Slashdot Mirror
Narco-Blogger Beats Mexico Drug War News Blackout
An anonymous reader writes "An anonymous, twentysomething blogger is giving Mexicans what they can't get elsewhere — an inside view of their country's raging drug war. Operating from behind a thick curtain of computer security, Blog del Narco in less than six months has become Mexico's go-to Internet site at a time when mainstream media are feeling pressure and threats to stay away from the story. Many postings, including warnings and a beheading, appear to come directly from drug traffickers. Others depict crime scenes accessible only to military or police."
http://www.blogdelnarco.com/
I'm a mexican living in Mexico. I won't go as far as saying that it is hell on earth, but it is getting pretty gruesome. And that's just from what you hear on the news!
Then I started diggin in alternate sources, such as blog del narco, and damn, was I missing out on all the news!
Just recently I bumped into this story about Ciudad Juarez. The story both gives hope and scares the crap out of you. No sign of that story on the two most widely spread newspapers in Mexico, though. They're just sweeping it under the rug.
I wonder if blog del narco featured it...
I'll stop buying drugs as soon as everyone else stops buying diamonds.
I'm not a really pro-gun person, but really, considering they're selling something that's illegal to make, traffic and sell... I can't see them having a hard time making, trafficking or selling guns either if they were illegal.
Especially with the news of numerous corrupt police and government officials in the whole drug war, I can't see it being too hard for them to 'somehow' get a bunch of military weapons if they needed to.
Which is why you only buy locally grown.
You should be very careful to distinguish how the guns come from the US...
The US is, in fact, a pretty decent place for civilians to buy moderately zesty firearms without too much hassle. However, the US government also has a habit of handing out all sorts of military-grade goodies to governments it considers to be friends and allies.
Mexican security forces, for reasons that aren't all that hard to understand, has had some trouble stemming corruption and even the flow of former personnel into cartel forces. "Los Zetas" for instance, are largely ex-security forces, now working for the cartels.
Obviously, there is no point in arguing that none of the guns being used in Mexico are of US origin. That is almost certainly wrong, I suspect a reasonable percentage of them are. The question, though, is are they diverted hardware from the American civilian market or are they American military aid being lost because of Mexican government corruption? Both types are "American Guns"; but they have very different policy implications...
Legalize it all damn ready. Seriously, executive order, make it happen.
I debated on whether to use my mod points to mod this comment down as a troll, or to forgo the ego trip and answer the question.
The answer, as it turns out, is "not from the U.S."
Although the Mexican gov't has repeatedly asserted that U.S. is to blame for the flow of guns into Mexico, some forget that the U.S. has sent millions of firearms to various Central and South American factions, firearms that are readily available in Mexico (and not as a result of any 2nd Amendment rights bestowed on U.S. citizens). Or for your consideration: The blatant distortion of facts by which Mexican officials who, while claiming that 80-90% of the arms in Mexico come from the U.S. fail to mention that the number is extrapolated from a small sample of guns sent to the U.S. that could be traced. This fallacy is substantiated by numbers reported by the ATF in which Mexican authorities confiscated 29,000 firearms in 2008, of which only 5,000 were traceable to the U.S.
It's really quite sad that the world learned nothing from the US' futile attempt to outlaw alcohol in the 1920's. No one is saying drugs are good. They are quite bad, but making them illegal makes them much, much worse. I wish politicians didn't care about looking "soft on crime" in dealing with the drug war, and they could actually push to try to overturn this quixotic war. Make them legal and undercut the illegal drug trade which is fueled by their artificially inflated illegal prices. We saw all the same stuff during alcohol prohibition. The extreme corruption, the gang wars, the bad moonshine that made people go permanently blind, people using/selling more potent forms because it's easier to transport. It's all avoidable, but no one will push the issue because they're instantly shot down for being "soft on drugs"
I die a little inside every time I hear a story about drug gangs basically taking over cities in Mexico and kidnapping people. Think of the people women whose husbands have been kidnapped and they receive pieces of them with ransom notes asking for money that they don't have. This is what could've happened if they kept up alcohol prohibition. Drug prohibition is just as ill-conceived. The better we do reducing supply, the higher the prices go, and the more vicious the drug gangs get in protecting their business.
It's a terrible cycle, and one that can only be broken by regulation. They need to make drugs legal through special outlets stocked with health care workers, where people can safely obtain their drugs and use the proceeds to pay for the addiction specialists and treatment centers. There's nothing we can do except address the problem of addiction, and treat such users as patients, not criminals. Is it perfect? Probably not, but it's a start.
1: Most guns in Mexico come from central america or from the mexican givernment/military. See those pictures of the drug lords with H&K G3 rifles or MP5 submachine guns? Yeah, those couldn't have come from America. We can't get those here. (Well, we can, but they're 30k or more)
2. Very few americans own M-16's. As in less than a thousand most likely. Why? Because the process of purchasing a fully automatic firearm is such a pain that most people don't go through with it. Do you want the ATF to have a sheet of paper where you signed a waiver allowing them to walk into your home at any point, on ant day, without notice to search your home? Neither do most of us, and that's EXACTLY what you have to do to own a fully automatic firearm in this country.
Those of us who do own full auto firearms fall into three categories:
A: Law abiding citizens who like firearms and enjoy shooting. We pay our taxes, don't dream of murdering people, and largely consider our autos to be investments much like classic cars or sports memorabillia.
B: Criminals and thugs who don't go through the proper, legal channels to purchase their weapons (I use the word weapon here intentionally, as it is these people who consider their firearms to be weapons, and intend on using them.) Outlawing firearms will not affect these people in the least as it is already illegal for them to own these firearms. When guns DO move across the border (not often as Mexico throws anyone entering their country with even a single round of ammo into jail for 20+ years) it is these outlaws and criminals who do the moving and selling.
C: Fringe elements made up of crazy mountain men and people who consider their friends to be a militia of some sort and are still out in the woods each weekend preparing for the Soviet Union to invade their small town. Really? Are you worried about these people taking over your country? They aren't a threat to anything except their local dentist's children getting the money for college... Sure, they're vocal and love making a spectacle, but they're on every watch list in the country and are largely law abiding citizens like group A. Those who fall into group B don't usually last more than a year or two before the ATF is at their door taking their toys to the furnace and hauling them off to federal prison for drug or firearms charges.
Being scared of an armed citizenry is about as sane as being scared of dogs. Sure, there are bad apples out there, but just because one in ten dogs have bitten someone doesn't mean that your neighbors lab is about to rip into your leg as you walk by...
I carry a pistol every day. You know how many people I've ever shot? none.
The other day I was at the grocery store and a woman saw my pistol. When she noticed that the hammer was back (the proper way to carry a 1911 is with a round in the chamber, the hammer back, and the safety on) she asked me "Isn't that dangerous."
My answer to her: "Yes, that's the point of owning a pistol. They're dangerous when you need them to be."
She smiled, got the point, and went about her day.
--Forest C. Adcock--
No, the GP is correct. It is prohibition and the resulting corruption of the authorities that is causing the bloodshed. We haven't learned the lesson of alcohol prohibition yet. So the war will continue until then. This is not an NRA issue at all. It should be a lesson of how power corrupts. Legalize now, and the gangs will be out of business before the week is out.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
How many alcohol cartels are out killing people right now? Only where there is prohibition do you have this problem. The demand will always be there. In fact it's possible the cartels are the ones who threaten politicians if they don't impose prohibition to begin with. Oh damn! I just made your point. Well, I suppose we could organize a boycott... Then again you could read up on the Opium Wars of the 1850s..
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone