Mexico drug war: the new killing fields

[Ban Hammer 13,508]

If it would be better to introduce conscription to solve this problem, then that's fine, but simply suggesting that tossing civilians guns is going to make things better, as I said, I believe you are totally misunderstanding what it takes to change this situation. The problem is that these gangs terrorize, they do so by killing not only people who threaten their livelihood, but by targeting families, they are organized, they are gangs and they are thugs. Do you remember reading the OP where the mayor said Momentarily dropping the charade, Luque mentions he has no bodyguard. "What would be the point? If they decide to kill you then there would be two bodies instead of one." Who would "they" be? The mayor smiles again. "I really don't know." He has the opportunity to protect himself but feels he is better off not doing so, why is that?

and again; For protection De La Rosa sleeps across the border in El Paso and travels to Juárez every day with 12 bodyguards. In between fielding phone calls on the latest atrocities and rumours he coaxes testimony from frightened families.

They do not want fricking guns, they want politicians who are honest, a police force that isn't corrupt and a government that takes this problem seriously and cleans it up. Without that, arming these peaple would simply be putting a target on their backs. I find it odd that you are unable to see that.

um you do know that the mexican military is conscripted?

the best way to achieve a professional military is volunteer only.

and yes, i read the article - there are no simple answers, yet conscription certainly won't be the answer. one thing missing is an armed population, but you refuse to consider that.

[Peikko 1,575]

um you do know that the mexican military is conscripted?

the best way to achieve a professional military is volunteer only.

and yes, i read the article - there are no simple answers, yet conscription certainly won't be the answer. one thing missing is an armed population, but you refuse to consider that.

No, I did not know it was conscripted. What I meant however was enlisting the local populations as part of a properly armed and trained organization. Why would tossing the civilians arms be better, particularly considering the fire power and organization of the drug gangs?

Do you think that the American army should arm civilian afghans in order to solve the problems over their?

Edited September 5, 2010 by Madame Cleo

[SuperDuper! 230]

[Ban Hammer 13,508]

No, I did not know it was conscripted. What I meant however was enlisting the local populations as part of a properly armed and trained organization. Why would tossing the civilians arms be better, particularly considering the fire power and organization of the drug gangs?

Do you think that the American army should arm civilian afghans in order to solve the problems over their?

so you're suggesting a militia then.

[mawilson 2,133]

Yes, how dare I imagine that being armed in this situation would make things worse rather than better.

It would make them less of a target. Criminals tend not to attack people with guns.

[Peikko 1,575]

It would make them less of a target. Criminals tend not to attack people with guns.

These gangs do not care.

[Ban Hammer 13,508]

These gangs do not care.

what leads you to the conclusion there's a bunch of kamikaze drug dealers in mexico?

[Peikko 1,575]

so you're suggesting a militia then.

It might be part of a consolidated solution, yes. However, without addressing the fundamental issues, such as corruption in politics and the police force, it would not be a lasting solution.

[mawilson 2,133]

These gangs do not care.

They don't care because they haven't met much resistance.

[Peikko 1,575]

what leads you to the conclusion there's a bunch of kamikaze drug dealers in mexico?

They are violent thugs for the most part, why would armed citizens bother them when armed police and military do not?

[mawilson 2,133]

They are violent thugs for the most part, why would armed citizens bother them when armed police and military do not?

Precisely because armed police and military do not. Somebody has to.

[Peikko 1,575]

They don't care because they haven't met much resistance.

No resistance? The gangs fight each other in a constant battle for supremacy and you think a few armed citizens are going to register as resistance?

[Peikko 1,575]

Precisely because armed police and military do not. Somebody has to.

That does not make any sense. The answer is to eliminate the corruption and get the proper authorities to do their jobs, not paint targets on the backs of more people who have no hope of sorting the mess out.

[Ban Hammer 13,508]

They are violent thugs for the most part, why would armed citizens bother them when armed police and military do not?

probably because there would be a hell of a lot more of them!

[mawilson 2,133]

That does not make any sense. The answer is to eliminate the corruption and get the proper authorities to do their jobs, not paint targets on the backs of more people who have no hope of sorting the mess out.

What are you, some kind of pacifist tree hugging vegetarian?