the turn of the century when these items were perfectly legal. Remember, Coca-cola was originally formulated with Cola nuts, and Cocaine.