HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » When Men Hate Women: Fem...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:08 AM

When Men Hate Women: Femicide in Ciudad Juarez

The border area between El Paso, TX and Ciudad Juarez is the site of the most prolific wave of serial killing in modern history. Juarez exemplifies just how deadly misogyny is. Lest you think this is something that can be blamed entirely on Mexico, understand this is a border area where people travel back and forth. The killers might just as easily be Americans as Mexicans, or even both.

Edit: Some sources say up to 4000 women have been killed. This entry is courtesy of Squinch:

"Between the years of 1993 and 2003 in Juárez there had been over 4000 feminicides which have attracted wide attention. Bodies were often dumped in ditches or vacant lots. Grassroots organizations in the region reported an additional 400 women as missing. Despite pressure to catch the killers and a roundup of some suspects, few believe the true culprits were found"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciudad_Ju%C3%A1rez


For the last dozen years, fronteriz@s (border people) in the Ciudad Juárez-El Paso metropolitan area have heard shocking reports about women-killing, known as femicide (or in Mexico, feminicidio). About one of every three of the 370 women murdered since 1993 was a young teen who died as a result of grotesque, sexualized torture, according to non-governmental organization (NGO) lists, official reports and Amnesty International’s 2003 monograph, Intolerable Killings. The young women were raped and mutilated, and their bodies dumped in the desert periphery or on city streets. Since 1993, about thirty women have been murdered annually in the Juárez metropolitan area of more than two million people. Even higher rates of homicide exist among Juárez males: more than 200 men are murdered each year, though not tortured sexually.

There is more to this story and its tragedies than the victims, the violence and the eventual demonization of Mexico’s fifth largest city. Mothers of the murdered daughters began to organize in the 1990s, and their efforts have inspired many human rights and feminist activists, as well as some ordinary citizens, to raise awareness about violence against women and about public insecurity generally. Although the mothers have not obtained justice for their daughters, civil society activism is leading toward deeper democracy and a more genuine “rule of law” on the border.

http://www.drclas.harvard.edu/publications/revistaonline/winter-2008/other-side-ciudad-ju%C3%A1rez-femicide-story

&list=PL3F1F4D5212BF5C0D

Click through to YouTube to see the entire documentary. Video 1 gets stuck near the end, but if you click through to video 2 at that point, the videos automatically load in sequence.

244 replies, 26526 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 244 replies Author Time Post
Reply When Men Hate Women: Femicide in Ciudad Juarez (Original post)
BainsBane Jun 2013 OP
niyad Jun 2013 #1
rl6214 Jun 2013 #2
SoCalDem Jun 2013 #19
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #91
datasuspect Jun 2013 #121
rl6214 Jun 2013 #127
datasuspect Jun 2013 #187
BainsBane Jun 2013 #3
Monkie Jun 2013 #6
BainsBane Jun 2013 #7
Monkie Jun 2013 #8
BainsBane Jun 2013 #10
Monkie Jun 2013 #11
BainsBane Jun 2013 #12
antigone382 Jun 2013 #26
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #29
BainsBane Jun 2013 #31
senseandsensibility Jun 2013 #4
BainsBane Jun 2013 #5
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #16
BainsBane Jun 2013 #17
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #18
BainsBane Jun 2013 #20
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #23
BainsBane Jun 2013 #36
BainsBane Jun 2013 #21
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #28
BainsBane Jun 2013 #38
Squinch Jun 2013 #41
zazen Jun 2013 #107
BainsBane Jun 2013 #130
siligut Jun 2013 #9
BainsBane Jun 2013 #14
gejohnston Jun 2013 #125
BainsBane Jun 2013 #128
gejohnston Jun 2013 #132
BainsBane Jun 2013 #134
gejohnston Jun 2013 #136
BainsBane Jun 2013 #139
gejohnston Jun 2013 #140
BainsBane Jun 2013 #147
gejohnston Jun 2013 #153
BainsBane Jun 2013 #157
gejohnston Jun 2013 #173
BainsBane Jun 2013 #183
BainsBane Jun 2013 #151
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #163
BainsBane Jun 2013 #168
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #178
gejohnston Jun 2013 #174
BainsBane Jun 2013 #184
gejohnston Jun 2013 #188
BainsBane Jun 2013 #220
gejohnston Jun 2013 #232
BainsBane Jun 2013 #233
gejohnston Jun 2013 #235
BainsBane Jun 2013 #237
BainsBane Jun 2013 #13
BainsBane Jun 2013 #15
hack89 Jun 2013 #30
BainsBane Jun 2013 #40
hack89 Jun 2013 #56
BainsBane Jun 2013 #57
hack89 Jun 2013 #58
BainsBane Jun 2013 #59
hack89 Jun 2013 #61
BainsBane Jun 2013 #63
hack89 Jun 2013 #67
BainsBane Jun 2013 #69
hack89 Jun 2013 #70
BainsBane Jun 2013 #72
hack89 Jun 2013 #73
BainsBane Jun 2013 #74
tammywammy Jun 2013 #76
hack89 Jun 2013 #77
BainsBane Jun 2013 #79
BainsBane Jun 2013 #75
hack89 Jun 2013 #78
BainsBane Jun 2013 #80
hack89 Jun 2013 #106
BainsBane Jun 2013 #129
tammywammy Jun 2013 #131
BainsBane Jun 2013 #149
hack89 Jun 2013 #133
BainsBane Jun 2013 #150
hack89 Jun 2013 #166
BainsBane Jun 2013 #169
hack89 Jun 2013 #179
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #180
BainsBane Jun 2013 #238
NaturalHigh Jun 2013 #55
BainsBane Jun 2013 #60
NaturalHigh Jun 2013 #62
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #82
BainsBane Jun 2013 #84
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #90
BainsBane Jun 2013 #92
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #110
LanternWaste Jun 2013 #116
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #120
BainsBane Jun 2013 #141
BainsBane Jun 2013 #94
BainsBane Jun 2013 #95
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #111
BainsBane Jun 2013 #112
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #113
BainsBane Jun 2013 #143
hack89 Jun 2013 #145
BainsBane Jun 2013 #154
hack89 Jun 2013 #167
BainsBane Jun 2013 #171
hack89 Jun 2013 #177
BainsBane Jun 2013 #193
hack89 Jun 2013 #196
BainsBane Jun 2013 #200
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #204
BainsBane Jun 2013 #205
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #206
BainsBane Jun 2013 #208
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #211
BainsBane Jun 2013 #227
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #241
BainsBane Jun 2013 #209
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #217
BainsBane Jun 2013 #228
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #242
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #181
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #176
BainsBane Jun 2013 #186
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #198
BainsBane Jun 2013 #240
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #244
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #22
galileoreloaded Jun 2013 #24
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #25
galileoreloaded Jun 2013 #27
BainsBane Jun 2013 #33
galileoreloaded Jun 2013 #39
lumberjack_jeff Jun 2013 #47
BainsBane Jun 2013 #49
Squinch Jun 2013 #54
BainsBane Jun 2013 #64
Squinch Jun 2013 #66
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #83
BainsBane Jun 2013 #85
BainsBane Jun 2013 #87
WinkyDink Jun 2013 #43
galileoreloaded Jun 2013 #44
WinkyDink Jun 2013 #46
galileoreloaded Jun 2013 #48
BainsBane Jun 2013 #98
galileoreloaded Jun 2013 #101
BainsBane Jun 2013 #102
galileoreloaded Jun 2013 #103
BainsBane Jun 2013 #104
BainsBane Jun 2013 #51
BainsBane Jun 2013 #32
BainsBane Jun 2013 #34
WinkyDink Jun 2013 #42
BainsBane Jun 2013 #53
Squinch Jun 2013 #65
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #81
BainsBane Jun 2013 #97
Squinch Jun 2013 #124
niyad Jun 2013 #114
BainsBane Jun 2013 #35
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #86
BainsBane Jun 2013 #96
CokeMachine Jun 2013 #99
BainsBane Jun 2013 #100
CokeMachine Jun 2013 #118
BainsBane Jun 2013 #135
CokeMachine Jun 2013 #146
BainsBane Jun 2013 #156
CokeMachine Jun 2013 #207
BainsBane Jun 2013 #210
CokeMachine Jun 2013 #214
BainsBane Jun 2013 #216
CokeMachine Jun 2013 #218
BainsBane Jun 2013 #229
CokeMachine Jun 2013 #236
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #109
BainsBane Jun 2013 #138
gejohnston Jun 2013 #144
BainsBane Jun 2013 #152
gejohnston Jun 2013 #155
BainsBane Jun 2013 #158
gejohnston Jun 2013 #172
BainsBane Jun 2013 #182
gejohnston Jun 2013 #192
gejohnston Jun 2013 #202
BainsBane Jun 2013 #185
gejohnston Jun 2013 #190
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #197
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #175
BainsBane Jun 2013 #37
WinkyDink Jun 2013 #45
BainsBane Jun 2013 #71
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #88
BainsBane Jun 2013 #89
LanternWaste Jun 2013 #117
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #122
Squinch Jun 2013 #126
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #165
BainsBane Jun 2013 #225
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #243
Squinch Jun 2013 #239
arely staircase Jun 2013 #50
BainsBane Jun 2013 #52
Liberal_in_LA Jun 2013 #68
ismnotwasm Jun 2013 #93
BellaKos Jun 2013 #105
BainsBane Jun 2013 #108
duhneece Jun 2013 #137
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #201
niyad Jun 2013 #115
Catherina Jun 2013 #119
Quantess Jun 2013 #123
downbythelake Jun 2013 #142
BainsBane Jun 2013 #148
Pelican Jun 2013 #159
BainsBane Jun 2013 #160
BainsBane Jun 2013 #161
galileoreloaded Jun 2013 #162
BainsBane Jun 2013 #164
galileoreloaded Jun 2013 #199
BainsBane Jun 2013 #213
opiate69 Jun 2013 #223
BainsBane Jun 2013 #224
opiate69 Jun 2013 #230
BainsBane Jun 2013 #231
opiate69 Jun 2013 #234
Lizzie Poppet Jun 2013 #215
galileoreloaded Jun 2013 #221
Sunlei Jun 2013 #170
Bosso 63 Jun 2013 #189
BainsBane Jun 2013 #194
loose wheel Jun 2013 #191
BainsBane Jun 2013 #195
GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #203
BainsBane Jun 2013 #212
ismnotwasm Jun 2013 #219
BainsBane Jun 2013 #222
ismnotwasm Jun 2013 #226

Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:18 AM

1. k and r for this horrific story. I used to go to ciudad juarez years ago, when it was relatively

safe. the sheer woman-hatred now is almost mind-bending.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:26 AM

2. I live two miles from Juarez.

 

The Mexican men over there are extremely possessive , consider themselves all to be Don Juan's and act as if they own "their" women.

And they are correct about the back and forth across the border, although with the violence and murders I haven't crossed the border in 25 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #2)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:33 PM

19. The Madonna/Whore complex

As long as (some) men think of women in those terms only, all women are in danger. If a young woman is only a penis receptacle, they are as disposable as kleenex.

Even a wife with child is in danger because the macho-man they are with will eventually assume that they (the woman) are cheating on him, and maybe he prefers a younger woman anyway. If she is lucky enough to get away with the kids, she may be okay as long as she does not "bother" him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SoCalDem (Reply #19)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 11:02 PM

91. So true.

For those not familiar with the Modonna/Whore complex: Men who have accepted that view see women as either sluts or as pure as the Virgin Mary. The man wants a Virgin Mary for his wife so she will be faithful to him in marriage. She must prove to him that she is that pure. He tests her by trying to bed her. If he is able to get her into bed, then that is proof for him that she is a whore. In its extreme form, as we often see in Mexican culture, the man will view all women as whores, except his mother whom he will view as a Saint.

Of course the more women the man beds, even after the marriage, the more he views himself as a real man.

It is the double standard written in huge letters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #2)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 12:46 PM

121. ALL Mexican men consider themselves to be Don Juans

 

and you know that EVERY SINGLE Mexican male in existence thinks he is a Don Juan how?

how do you personally KNOW that EVERY SINGLE (ALL) Mexican male(s) acts as if he owns "his" woman?



let's ponder this . . .

on second thought what other categorical statements can you come up with regarding any other race, nationality, or ethnic group?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to datasuspect (Reply #121)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 06:07 PM

127. You take every comment literally?

 

I think your data is suspect

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #127)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 10:10 AM

187. your question doesn't make any sense

 

in this context.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:36 AM

3. The documentary links the killings to demand for drugs in the US

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #3)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:44 AM

6. book links it to NAFTA and the factories that sprung up at the border

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Monkie (Reply #6)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:45 AM

7. Maquilas predate NAFTA

In fact when NAFTA was being negotiated, there was talk that Maquilas might disappear. They haven't. The factories are American owned, however. And the employers do little to noting to secure the safety of their workers. Shifts start in the middle of the night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #7)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:50 AM

8. didnt realise it was as bad then

 

where i live in europe we didnt get that much news from the border region of mexico, being connected to the internet changed things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Monkie (Reply #8)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:59 AM

10. the murders kicked up around 1993

The border was a free trade region before NAFTA. Maquiladoras are American-owned factories that were able to export into the US tariff free before the NAFTA trade agreement existed. About 70% of their work force is women, most very young, and there are all kinds of accounts of women disappearing on their way to and from work. So there is no question there is a link to the US economy, but the connection to NAFTA in particular doesn't seem clear to me. Even that book summary talks about the rise of the maquilas in the 70s and 80s, which was before NAFTA was signed in 1994.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #10)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 12:05 PM

11. maybe NAFTA was too much of a shortcut

 

for saying factories that sprung up near the border due to trade with the US.
either way it only explains the conditions that made it easier for those men that hate women to kill with impunity.
add to that the fact that the murders are likely only the tip of the iceberg that is the abuse women suffer at the hands of men that hate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Monkie (Reply #11)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 12:39 PM

12. Indeed, and hatred of women

is likewise manifested in the appalling lack of concern police authorities display toward this horrific wave of murders. Then there is the narcotraficante who wore a woman's nipple as a necklace referenced in the documentary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #10)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:47 PM

26. I would guess that NAFTA contributed to a flood of new female workers to Juarez...

...following the destruction of much of Mexico's agricultural economy owing to the flood of cheap, subsidized U.S. corn into Mexican markets. That kind of population pressure leads to competition for scarce jobs. Combined with the fact that those jobs disproportionately go to the women who are perceived as being less troublesome by the employers, at the same time that they're perceived as violating gender norms by the men in their lives, and you have a recipe for disaster and holocaust.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigone382 (Reply #26)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 06:03 PM

29. Yours is the most reasonable guess. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to antigone382 (Reply #26)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 07:40 PM

31. That could well be the case

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:38 AM

4. It's not just Mexico

There have been many, many serial killers who target women in the same manner as these in the United States. Ted Bundy is one obvious example, but of course there have been so many others. The Green River Killer was very prolific.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to senseandsensibility (Reply #4)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:40 AM

5. Of course

And it's quite possible that Americans are going just over the boarder to kill women with impunity, just as rapists gravitate to the US military to act with impunity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #5)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:20 PM

16. Do you have any evidence that the killers are Americans crossing the border for kicks?

No evidence? Just your wild speculations? That's what I thought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #16)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:22 PM

17. WTF do you think? They act with impunity.

Watch the documentary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #17)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:32 PM

18. So you still don't have any evidence.

That so-called documentary isn't evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #18)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:35 PM

20. They haven't been caught

Obviously there is no evidence. You have no evidence of who they are either. You might learn something if you watched the documentary. Clearly you wouldn't want that to happen. Quit using serial killing as rhetorical fodder for your corrupt gun ploys. It is beyond repulsive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #20)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:45 PM

23. You are the one accusing Americans of doing the killing.

As the accuser the burden of proof is on you.

Elephant joke from the early 1960s.
1st - Why do elephants paint their toenail different colors?
2nd - I don't know. Why?
1st - To hide in the jellybean bowl.
1st - Have you ever seen an elephant hiding in the jellybean bowl?
2nd - No.
1st - They hide real well, don't they?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #23)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 07:57 PM

36. What difference does it make to you?

If you had bothered to watch the documentary or read anything, you would know there is no need to hide because there have been no investigations. I can't imagine what difference you think it makes if they are Mexican or American since you consider the deaths of those women so insignificant that you are angry that anyone dares to write about it.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #18)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:40 PM

21. from the Harvard, DRCLAS piece

SOME THEORIES

Who is killing the women of Juárez? Theories abound. The answers multiply, though are often speculative. Initially, fingers pointed to foreigners, and an Egyptian engineer and U.S.-convicted sex offender, Abdel Latif Sharif Sharif, was jailed; from his prison cell he allegedly hired gangs to continue killing women. Sharif died in prison, but it appears very unlikely he was responsible for any of the serial killings.
In extensive media attention on both sides of the border, more theorizing occurred about the identity of the killers and their psychopathic and material motives: snuff film makers, drug dealers engaged in sport to celebrate profits, police officers, organ harvesters, gang members, U.S.-registered sex offenders and the sons of rich families, known as “los juniors.” People are quick to blame machismo, an oversimplified term that Latinizes the gender power relational changes all over the world. Although we can discount wild theories involving snuff films and organ trafficking, the fact is that world experts on serial killing have been unable to identify the culprits through the botched evidence provided by the municipal and state police.
Although we cannot identify the killers at this time, we can contribute explanations for the political, economic, and institutional conditions that are responsible for public insecurity, shockingly extreme violence against women and judicial impunity. Our explanations are less dramatic but paint a more comprehensive picture. In so doing, we do not demonize Ciudad Juárez as the unique, women-killing stain on the international map. In fact, international NGOs like Amnesty International have more recently begun to generate awareness about even greater rates of femicide elsewhere in Mexico and other parts of the Americas, particularly Guatemala.
Ciudad Juárez sits at the frontlines of globalization that started well before the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that began officially in 1994. In the mid-1960s, Mexico established the Border Industrialization Program to encourage foreign investment and job creation in what began as feminized assembly-line production. From modest beginnings, the maquiladora labor force has grown to nearly a quarter-million workers in 300 plants in the city, most of them U.S. owned. Many workers migrated from Mexico’s interior; in fact, Ciudad Juárez is sometimes called a “city of migrants.”
At the outset, women represented about 80% of the assembly-line workers. By the early 21st century, the percentage of women in the maquiladora workforce diminished, but it is still more than half. In the 40 years of industrial production on the border, gender anxieties, threats and some male backlash have emerged in response to women’s greater earning power, however modest, in the formal workforce. The local media have sometimes expressed hostility toward the maquiladora women, most notably in the 1980s and early 1990s. Popular folklore often portrays these women as oversexed libertines who stay out late and dress provocatively, leading some politicians to blame the victims. However, by the late 1990s, the border media reflected massive outrage and soul-searching within the city.
What, then, is there about this industrial city that might aggravate violence along with high rates of femicide and homicide? We explore several issues in our context-situated explanations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #21)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 06:01 PM

28. From the Harvard DRCLAS piece:

we cannot identify the killers at this time

The piece proves nothing. Why don't you care about the thousands of men that are being killed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #28)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:08 PM

38. I do, which is why I work for gun control

Whereas you work to see arms distributed across the border, where they are used to kill men and women in Juarez.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #28)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:12 PM

41. Why are you making this a fight? Why does this conversation make you jump to being offended?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #21)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:03 AM

107. "although we discount wild theories like snuff films. . . "

I'd wager 50% of the sexual violence is filmed and distributed somehow. Snuff is killing--it's also all the fun bondage and torture up to the point where the woman at least doesn't have to feel pain anymore. I have no doubt there's a "genre" for gonzo South of the Border porn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zazen (Reply #107)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:14 PM

130. I wish I could say I disagreed.

Anything and everything is possible. There is no limit to the hatred of women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 11:54 AM

9. The TV series Weeds touched on this

During an episode when Nancy was dealing with a drug cartel which also enslaved women for the sex trade.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to siligut (Reply #9)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 08:06 PM

14. Sadly, these women in Juarez referenced above don't make it long enough

to be trafficked into slavery.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #14)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 05:16 PM

125. then again,

if Mexico's gun laws were not so overly strict, perhaps one of those women could have defended herself against him, saving the lives of would be victims. That is the only way gun laws would affect the outcome in these murders for these reasons:
The women were tortured and degraded. Like domestic males domestic abusers in general, the goal is to degrade the woman. Most domestic shootings in the US, it is usually the guy.
Most serial killers don't use guns, Son of Sam and Zodiac being among the exceptions.
Less than about 27 percent of Mexico's murders are with guns.

Meaning, while Mexico's gun murder rate is about 10 vs our 3.0 per 100K. Their murder rate is about 23.7 per 100K, while ours is 4.8

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #125)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:03 PM

128. I completely disproved that NRA propaganda

The idea that Mexico's laws are strict is a joke. The reason the murder rate is so high in Chihuahua and other northern states is because they are awash with guns. We're talking about a failed state because of the drug war and your friends in the gun lobby arming the cartels to the teeth. Have a look at this post about Murder rates in Mexico, which I will book mark. If gun bans were responsible for the deaths, the areas furthest from the border would have the highest murder rates, not those closest to the border that have the greatest access to guns. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3044851

You may need to google a map of Mexico to follow along. I hope you can manage that.

Now, I have that post in my journal for ready access the next time you try to peddle that particularly obviously false been of NRA propaganda. Should you again repeat that propaganda, I will clearly demonstrate to anyone in range, jurors, and the administrators that you are willfully and knowingly promoting false information.

If you were actually interested in the results of effective gun bans, you would point to Japan or the UK, but obviously the truth isn't nearly as convenient as NRA supplied bullshit designed to promote profits for the gun companies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #128)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:19 PM

132. actually you disproved nothing

It is basic criminology, not NRA anything. I suggest you take some criminology courses or use any search engine.

The idea that Mexico's laws are strict is a joke. We're talking about a failed state because of the drug war and your friends in the gun lobby arming the cartels to the teeth. Have a look at this post about Murder rates in Mexico, which I will book mark. And then if you repeat that propaganda in the future I can be sure to point out you would then be willfully and deliberately lying to promote guns.
Actually, the cartels are getting most of their guns through the southern border, and legal sales from the US government to the Mexican government but getting "redirected".

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110209-mexicos-gun-supply-and-90-percent-myth

Compare the high murder states with this map.
http://geo-mexico.com/?p=3536
Most of the "business disputes" also occur in those states.
I know exactly where it is. I have been there several times.

Have a look at this post about Murder rates in Mexico, which I will book mark. And then if you repeat that propaganda in the future I can be sure to point out you would then be willfully and deliberately lying to promote guns.
Show where I lied. GSC said it better than I could.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3045701

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #132)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:26 PM

134. You didn't even take time to look at the numbers

You didn't even bother to find a map of Mexico or look at the break down by state. IN other words, you avoid the truth and willfully falsify information for craven ideological purposes.

You're citing the same distorted RW source your fellow gunner did. It's not basic criminology. You would fail any college course were you so deliberately falsified information. The numbers don't hold up. That Sratfor distortion doesn't hold up either. I am dealing with that in a separate post.

I truly am sorry that truth means nothing to you and you can't even be bothered to examine evidence. That tells everyone exactly what you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #134)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:44 PM

136. project much?

You didn't even bother to find a map of Mexico or look at the break down by state. IN other words, you avoid the truth and willfully falsify information for craven ideological purposes.
Actually I did. I also knew where many of the states are without having to look it up. BTW, I think you are projecting since you are not offering any evidence of anything.

You're citing the same distorted RW source your fellow gunner did. It's not basic criminology. You would fail any college course were you so deliberately falsified information. The numbers don't hold up. That Sratfor distortion doesn't hold up either. I am dealing with that in a separate post.
Stratfor is a respectable and neutral private intelligence service. Can you prove that I falsified anything?

I
truly am sorry that truth means nothing to you and you can't even be bothered to examine evidence. That tells everyone exactly what you are.
sounds like projection to me.

One more thing, I'm guessing you don't know much about the US Southwest esp. Texas. El Paso is one of the US' oldest cities. Like many cities in Texas, New Mexico, and California, their existence predates Anglo settlement. The dialect and accent of Spanish is distinctive in Texas and is separate from central New Mexico. In fact, few Anglos moved from other states until air conditioning became common, and Sun City. I used to work for a guy from El Paso. His family didn't immigrate, the border crossed his ancestors. We were in a bar in Panama. The local folks could tell he was an American Hispanic from Texas just by his accent and dialect. So, "El Paso" does not equate to white. BTW, google Tejano Music and its origin. That is also why the term "buckaroo" is or was used more often in Texas and California for cowboys than in Wyoming or Alberta. Buckaroo is a poor Anglicization of the Spanish term Vaquero. IOW, all things cowboy/old west is Spanish/Mexican origin.
One last thing. That is the difference between a cattle ranch in Wyoming and a cattle farm in Florida. Ranch is an Anglicized loan word from Spanish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #136)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:55 PM

139. Here is the post about Statfor

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3050151

the GAO report is accessible. There is no excuse for relying on Stratfor.

You say nothing about the difference in homicide rates throughout Mexico. For your argument to hold, the areas furthest from the US would have to be more deadly, not less.

I have a PhD in Latin America history from the University of Texas. You don't need to lecture me about Mexico and the Southwest.

Your little launch into Tejano music is sweet, but entirely aside from the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #139)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 08:14 PM

140. I know the difference between secondary and primary source documents

the GAO report is accessible. There is no excuse for relying on Stratfor.
The GAO is limited in scope. "US origin" doesn't actually mean much. M-16s and M-60s smuggled through the southern border is "US origin". So are M-16s from Vietnam. Even then, the GAO is depending on primary source documents from the ATF, so it is also secondary. The ATF only had access to what the Mexican Government gave them. As I said, Stratfor is a respectable neutral intelligence service, and their analysis and background information is spot on.

You say nothing about the difference in homicide rates throughout Mexico. For your argument to hold, the areas furthest from the US would have to be more deadly, not less.
How so? Compared to the US, all but three are pretty deadly. There are a number of reasons why different states have different murder rates. Look at the US. We have the same thing. We even have large variations between cities within states.

I have a PhD in Latin America history from the University of Texas. You don't need to lecture me about Mexico and the Southwest.
Really? I find that really surprising.

Your little launch into Tejano music is sweet, but entirely aside from the point.
There was a point there. You made the El Paso equals white remark. That was part of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #140)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:38 AM

147. If you want to compare the effectiveness of gun bans

Let's look to Japan and the UK, in comparison to the US. The same link provides the numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Japan. 0.4 per 100k
UK. 1.2
USA 4.8


The fact that Mexico is a failed state thanks to our insatiable consumption for drugs and arms dealing means that is not an example of what happens when firearms are banned. The density of firearms is high in the north of the country.

If you know the difference between secondary and primary sources, why do you site a secondary source that misrepresents the GAO report? Stratfor interprets the primary source in ways that satisfy gun zealots. The fact you can't be bothered to read the original report because you like what you see on the Stratfor website only speaks to your own lack of concern for the truth. The game of telephone has been so distorted members on this site now say there is proof 90% of guns in Mexico don't come from the US, which is obviously not the case. One need only read the introduction and subject headings of the GAO report to see that is false.

I never said El Paso equals white. However, race is a cultural construct. Firstly, Hispanic is not a race at all. It is ostensibly a linguistic categorization, but in this country has come to include those who speak Portuguese as well as Spanish. It's an awkward, forced category. Secondly, many Mexicans are considered white there, while we consider them a racial other here. El Paso, like any border town, has a mixture of people who identify as white and mestizo. The American side even has Anglos without any Mexican heritage, while the Mexican side has Indian migrants who come for work. That you don't see any Mexican or border resident as white is a function of your own cultural perception of race forged in that multicultural bastion, Wyoming. (No offense to your state. From all pictures I've seen, it looks astoundingly beautiful.)

If you'll bear with me, I'll provide an example that illustrates well cultural difference on perceptions of race. One of my grad school friends is from Puerto Rico. She had a crush on a Brazilian woman. At one point my grad school friend asked the Brazilian "How come you hang around with all those white girls." The Brazilian turned to her and said, "What do you mean? I am white." Believe me, differences of race matter a great deal in Brazil and Mexico, as they do here. Those who wield power in Mexico are overwhelmingly white.

I have a PhD in Latin America history from the University of Texas. You don't need to lecture me about Mexico and the Southwest.
Really? I find that really surprising.

Your view of my education is meaningless. The only thing I can tell you have a solid background in is distortion of evidence for ideological purposes.

I fully admit to being prone to hyperbole on the gun issue, but I take analysis and use of evidence very seriously. Intellectual honesty and my own self respect demands it. Anyone can pull odd statistics together in ways that suit their purpose. To examine a problem in order to understand it, however, take respect for the truth and intellectual integrity. I know full well when I am being hyperbolic or inflammatory and when I am undertaking a rational examination of evidence. Given the fact I am a recent victim of gun violence, I think I have a right to take the issue personally.

I suggest you read this post for an El Paso resident's take on the issue. It's quite informative, and I think it makes a lot of sense. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023021983#post105

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #147)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:23 AM

153. UK is irrelevant because

gun crime, murder in general, was almost nonexistent before any ban. I lived in Japan, it is also irrelevant because of their culture. But, if I wanted to get an illegal gun in Japan, it isn't that hard if know the right people in the Yakusa. When I was there, there were a couple of folks that were court martialed for various crimes against the US, and turned over to the Japanese because they were buying guns made in illegal factories in Cebu, kind of like the ones in Pakistan where they make high quality guns with hand tools, and flipping them for 100 times to the Yakusa.


Let's look to Japan and the UK, in comparison to the US. The same link provides the numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Japan. 0.4 per 100k
UK. 1.2
USA 4.8
You have heard of post hoc ergo propter hoc? Cherry picking comes to mind. BTW, Iceland is 0.3, and has the gun ownership rate about the same as Florida. Norway is 0.6, and has a higher gun ownership rate. Minnesota and Manitoba are about the same.


The fact that Mexico is a failed state thanks to our insatiable consumption for drugs and arms dealing means that is not an example of what happens when firearms are banned. The density of firearms is high in the north of the country.

If you know the difference between secondary and primary sources, why do you site a secondary source that misrepresents the GAO report? Stratfor interprets the primary source in ways that satisfy gun zealots. The fact you can't be bothered to read the original report because you like what you see on the Stratfor website only speaks to your own lack of concern for the truth. The game of telephone has been so distorted members on this site now say there is proof 90% of guns in Mexico don't come from the US, which is obviously not the case. One need only read the introduction and subject headings of the GAO report to see that is false.
I think the opposite is true, most of Stratfor's customers don't give a rat's ass about guns. They care about security for their business interest. I have been following the issue in the Latin American media as well. They kind of back up Stratfor's analysis. You haven't shown me where their claims were false.

I never said El Paso equals white. However, race is a cultural construct. Firstly, Hispanic is not a race at all. It is ostensibly a linguistic categorization, but in this country has come to include those who speak Portuguese as well as Spanish. It's an awkward, forced category. Secondly, many Mexicans are considered white there, while we consider them a racial other here. El Paso, like any border town, has a mixture of people who identify as white and mestizo. The American side even has Anglos without any Mexican heritage, while the Mexican side has Indian migrants who come for work. That you don't see any Mexican or border resident as white is a function of your own cultural perception of race forged in that multicultural bastion, Wyoming. (No offense to your state. From all pictures I've seen, it looks astoundingly beautiful.)
When my grandparents were kids, half of the city's population were Chinese immigrants. I went to an intergrated school in the 1960s with Chinese decent, Hispanic, various European ethnics. The "pillars of society" of my hometown are mostly Italian Catholic and Chinese decent. Our public school system is very good and even a farming community like Farson has well paid and diverse teachers and state of the art stuff, because we tax shit out of coal and oil companies and spread the dollars equally, not expect districts to depend on local property taxes. The county sheriff when I was a kid had a Serbian surname that I couldn't pronounce and can't remember. I learned a lot in the Air Force. In other words, Wyoming is a lot more diverse than you give it credit for.


Your view of my education is meaningless. The only thing I can tell you have a solid background in is distortion of evidence for ideological purposes.
sorry, you are projecting. You are the one distorting evidence for ideological purpose. More accurately, reading more into it than it is there.

I fully admit to being prone to hyperbole on the gun issue, but I take analysis and use of evidence very seriously. Intellectual honesty and my own self respect demands it. Anyone can pull odd statistics together in ways that suit their purpose. To examine a problem in order to understand it, however, take respect for the truth and intellectual integrity. I know full well when I am being hyperbolic or inflammatory and when I am undertaking a rational examination of evidence. Given the fact I am a recent victim of gun violence, I think I have a right to take the issue personally.
Hyperbole is an understatement. You may be honest, but limited, as I explained before. You have to have complete information, and not take things at face value. Just because some government agency or corporation makes a claim doesn't make it true. One of the many things I learned in the military, like those those phantom WMDs and the F22 is a great deal for the tax payer. Never mind that pilots threatened an illegal strike because they are unsafe. Being inflammatory and rational is mutually exclusive. To understand it, you have to go out of your comfort zone, and risk the possibility that your preconceived ideas are wrong. As for your unfortunate experience, so you equate me, Maya Angelou, Jerry Brown, Green Storm Cloud, and other legal and legitimate gun owners with criminal predators. Sorry, that doesn't strike me as rational nor intellectually honest. I never said a gun ban caused Mexico's problem. It is a fact that Mexicans are in a situation where they can not legally defend themselves from drug gangs or their police lackeys.

I suggest you read this post for an El Paso resident's take on the issue. It's quite informative, and I think it makes a lot of sense. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023021983#post105
Response to: BainsBane (Reply #147)
Forum or Group: General Discussion (Forum)
Reply title:
I read it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #153)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 03:00 AM

157. You consider them irrelevant

because you don't like what they say. "Culture," as though a culture characterized by massive violence and drug cartels offers no distinction with your lovely home region of Wyoming. Culture, as you use it above, is a lazy catch all for a wide range of different political, economic, and social factors that vary from one place to another. There are ways to disaggregate that and study the issue accounting for variables, but that would depend on federal funding for research and reliable data to work from. Hence the importance of lifting the ban on research into and documentation abut guns.

I'm glad to have a bit of information about your state. I have no doubt you are fortunate to live in such a beautiful place.


Just because a government agency makes a claim doesn't make it true.

Fair point. But if you claim the original report is untrustworthy, so then is the secondary analysis of it. Generally, such critiques are based on a thoughtful discussion of research methods rather than simply not liking the results of the report. If you truly believe the report unreliable, you can no longer point to the website analyzing it. I will keep an eye on you to see how that goes.

sorry, you are projecting. You are the one distorting evidence for ideological purpose. More accurately, reading more into it than it is there.
You chose to insult my intelligence. I provided a fair assessment of the very source you claimed formed the basis for your views, a source you now proclaim to be untrustworthy because you don't like its conclusions. You have offered no thoughtful or informed critique.

Being inflammatory and rational may be mutually exclusive at the same moment, but not in the same person. As a human being with a range of thoughts and emotions, I like any other non-sociopath react differently at different times. A discussion board is not a publication. I have no obligation to fit your definition of rationality all the time. In fact, I hope I never do because what you consider rational strikes me as lacking in humanity. However, I am perfectly capable of analyzing evidence honestly and fairly, something you steadfastly refuse to do. I am aware of my biases, which is key to any honest research or intellectual endeavor. You refuse to acknowledge yours, which is far more insidious because it renders you incapable of honest analysis.

You want to believe guns somehow magically make homicide disappear and the absence of guns turns otherwise peaceful people into homicidal maniacs. Nothing will ever convince you otherwise because you don't want to believe anything else. You are desperate to justify gun proliferation to yourself. The rest of us are merely the audience in your efforts to try to convince yourself that the policies you hold most dear in life have nothing to do with resulting homicides.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #157)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:25 AM

173. the UK murder rate was still lower before any gun control

so it doesn't prove your point at all.
I didn't say it was untrustworthy, I said it was limited, and secondary because it was based on what the ATF told them.
However, I am perfectly capable of analyzing evidence honestly and fairly, something you steadfastly refuse to do. I am aware of my biases, which is key to any honest research or intellectual endeavor. You refuse to acknowledge yours, which is far more insidious because it renders you incapable of honest analysis.
I'm betting your students can make up any poorly sourced crap, or not source it at all, and get an A if you agree with it. If you disagree with it, quality doesn't matter. That is pretty much what you demonstrated.
Case in point
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3051988
or the VPC's CCW killers report, which included a large number of suicides as GSC pointed out. It also included many "cases pending" meaning they didn't know if it was murder or not. You either didn't read it or were dishonest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #173)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 09:26 AM

183. You bet wrong

You're just being petty and nasty now. Go do something productive with your time. All that beauty surrounding you and all you want to do is insult me?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #140)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:55 AM

151. Stratfor does nothing but provide a pro gun assessment of the GAO report

It is more limited. Then the problem is the intellectually dishonest on this site are now going around saying it provides proof that 90% of the guns don't come from the US, which is obviously completely false. It doesn't even make sense. Since 87% of traceable guns are proved to have come from the US, it makes sense that most of the others also have. The US is the easiest place to acquire guns. Getting them from China or Russia would make no sense. That doesn't mean some of those weapons can't end up in the hands of the cartels, but it is not going to be the majority of weapons. You misrepresent anecdotal findings to pretend a claim of majority non-North American imports. Such an approach lacks logic or intellectual integrity.

You really would do best to leave Mexico out of your argument all together.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #151)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 07:44 AM

163. China or Russia as a source of AK-47s makes a lot of sense.

Jordan makes even more sense. They are much cheaper in all of those places. With a little bit of googling you can find the prices of GENUINE full-auto AK-47s in those countries. A brand new Russian one costs about $250. A Jordanian one costs about $60. They can be picked up, used, for about $30 in Somalia.

Why pay almost a thousand for a semi-auto U.S. clone when you can get the real ones for under a hundred? The cartels aren't stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #163)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 07:54 AM

168. and transportation all the way from across the world

as opposed to across the border. How does that make sense in any world other than some weird wishful thinking? Why have you gunners decided the legitimacy of your worldview rises and falls based on fixing the evidence from Mexico?

You know the existence of a certain types of weapons that may be manufactured overseas doesn't provide evidence that they constitute the majority, particularly when contradicted by a GAO/ATF report showing 87% of a large sample of seized weapons were manufactured in the US. I expect some Russian weapons filtered in through Central America, but the US supplied far more arms to that region during the 80s and early 90s than did Cuba. It wasn't even remotely close.

I don't quite understand this trip about Mexico. Just give it up. The argument is nonsensical and contradicted by all reliable sources. This is verging on pathological on ya'll's part. Your right to bear arms doesn't hinge on pretending that the weapons in Mexico aren't primarily from the US. The Mexican government knows that to be the case, which is why the drug war is a major issue in US-Mexican diplomatic relations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #168)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:43 AM

178. Transportation is cheap.

Wal-Mart carries lots of Chinese stuff because it doesn't cost much to ship it. The cartels specialize in smuggling, so they have the contacts to move large shipments of guns, just as they move drugs.

The price difference between and U.S. knock-off and a GENUINE AK is huge. For that kind of price difference, they can bring in bunches of real AKs, for a very nice profit, even after paying the needed bribes.

Where do you think the cartels get their hand grenades and RPG-7 rockets? You can't buy those in any American gun store.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #151)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:29 AM

174. if the price is right, it would make sense edit to add

Last edited Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:45 AM - Edit history (1)

From many of the media accounts, they get grenades from Korea. Mexican police show Russian made light machine guns and rocket launchers in their "we confiscated this" photo ops.
you mean these ones?
http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/mexican-cartel-tactical-note-12
Ever wonder why many US cops, with our huge gun industry, carry Austrian made guns? The Secret Service is issued German and Belgian?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #174)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 09:29 AM

184. Oh, no media accounts are reliable

even unnamed ones, when a news story about a recent trial prompted you to say you don't trust newspapers. You're flailing.



Regardless, newspaper ops aren't evidence of a majority of anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #184)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 10:17 AM

188. over generalization

The Texas story bordered on absurd. A lot of details were probably missing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #188)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:30 PM

220. Oh right

the accounts that you agree with are fine. The ones you don't aren't.

Here's the story so you can keep pretending it didn't happen. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/06/06/ezekiel_gilbert_texas_man_acquited_of_murdering_craigslist_escort_who_wouldn.html

It's covered in several publications.

Here's the picture of the guy who doesn't exist. http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Jury-acquits-escort-shooter-4581027.php

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #220)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:58 PM

232. slate said the same thing

You need to read past the headline.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #232)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 02:01 PM

233. said what?

It didn't happen? I read the San Antonio article. The lawyer argued that withholding sex constituted a theft.

Are you a big defender of misogyny too, or just when it involves guns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #233)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 02:11 PM

235. no

$150, not sex as I explained before. Read the article completely. I'm against killing over money or sex. The court ruled about money, not sex.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #235)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 02:40 PM

237. This is a very strange exchange

reminiscent of the GAO report.

During closing arguments Tuesday, Gilbert's defense team conceded the shooting did occur but said the intent wasn't to kill.
Gilbert's actions were justified, they argued, because he was trying to retrieve stolen property: the $150 he paid Frago. It became theft when she refused to have sex with him or give the money back, they said.
... The Texas law that allows people to use deadly force to recover property during a nighttime theft was put in place for “law-abiding” citizens, prosecutors Matt Lovell and Jessica Schulze countered. It's not intended for someone trying to force another person into an illegal act such as prostitution, they argued.


That is exactly what I just said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:11 PM

13. By the way, these dead women are all under 35

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:02 PM

15. Note the gunners think El Paso is paradise.

On the off chance they might learn something and actually give a fuck about the women killed. This really doesn't have to do with guns, other than their disgusting use of the death count in Juarez as a way to justify gun proliferation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #15)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 06:15 PM

30. No - we just know El Paso has an extremely low murder rate

despite liberal gun laws.

No place that thinks BBQ = beef can be called paradise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #30)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:12 PM

40. I wonder how many NRA members vacation there?

So much fun to be had, especially just over the border.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #40)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:12 PM

56. Anyone looking for a safe place would certainly enjoy vacationing there

it would appear that Mexican violence is well contained in Mexico.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #56)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:16 PM

57. Try reading the OP

And watching the video. The rest of it is on You Tube.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #57)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:18 PM

58. I know - American CCW holders killing women and smuggling the bodies into Mexico

No evidence, no thought - just an agenda.

It is pretty clear where you stand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #58)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:19 PM

59. Where does the OP mention CC or guns at all?

It doesn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #59)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:23 PM

61. True - you just think it is Americans in general

And it's quite possible that Americans are going just over the boarder to kill women with impunity, just as rapists gravitate to the US military to act with impunity.


This entire thread is a direct result of your CCW poll debacle. You are very transparent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #61)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:24 PM

63. Look at the date

I created this OP this weekend, long before concealed carry. Your reading skills suck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #63)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:27 PM

67. My bad.

you are still wrong about El Paso.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #67)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:28 PM

69. Wrong about what?

How many of those homicides of men in Juarez are gun deaths?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #69)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:29 PM

70. That liberal gun laws result in increased gun violence

Chicago wishes they had El Paso's murder rate - perhaps they should adopt Texas style gun laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #70)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:33 PM

72. That's dishonest bullshit

If you want to look at effective gun control, look at Japan or the UK. Juarez is awash with guns, and I would bet you anything that most of the murders there sited by your fellow gun fetishist are gun deaths.

Laws mean nothing when they aren't effective. Your whole argument is a fraud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #72)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:37 PM

73. We are talking about America, not Mexico

Juarez is a city in a semi-failed state in the midst of an violent and bloody drug war between rival drug cartels. Mexico also has extremely strict gun laws. They don't appear to be working, do they?

El Paso is the city we are talking about - stop evading the issue. How is it possible for El Paso to have such a low murder rate without Chicago style gun laws?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #73)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:53 PM

74. Gunner number 1

posited El Paso to Juarez. His entire point was a comparison. He claimed Juarez's high murder rate was because of gun control, though he got pissed off I dared to mention women's deaths.

I don't believe El Paso is that safe. I think it's quite possible crimes are going unreported, especially when they involve Mexican nationals. It's always highly likely that rapists and murderers go across the border to get their rocks off. I know that I wouldn't set foot near El Paso, and most women I know feel the same way. My cousin flies to a different airport (Midland?) to visit her father who lives near Big Bend because neither he nor she wants her going anywhere near El Paso.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #74)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:03 PM

76. I make the travel reservations for the people I work with

They regularly fly in and out of ELP and not once has anyone said anything negative about it. I also know quite a few people with family in El Paso and they regularly visit them as well. I have never heard any of these people comment negatively about El Paso, say they feel afraid there, or in general that it's a dangerous place. El Paso isn't a dangerous place that you seem to think it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #74)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:10 PM

77. "highly likely that rapists and murderers go across the border"

when you say shit like that, it should come as no surprise that no one takes you seriously. When you have to paint such lurid and fantastic scenarios to avoid taking a hard look at your own beliefs then you are beyond reason.

Have a good evening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #77)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:19 PM

79. Why wouldn't they?

If a rapist knew he could act with impunity by crossing the border, why wouldn't he? Have you ever been in a border town? People cross over all the time.

It's a supposition, and I think a quite likely one. Why you find it so outlandish, I have no idea. Sorry to say anything that might pierce your notion of gunner utopia. I'm sure you'll keep producing fraudulent arguments without interruption.


If by no one taking me seriously, you mean gun cultists, WTF cares? They don't take anything but guns seriously. I'm a human being. Obviously what I think or feel is irrelevant. Some things are obvious.

I can think of nothing better than your not responding to my posts in the future. I had no idea that nationality meant so much to gun cultists. Must be part of that whole right wing mentality. For me, a murder is a murder and a murderer a murderer. I don't think it any worse to suggest a rapist or murderer might be American than Mexican, but then I don't have a world view that assumes white Americans are superior to the rest of humanity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #73)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:57 PM

75. Chicago's murder rate is down 40% this year

I assume the NRA and co is hoping that trend will be reversed as a result of the legislation they got passed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #75)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:12 PM

78. Everyone's murder rate is at historic lows

you haven't been paying attention to the past 20 years. The country as a whole has cut its murder rate in half despite all that "NRA legislation."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #78)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:20 PM

80. 40% in one year? Really? No

I realize murder rates are dropping, but not by the amount Chicago's has.

You promised to stop talking to me. I took that as a promise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #80)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 06:20 AM

106. Their murder rate went up 16% in 2012

The shooting, on Nov. 26, was one more jarring reminder of just how common killings seem to have grown on the streets of Chicago, the nation’s third-largest city, where 506 homicides were reported in 2012, a 16 percent increase over the year before, even as the number of killings remained relatively steady or dropped in some cities, including New York.


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/us/a-soaring-homicide-rate-a-divide-in-chicago.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #106)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:13 PM

129. It is down 40% this year

Naturally that fact is disturbing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #129)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:17 PM

131. It was down 40% from Jan to April. Cumulatively to date it's down 34%. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tammywammy (Reply #131)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:48 AM

149. Thank you for that clarification

Much appreciated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #129)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:23 PM

133. Summer is the killing season in Chicago

so don't start your happy dance yet.

Six months is not a significant trend - you expect numbers to bounce around from year to year.

More to the point - if their gun laws were responsible for that drop, what was responsible for the increase? The laws have not changed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #133)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:50 AM

150. I didn't say gun laws were responsible for the drop

Nor does Rahm. I implied that CC would take care of that, and that is in fact it's intend. As I said, I believe part of what drives gun proliferation on the part of the gun cabal is a desire to reimpose white supremacy. It's a theory, but I suspect if I had the opportunity to observe some of these groups of gun activists, I would find confirmation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #150)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 07:48 AM

166. Considering the vast majority of murders are intra-racial

with whites killing whites and blacks killing blacks, the facts do not support you. Of course actual facts are optional to you - it is all about opinion to you.

We have several states that have relaxed CCW - can you show an increase in white on black crime?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #166)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 07:59 AM

169. No, it doesn't

The policy is racist. The policy is advanced by people who live no where near Chicago, the kind of people who travel to cities and hand out weapons.

Your point is entirely irrelevant to the issue. I told you it was just a theory. Evidence would require being undercover with the gun and white supremacist groups.

Obviously what I think is meaningless to you, so why keep asking?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #169)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:44 AM

179. Show me any group using CCW laws to travel to cities and "hand out weapons"

this is a new one - can't wait to see what you have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #169)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:49 AM

180. A theory should have some evidence to back it up.

Wild imaginings don't count as evidence. Your accusation does not even rise to the level of a theory, you are presenting only wild speculation. Remember, that which can be presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #180)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 03:44 PM

238. Well, I could always try your tactic

Of pointing to evidence that says the opposite of what you claim it does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #30)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:10 PM

55. I thought I read somewhere...

that El Paso is the second safest city in America. Not sure where I got that statistic.

BTW, if you don't like BBQ, you just haven't tried the right kind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NaturalHigh (Reply #55)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:21 PM

60. the gunners love to point out how safe El Paso is

I don't believe it for a minute. It seems to me a lot of murders are going undocumented. I suppose it's possible that the rapists just go over the border to get their rocks off since they can operate with impunity there, but it's also possible authorities aren't counting lots of crimes, especially those involving Mexicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #60)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:23 PM

62. Never been there, just quoting statistics.

I'm not looking to get involved in the flame war on this subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #60)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:28 PM

82. Evidence for your allegations? You don't have any.

Show real evidence that murders in El Paso are going unreported.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #82)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:36 PM

84. speaking of evidence

Last edited Wed Jun 19, 2013, 03:59 AM - Edit history (1)

Your numbers on murder in Juarez, where did you get them? How many are gun homicides?

You seem to have a great deal of trouble differentiating between a claim of absolute fact vs. a supposition. I don't know why that is, if it's an issue with reading comprehension (like missing the part of the OP talking about the murders than you think count, men) or something else. I wouldn't say "it's possible" if I knew for certain something was true. Just how do you suppose one would produce evidence of under reported crimes? You don't appear to have any experience with documentation at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #84)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:51 PM

90. You are the one making the accusations.

The responsibility of providing the evidence is always with the accuser.

Now you are claiming that murders are underreported. Please provide proof of your claim.

Remember, that which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.

The number comes from here: http://www.borderlandbeat.com/2011/01/ciudad-juarez-has-record-drug-killings.html

The embattled border city of Ciudad Juarez had its bloodiest year ever with 3,111 people killed in drug violence, an official said Saturday. The method of killing is not given. Likely that most were gun murders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #90)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 11:58 PM

92. I didn't make an accusation

I gave information about the murders and suggested possibilities. You don't seem to be able to distinguish between a theory and an accusation. As the Harvard piece points out, others have suggested the theory. I'm not familiar enough with the evidence of the case (such as it is since there has obviously been little effort to solve the crimes) to know what those precisely those theories are based on. Christ, the Harvard piece even names a suspect. I don't see any outrage on your part about that, presumably because he wasn't American. You've got some serious trip going about nationality.

One of the reasons I suggested the possibility that Americans might be involved is because I didn't want people to read it as all about evil Mexico, since so many people are imbued with that kind of deep-seeded prejudice without even realizing it. I get tired of mal-educated posters going on about how evil this or that culture is.
I don't know why you find the idea that the killers might be American so preposterous. The US has had more serial killers than any other country.

I don't find that source satisfactory. The numbers may be accurate, but there is no way to examine what they died from. Since they describe it as part of the drug war, I'm guessing, like here in the US, most were killed by guns, which would shoot to hell your whole argument about gun control being responsible. Clearly there is no such thing as an effective gun ban anywhere in North America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #92)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:23 AM

110. So you admit you have ZERO evidence that Americans are doing it.

But that doesn't stop you from making the accusation. Calling it a theory is mere semantics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #110)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 10:21 AM

116. Not really. "Accusation" and "theory" are two wholly separate concepts.

"Calling it a theory is mere semantics."

Not really. "Accusation" and "theory" are two wholly separate concepts. Accuracy is not engaging in semantics, nor is the appropriate word usage.

Although I could perceive semantics being used simply to minimize the theories of other people...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #116)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 12:46 PM

120. She began, in other posts, with a flat-out accusation.

Now she calls it a theory. Therefore she is playing with semantics. Under other conditions I would agree with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #110)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 08:29 PM

141. Yes, just as there is zero evidence that Mexicans are the killers

Why does that distinction mean so much to you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #90)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 12:02 AM

94. That article doesn't specify the sex of the victims

No where does it say a certain number were male. Moreover, if it is to be taken at face value, it is counting only those killed in drug violence. Presumably that wouldn't include the victims of the serial killer/s.

Your argument gets weaker and weaker. You have no basis for your bogus charges of sexism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #90)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 12:14 AM

95. Murder rate in Mexico

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#Mexico

You'll need to click on "show" to open up data by state.

Chihuahua (the state in which Juarez is located) does indeed have the highest murder rate in Mexico. It's a horrifying rate. The highest rates in general are along the border and in Northern Mexico, which shows the correlation in violence between drug trafficking to feed American demand. The much higher murder rates in Chihuahua, Sinoloa, Durango, and Gurerro as opposed to the Yucatan and Queretaro show that your entire argument about gun bans as responsible is untenable. Most of the guns are in the drug areas along the border and in places like Sinaloa where cartels control territory enabling them to transport drugs to the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #95)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:30 AM

111. I am comparing two adjancent, similar cities.

Juarez - El Paso. They are side-by-side and have similar cultures, about the same size.

When you expand to the rest of each country, many other factors come into play.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #111)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 08:33 AM

112. Your comparison is an NRA scam

designed to obfuscate. Obviously it doesn't hold up to scrutiny, as the numbers I outlined provide clear and convincing evidence for. Quite obviously your NRA deterministic argument doesn't hold water. If the factor were a gun ban, areas furthest from the border and furthest away from access to gun would have higher homicide rates rather than lower ones.

Mexico is a failed state because of the drug war. US guns make that war horrifically deadly. To ignore that in favor of gun evangelization is entirely illogical and and obvious attempt to distort the record for craven ideological purposes.

You need to quit justifying the unjustifiable. More guns do NOT ever make a safer society. They always lead to more deaths. Just admit that you have determined that the right to bear arms is more important to you than the death toll. At least that would be an honest way to deal with the issue rather than manipulating statistics in ways that any child can see are dishonest. Just because the NRA feeds you numbers doesn't mean they are accurate. In fact, you can count of the fact they are false.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #112)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 09:41 AM

113. The numbers didn't come from the NRA.

Google: El Paso TX murders 2010 and look at the top return. It is from a new media outlet. Five (5) murders in 2010.
Google, Juarez Mexico murders 2010 The fifth entry is the first one to have the total murders for 2010. 3,111 murders in 2010

That El Paso has more guns than people is pretty much common for any town or city in Texas. If more guns meant more death, the El Paso should have more murders than DC or Chicago. Obviously, guns are not the only factor.

About 90% of Mexican guns don't come from the U.S. Instead the cartels get better guns at a lower price through the internation arms black market.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #113)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 09:44 PM

143. That story gets more distorted with each telling

And now you've twisted it a complete falsehood. Of the guns ATF can trace, 87% come from the US. It could not trace the rest. That is a far cry from "90% of guns don't come from the US." That really is an ugly and malicious distortion.

Read this post from someone who lives in El Paso. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3045567

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #143)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 10:21 PM

145. What percentage of guns did the Mexican goverment submit to the US government for tracing?

that is the point you are ignoring

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #145)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:33 AM

154. 24% according to the pro-gun site

A very large statistical sample by any standard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #154)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 07:50 AM

167. So .24 X .87 = 20% of guns seized in Mexico come from America

ok.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #167)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:05 AM

171. Of those that are traceable

Serial numbers were filed off the rest.
Ever study statistics. Know anything about the scientific method? That is a large sample by any standard. Very few studies have a sample as large as 24%. Ask Buzz Clik. I believe he is a statistician.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #171)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:42 AM

177. No, serial numbers were not filed off the rest

unless you have proof of this.

They had no reason to believe that the rest of the guns came from America therefore they did not submit them for tracing.

Think about this for a second - Central America is awash with cheap military weapons from their decades of civil war. Why are they coming to America to pay ten times what they have to for guns?

As for the scientific method - the Mexican government examined 100% of the guns they seized and determined that only 24% possibly came from America. They were right 87% of the time. Which means that all we can say with any confidence is that 20% of guns seized in Mexico came from America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #177)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 10:38 AM

193. Wrong

You have garbled the report. First most of the guns in Central America come from the US since we waged war on the region. True, the Russians supplied some weapons to the guerillas via Cuba, but not nearly as many as we did.

Now for the report. 87% of the weapons that could be traced came through the US. Even most of those manufactured outside of the US were shown to have been trafficked through the US.

There has clearly been a game of telephone going on among gun proponents regarding this report. You all have taken the arms not traceable and falsely concluded that they did not come from the US, when there is no evidence to suggest that. In fact the data from the traceable guns is a large sample and can be seen as representative of the overall composition of guns trafficked into Mexico.

I am excerpting part of the report here and will link to the original so you can read it yourself.

Using ATF’s eTrace data, which currently serves as the best data we found
available for analyzing the source and nature of firearms trafficked and
seized in Mexico, we determined over 20,000, or 87 percent, of firearms
seized by Mexican authorities and traced from fiscal year 2004 to fiscal
year 2008 originated in the United States.
Figure 3 shows the percentages
of firearms seized in Mexico and traced from fiscal year 2004 to fiscal year
2008 that originated in the United States. Over 90 percent of the firearms
seized in Mexico and traced over the last 3 years have come from the
United States.

Around 68 percent of these firearms were manufactured in the United
States, while around 19 percent were manufactured in third countries and
imported into the United States before being trafficked into Mexico.
ATF
could not determine whether the remaining 13 percent foreign sourced
arms had been trafficked into Mexico through the United States, due to
incomplete information.


As for the Mexican end, GAO reports:

While the eTrace data only represents data from gun trace requests
submitted from seizures in Mexico and not all the guns seized, it is
currently the only systematic data available, and the conclusions from its
use that the majority of firearms seized and traced originated in the United
States were consistent with conclusions reached by U.S. and Mexican
government and law enforcement officials involved personally in
combating arms trafficking to Mexico. In 2008, of the almost 30,000
firearms that the Mexican Attorney General’s office said were seized, only
around 7,200, or approximately a quarter, were submitted to ATF for
tracing. U.S. and Mexican government and law enforcement officials
indicated Mexican government officials had not submitted all of the
firearms tracing information due to bureaucratic obstacles between the
Mexican military and the Mexican Attorney General’s Office and lack of a
sufficient number of trained staff to use eTrace. For instance, at one point,
State officials told us, the Government of Mexico had only one staff person
collecting gun information and entering it into eTrace.12 Further, as ATF
pointed out, not all guns seized in the United States are submitted by U.S.
entities to ATF for tracing either, due to some of the same type of
bureaucratic and resource challenges faced in Mexico. Consistent with the
results of eTrace data, U.S. law enforcement officials who had worked on
arms trafficking in Mexico and along the U.S.-Mexican border told us their
experience and observations corroborated that most of the firearms in
Mexico had originated in the United States. Furthermore, U.S. and
Mexican government and law enforcement officials also stated this
scenario seemed most likely, given the ease of acquiring firearms in the
United States; specifically, they told us they saw no reason why the drug
cartels would go through the difficulty of acquiring a gun somewhere else
in the world and transporting it to Mexico when it is so easy for them to do
so from the United States.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09709.pdf

The go on to list the specific types of weapons and how they have been altered to make them more lethal.

It shows maps of how the guns flow from various parts of the US into Mexico.

Conclusions:

Combating arms trafficking has become an increasing concern to U.S. and
Mexican government and law enforcement officials, as violence in Mexico
has soared to historic levels, and U.S. officials have become concerned
about the potential for increased violence brought about by Mexican DTOs
on the U.S. side of the border. However, while this violence has raised
concern, there has not been a coordinated U.S. government effort to
combat the illicit arms trafficking to Mexico that U.S. and Mexican
government officials agree is fueling much of the drug-related violence.

Agencies such as ATF and ICE have made some efforts to combat illicit
arms trafficking, but these efforts are hampered by a number of factors,
including the constraints of the legal framework in which law enforcement
agencies operate, according to agency officials, and poor coordination
among agencies. In addition, agencies have not systematically and
consistently gathered and reported certain types of data on firearms
trafficking that would be useful to the administration and Congress to
better target resources to combat arms trafficking to Mexico. Gaps in this
data hamper the investigative capacity of law enforcement agencies.
Further, a Spanish language version of ATF’s eTrace has been in
development for months but has yet to be finalized; the lack of this new
version of eTrace has impeded the use of eTrace by Mexican law
enforcement officials, which limits data that could be used in
investigations on both sides of the border and results in incomplete
information on the nature of firearms trafficked and seized in Mexico.
Quick deployment of eTrace across Mexico and training of the relevant
officials in its use could increase the number of guns submitted to ATF for
tracing each year, improving the data on the types and sources of firearms
trafficked into Mexico and increasing the information that law
enforcement officials have to investigate and build cases.

U.S. and Mexican government officials in locations we visited told us that,
while they have undertaken some efforts to combat illicit arms trafficking,
they are concerned that without a targeted, comprehensive, and
coordinated U.S. government effort, their efforts could fall short. In June
2009, the administration released its 2009 National Southwest Border
Counternarcotics Strategy, containing a chapter on arms trafficking to
Mexico. We reviewed the strategy’s chapter on arms trafficking and found
that the chapter does contain some key elements of a strategy, such as
setting objectives, but it lacks others, such as providing detailed roles and
responsibilities for relevant agencies or performance measures for
monitoring progress toward objectives. ONDCP officials said they will
develop an implementation plan for the strategy in late summer of 2009
that will have more detailed actions for each agency to take, as well as
some performance measures for each item under the objectives. However,
at this point, it is not clear whether the implementation plan will include
performance indicators and other accountability mechanisms to overcome
shortcomings raised in our report. Furthermore, in March 2009, the
administration announced more resources for the Southwest border,
including more personnel and equipment for conducting southbound
inspections. However, it is unclear how the new resources that the
administration has recently devoted to the Southwest border will be tied
to the new strategy and implementation plan.

The current level of cooperation on law enforcement issues between the
United States and Mexico under President Calderon’s administration
presents a unique opportunity to work jointly to combat illicit arms
trafficking. Taking advantage of this opportunity will require a unified,
U.S. government approach that brings to bear all the necessary assets to
combat illicit arms trafficking.


Now, if the US government could absolve itself of responsibility for gun trafficking into Mexico, don't you think they would? The government is not in the habit of creating more diplomatic hassles without some driving national interest. There is no national interest in claiming more guns flow from Mexico into the US than actually do.
So time to readjust your argument. I would suggest you simply leave Mexico off the rhetorical menu. It does not help your case and only shows how badly the gun side distorts evidence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #193)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:12 AM

196. I have no problem giving the ATF the tools they need to combat gun trafficking

I have no problem giving the ATF the tools they need to combat gun trafficking - it is a sure fire way to reduce gun violence.

The thing about Mexico is this - they have just as many guns as America does. Yet their murder rate is much much higher than ours. And their gun violence is due to criminal activity, not the actions of legal gun owners. So it is clear that mere access to guns does not explain the violence in Mexico. So Mexico does help our case. You want to make it just about guns (and racism) - Mexico says that it is that certain people with guns that is the problem. Just like America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #196)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:32 AM

200. Obviously there is far more involved than just guns

which is true for any problem of criminal justice. One factor never explains anything.
In the case of Mexico, the drug war is the central issue, and US trafficked guns make it all the more deadly. Legalization or decriminialization of drugs would be an excellent start to the problem. My own response is to not use any illegal drugs because I do not wish to contribute to that horrific bloodshed.

I am glad you are no longer distorting that particular report. It appears to have been like that childhood game of telephone, where the story is told and retold so many times it veers further and further from the original report.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #200)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:51 AM

204. I would completely support the legalization of drugs.

Legalization and regulation of drugs would solve many problems, both here and in other countries. All drugs should be legalized and sold through specialy licensed stores, just as liquor is. That way drug users would get pure drugs without dangerous crap mixed in and could buy their drugs at a much cheaper price so they wouldn't have to steal as much to buy their drugs.

The smuggling chain would collapse as would the distribution system.

I don't use any illegal drugs either.

See? We do agree on some things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #204)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:55 AM

205. Yes, isn't that nice

I'm glad to see it. Now will you please stop distorting the information about Mexico?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #205)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:01 PM

206. I haven't distorted the Mexican info.

In fact, I have used the exact same GAO report that you use. I just don't skip over page 16. 76% of Mexican seized guns are NOT submitted for tracing. Nor is the selection of which guns will be submitted random, so it isn't a representative sample.

And I don't pretend that all it takes is knowing a language to trace a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #206)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:02 PM

208. But what that doesn't say

Is that the majority of guns come from outside Mexico, as you claim. It says they aren't traced. Do you see the difference? You attribute the absence of information for saying something in does not.

Clearly the ATF has traced foreign manufactured guns, as the report shows that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #208)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:09 PM

211. Foreign guns legally imported to the U.S. can be traced.

But they count as part of the 87%. Have fun tracing a North Korean manufactured gun, that was smuggled directly from NK to Mexico. China would also be uncooperative. And some countries don't even keep records.

Nor would any of the old Soviet Bloc weapons be tracable.

I have repeatedly pointed out that you can't buy full-auto weapons at U.S. gun stores. You always ignore that fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #211)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:24 PM

227. No, I don't

What I have said is it doesn't prove those are the majority of weapons in Mexico as you have repeatedly, falsely claimed.

Just because a gun can't be purchase legally in the US doesn't mean it can't be purchased and or trafficked through the US. What makes you think this comes entirely from gun stores? Exporting guns to Mexico is illegal. You think that traffickers are going to stand on niceties? Legal and gun sales are oxymoronic. There is so little enforcement of gun sales in the US that anything can and does happen. How else do you think criminals get guns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #227)

Fri Jun 21, 2013, 12:04 AM

241. Round-about smuggling routes are expensive.

You are talking about smuggling a gun into the U.S., then smuggling that same gun into Mexico. That is inefficient. Instead the cartels would simply smuggle directly to Mexico, eliminating your suggested middle steps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #206)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:05 PM

209. Not only did I read page 16

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #193)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:14 PM

217. And only 24% were submitted.

From page 16: In 2008, of the almost 30,000
firearms that the Mexican Attorney General’s office said were seized, only
around 7,200, or approximately a quarter
, were submitted to ATF for
tracing


87% of 24% = 21% (rounded)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #217)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:25 PM

228. Yes, that was the sample

What that means is you have a sample. All the guns were not submitted. It doesn't tell you the rest of the guns came from other countries, as you have repeatedly falsely claimed. Get it!!!!!!???????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #228)

Fri Jun 21, 2013, 12:06 AM

242. Nope, not a sample.

Those were not a random selection. They selected guns that they thought the U.S. would be able to trace, and didn't bother with guns that they knew that we would not be able to trace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #154)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:54 AM

181. The sample was NOT random.

For you to use it in the way you are trying to the sample needs to be random. The Mexican government SELECTED that 24%. After all, why would the send a Russian gun, or Chinese gun, or Jordanian gun, to the U.S. to trace? That would be rather stupid of them, and they aren't that dumb.

Where to you think the cartels get their grenades, full-auto weapons, and rockets from? You can't buy those in U.S. gun stores.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #143)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:35 AM

176. Mexico doesn't submit all guns for tracing.

They only submitted about 24% for tracing. Why should they bother trying to have the U.S. trace guns with Chinese or Russian or Arabic markings?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #176)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 09:51 AM

186. Did you read the part of the report

That says a good chunk of the guns that they found that weren't manufactured in the US were trafficked through the US?

The ATF is perfectly capable of tracing guns with foreign markings. There are Americans who speak foreign languages, as shocking as you may find that. I happen to be one of them. There are at least hundreds of others on this site who also do.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3053353

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #186)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:27 AM

198. It takes much more than speaking Chinese to trace a Chinese gun.

In each case, it takes the cooperation of the government of the country that the gun was made in. Our government has to ask their government to trace the gun. Some of those governments will not want their black market dealing in the international arms market traced. Others simply don't keep those kinds of records.

And some guns will not have a country of manufacture and serial number stamped on them and will be untraceable.

Foriegn guns that were imported into the U.S. and then trafficed to Mexico can be traced in the U.S. and count as part of the 87% of the 24%.

The Mexicans aren't stupid. They know which guns we can't possibly trace and won't bother asking us to trace them.

Where do you think the cartels get their machine guns, grenades, and rockets?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #198)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 07:35 PM

240. What possible reason would the Mexican government have

for camouflaging arms trafficked from overseas but not from the US? Do you think it's all some grand conspiracy against gun nuts? You think they plot it just so you can't use their homicide rate as rhetorical fodder to justify your views? What complete cods wallop.

The cartels get most of their stuff from US gun traffickers, even the imported stuff. The GAO report makes that clear.

You can suppose and conjecture all you want. The evidence is crystal clear, and denying it only makes you look ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #240)

Fri Jun 21, 2013, 12:15 AM

244. The Mexican gov't doesn't camouflage the gun sources.

They are well aware that guns from other countries are being smuggled directly into Mexico. Even if they were smuggled round-about through the U.S., the U.S. gov't would have no record of it. Smugglers don't register illegal shipments.

According to the GAO report that you reference, page 16, it shows that the Mexican gov't only submits about 24% of the total confiscated to the U.S. for tracing. So the majority of the guns aren't even traced.

Where do you think the cartels get their grenades and rockets?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:41 PM

22. Hundreds of women killed, thousands of men killed.

And you only care about the women killed. Are the men expendable? The total murder count for 2010 was 3,111. About 400 of those were women. Didn't the about 2,700 men count? Were they unworthy of your concern and outrage?

Both Juarez and El Paso are of similar size, although Juarez is a little bigger. The cultures of the two cities is nearly the same. The people of Mexico are not allowed to have guns for self-defense. El Paso has Texas gun laws, and has more guns than people. In 2010 El Paso had five (5) murders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:46 PM

24. yes, to these folks men are expendable meatshields. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #24)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:47 PM

25. But the OP completely ignores the thousands of men killed.

He is all excited about the hundreds of women killed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #25)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 05:51 PM

27. no, i get it and you are correct. its an attempt to define a protected class. i fight it often. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #27)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 07:44 PM

33. what you mean is your effort to deny these murders

The fact is the serial killers are targeting women. Denying that fact only further highlights your views on women. But go ahead. Their deaths don't really count. They are women under 35 and therefore "disgusting." Carry on in your tireless pursuit to demonstrate how little you value women's lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #33)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:11 PM

39. i think you might need or want a break from DU because your ability to read my mind

 

(and it must be that because your statements are....eclectic?) isn't really working out like it sounds.

you wont find a single post where I "demonstrate how little you value women's lives". clearly my existence bothers you soooooo...perhaps try and detach?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #33)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:25 PM

47. "targeting"?

If so, the killers apparently hit the wrong target by a ratio of 7:1.

The murdered women deserve justice as do the murdered men.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #47)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:44 PM

49. WTF

There is something seriously wrong here. This is about serial killers who rape and mutilate women. It is not the same killing spree as the shootouts of the drug cartels. I can't even begin to fathom the pathological hatred for women that one has to resent discussion of this sort of thing.

Do you think BTK and Ted Bundy missed their targets?

You all highlight perfectly why those killers act with impunity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #47)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:07 PM

54. Do you not see a difference between when members of drug cartels

kill each other, and when women are raped and mutilated one by one, hundreds of times? You do see that, don't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #54)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:25 PM

64. Actually a number of sources

give that 400 number, but then the documentary talks about how police fudge the numbers. This is thought to be by a single group of killers. It's not random killing of women, but either a single serial killer or more likely a group of rapists/killers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #64)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:27 PM

66. Ok. I'll edit. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #33)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:30 PM

83. I counted ALL the murdered. ALL 3,111 of them.

That includes the women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #83)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:39 PM

85. 1) I was talking to another poster

with a clear history on gender issues. 2) I'd like to explore those numbers. Can you provide a link? The OP ALSO talks about all murders. The fact is these particularly killings are thought to be carried out by a single group of killers.

Did you write to your local paper to criticize coverage of the Ariel Castro crimes because they didn't cover crimes against men as well? Do you know how absurd that your argument here is? It comes across as misogynistic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #83)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:42 PM

87. Here's clear evidence of sexism

Coverage of a murder in Door County, WI for killing his girlfriend. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/suburbs/plainfield/ct-tl-plainfield-murder-20130618,0,3421668.story

How dare they write about that murder and not talk about the far more important deaths of men in Door County?!!!! The horror, the horror!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #27)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:15 PM

43. Oh, DO you? DO you "fight it often"? As often as men murder women?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #43)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:16 PM

44. men are murdered 3-1 over women nationally. go bark up a different tree nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #44)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:20 PM

46. By men. Try THAT tree. And not, as the OP notes, SEXUALLY tortured.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #46)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:26 PM

48. so men killing men doesn't count. most sexist quote ive seen on DU. please stop making

 

my arguments for me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #48)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 01:40 AM

98. Learn to read

That might alleviate the constant sense of persecution toward men you feel.

She didn't say anything close to what you accuse her of. Get a grip.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #98)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 02:08 AM

101. pick one

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #101)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 02:17 AM

102. Do you have to ask?

It's number 2. I wouldn't go so far as to say hate. But that 95% comment left quite an impression on me. You know how Romney will always be known by 47%. You will forever in my mind be Mr. 95%.

Of course, you can avoid all the unwanted attention by simply staying out of my threads and especially by refraining from making charges of sexism based solely on your imagination (see how kind I am in using that word).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #102)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 02:39 AM

103. Fixed it for ya!

 

Of course, you can avoid all the unwanted attention= "yes i'm stalking you, and let me tell you how to stop being stalked"

by simply staying out of my threads = "by not disagreeing or participating in the forum you belong to"

and especially by refraining from making charges of sexism based solely on your imagination = "you aren't allowed to express an opinion that I don't share, and any opinion I don't condone is fully discounted"

Us uppity men just better be quiet eh? Nah, I would rather be part of a real solution to equality.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #103)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 03:42 AM

104. Just make an effort to stick with the reality based community

I'm afraid your "real solution" would keep me locked in the kitchen. Your notion of equality is based on subordination of women, and our never, never daring to speak about any issues that concern us. But that's only because I like the rest of my sex is "disgusting." (Oh, wait. I've never cheated on anyone. I must only be 5% woman.)

I'm actually not stalking you, but by your definition of stalking I've got a posse of armed men stalking me all the time.

No where did she say those deaths didn't count. You have a very active imagination. Those other deaths just don't happen to have been committed by the particular serial killer/s targeting women in Juarez. That 400 number isn't even close to all the women killed in Juarez. It's the number that are thought to have been killed by the same killer or group of killers, kind of like Ted Bundy on steroids. Evidently you and Gunner Sr. think it's an outrage to talk about a crime against women without statistics of all murders of men (which by the way he screwed up since his source doesn't claim those victims to be male or even a comprehensive tally of all murders). Besides, the OP does say more men than women are murdered. All you needed to do was read it before pitching your fit.

Below I'm going to post some of the same things to you I posted to your comrade guns. I know you won't admit that you were mistaken. That goes with imaging yourself to always be right.

Did you write to your local paper to criticize coverage of the Ariel Castro crimes because they didn't cover crimes against men as well? Do you know how absurd that your argument here is?

You know the FBI is really fucking sexist for prosecuting guys like BTK and Ted Bundy for killing women. That's totally unfair to men.

Clear evidence of sexism:
Coverage of a murder in Door County, WI, where the defendant is accused of killing his girlfriend. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/suburbs/plainfield/ct-tl-plainfield-murder-20130618,0,3421668.story

How dare they write about that murder and not talk about the deaths of men in Door County?!!!! The horror, the horror!

Look at what you (Gunner Sr. ) did here
You wrote an OP about the Zimmerman trial but not all the trials and all the murders in FL. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014506169
OMG, the injustice of it all. What about all the other people on trial in Florida. They aren't important to you? You only care about men on trial?
You see how stupid that sounds? That is exactly what you have done in this thread.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #44)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:55 PM

51. and 87% of homicides are committed by men

If you want to create a thread about national murder rates, feel free to do so. However, you will have to deal with the fact that guns are indeed a problem. You advocate for gun proliferation, when guns kill most of the men you claim to care about. Then when someone dares to mention rape, mutilation and murder of women, you insist they aren't important because men kill more men than they kill women. When you consistently advance positions that trivialize human life, you can hardly complain about the results.

The OP does it fact mention that more men are killed in Juarez than women. Try reading it.

Okay, you've sufficiently turned my stomach. I had no idea human beings could display this level of callousness toward human life. Feel free to play with the guys in your "protected space." I won't promise not to alert, but I will no longer be your friendly neighborhood stalker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #25)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 07:41 PM

32. Yeah, that has to do with the minor fact the serial killers are targeting women

As insignificant as you may find that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #25)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 07:49 PM

34. This OP is a she

And the fact is the serial killers are targeting women. Yeah, those lives don't matter to you. The callousness it takes to respond to a spate of serial killing of women by whining that men aren't being paid attention to. They are being attention to. They are allowed to kill with impunity. Naturally your reaction is to dismiss the lives of murdered women. Not only are they living, breathing beings, their are Mexican and female. Why would you possibly show an ounce of humanity toward them?

You know the FBI is really fucking sexist for prosecuting guys like BTK and Ted Bundy for killing women. That's unfair time to men.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #25)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:13 PM

42. Reading comprehension, much? The OP DOES mention men, but notes that their murders ARE NOT

SEXUAL: "Even higher rates of homicide exist among Juárez males: more than 200 men are murdered each year, though not tortured sexually."

I guess not reading fits YOUR agenda better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #42)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:04 PM

53. Thanks for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #25)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:26 PM

65. If you would like to make an OP about the deaths of men in Juarez, which are primarily from the

drug cartel wars, I am sure many here would be interested to read about it and support your position about it.

Right now, though, we are talking about what appears to be a serial killer or a number of serial killers who have raped and mutilated hundreds or thousands of women in Juarez.

This conversation doesn't preclude you from having the conversation about the cartel deaths. This conversation does not suggest a lack of support for frustration over the drug cartel deaths.

This is simply a different conversation.

Your suggestion that the very fact of having a conversation about a possible serial killer of hundreds or thousands of women indicates insensitivity about the subject of the drug cartel deaths is amazingly childish. If you think about it, I am sure you will see that that is true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #65)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:21 PM

81. The fight started in another thread.

I noted the El Paso and Juarez are close to the same size (Juarez is a little larger), have similar cultures, but El Paso had only five (5) murders in 2010 while Juarez had 3,111 murders. Juarez is under Mexican gun laws which basically forbid the ordinary citizen from having guns to defend themselves with. El Paso has more guns than people.

Suddenly, she is ranting about the female murders and claiming, without any evidence, that Americans are crossing the border to do the murders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #81)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 01:38 AM

97. Yes, regardless of your views about guns

What was said in that thread does not justify your anger over discussions about the murders of women. 1) you didn't bother to read the OP. So much of what is in your post reflects poor reading comprehension 2) your statistical source is dubious and provides no information about the gender of the victims. You don't know they are all men. 3) 400 is not the total of women killed. It is the number thought to be killed by this one perp or group of perps. Get it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #81)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 04:45 PM

124. So maybe you should be fighting on a page about Mexican gun laws, and not be

suggesting here that those who want to talk about a serial killer who is slaughtering women are being insensitive to men. Because that's just ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #25)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 10:15 AM

114. there is nothing stopping you from posting an article on the number of men killed, you know.

and there is no requirement on DU that other posters post only about what interests you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 07:52 PM

35. Yeah, well that rest of that is courtesy of your friends in the gun lobby

Who sell illegal weapons to drug cartels. This OP is about serial killing. That you object to a focus on the most prolific serial killing in North America shows exactly what you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #35)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:40 PM

86. Most of the cartel's guns are smuggled in for countries that make real AK-47s.

You can't buy real AK-47s in the U.S. You can only buy semi-auto clones that cost around $1,000.00 You can buy a real, genuine, full-auto, selective-fire, AK-47 in Sudan for about $75.00. Why would a smuggler pay the huge U.S. price for a knock-off when they can get the real thing for so much less. The cartels specialty is smuggling so getting the guns into Mexico would not be a problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #86)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 01:12 AM

96. proof?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #96)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 02:03 AM

99. That from you!!

 



That's all.

Not to jurors -- never mind it doesn't matter! Something sinister will be made up!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CokeMachine (Reply #99)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 02:04 AM

100. He asks it constantly, and in the most bizarre instances

He should be able to provide some himself.

Mind your Ps and Qs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #100)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 12:40 PM

118. Thanks for the laugh!! nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CokeMachine (Reply #99)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:28 PM

135. I know more about evidence and primary sources

than you ever will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #135)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 11:50 PM

146. If you say so and it makes you feel superior.

 

Thanks for your input though!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CokeMachine (Reply #146)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:56 AM

156. You contribute so much to this discussion

It truly is a marvel. You might want to do something about that chip on your shoulder. It must be awfully heavy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #156)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:01 PM

207. No heavier than yours!!

 

And once again thank you for the kind words in your title.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CokeMachine (Reply #207)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:07 PM

210. up to 66 recs

Hoping for 100?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #210)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:11 PM

214. Cool -- if that's what makes you feel good about yourself

 

then I'm happy for you!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CokeMachine (Reply #214)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:13 PM

216. I thought we were in your favorite thread

that you love to kick to bask in victimhood.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #216)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:21 PM

218. If you want to address that thread then post in it -- please.

 

You apparently thought incorrectly -- is that a first for you?

I'm not taking your bait -- you might want to try something more realistic.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CokeMachine (Reply #218)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:34 PM

229. Bait?

My. Easily agitated aren't you?

If I ever want to bait you, it will be much more effective than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #229)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 02:28 PM

236. Ok -- if you say so!!

 

It's just the intertubes so no I'm not agitated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #96)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:18 AM

109. I gave it to you.

Last edited Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:59 AM - Edit history (1)

Fact: It is well known that the cartels are using REAL AK-47s, not U.S. made semi-auto clones. Real AK-47s have full-auto capability. You can't buy real AK-47s in the U.S. So they are obviously getting them from somewhere else.

The Mexican gov't does NOT submit all captured weapons to the U.S. for tracing. Weapons with Russian, Chinese, North Korean, or Arabic markings and full-auto capabilities obviously didn't come from here so there is no point in asking for a U.S. trace.

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110209-mexicos-gun-supply-and-90-percent-myth
By the Numbers

As we discussed in a previous analysis, the 90 percent number was derived from a June 2009 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report to Congress on U.S. efforts to combat arms trafficking to Mexico (see external link).

According to the GAO report, some 30,000 firearms were seized from criminals by Mexican authorities in 2008. Of these 30,000 firearms, information pertaining to 7,200 of them (24 percent) was submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for tracing. Of these 7,200 guns, only about 4,000 could be traced by the ATF, and of these 4,000, some 3,480 (87 percent) were shown to have come from the United States.

This means that the 87 percent figure relates to the number of weapons submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF that could be successfully traced and not from the total number of weapons seized by Mexican authorities or even from the total number of weapons submitted to the ATF for tracing. In fact, the 3,480 guns positively traced to the United States equals less than 12 percent of the total arms seized in Mexico in 2008 and less than 48 percent of all those submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF for tracing. This means that almost 90 percent of the guns seized in Mexico in 2008 were not traced back to the United States.


Where do you think the cartels are getting Korean grenades and RPG-7 launchers and rockets for them? They definately aren't made in the U.S. There does exist an international black market in arms. Watch the movie Lord of War. It is based on true incidents and on a real man, and is an entertaining movie.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #109)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:51 PM

138. The ATF shows 87% came from the US, murder apologist corp. says 90% didn't come from US

Firstly, RW distortion of government reports are not proof. The concept of evidence is clearly lost on you. You must hear boatloads of evidence on Fox and Rush all day long. Evidence is not someone telling you what you want to hear.
The primary source is the GAO report itself. Not your RW buddies at Stratfor.

I've seen this before. They conclude those where the serial numbers have been sawed off didn't come from the US. The ATF says 87% of guns that they could trace came from the US. The rest only says they could not be traced. That doesn't say they came from elsewhere. That says the criminals and or illegal gun filed down the serial numbers so they couldn't be traced.

this is what the actual US governmental report said.
Available evidence indicates many of the firearms fueling Mexican drug
violence originated in the United States, including a growing number of
increasingly lethal weapons. While it is impossible to know how many
firearms are illegally smuggled into Mexico in a given year, about 87 percent
of firearms seized by Mexican authorities and traced in the last 5 years
originated in the United States, according to data from Department of
Justice’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
According to U.S. and Mexican government officials, these firearms have been
increasingly more powerful and lethal in recent years. Many of these firearms
come from gun shops and gun shows in Southwest border states. U.S. and
Mexican government and law enforcement officials stated most firearms are
intended to support operations of Mexican DTOs, which are also responsible
for trafficking arms to Mexico.
The U.S. government faces several significant challenges in combating illicit
sales of firearms in the United States and stemming their flow into Mexico. In
particular, certain provisions of some federal firearms laws present challenges
to U.S. efforts, according to ATF officials. Specifically, officials identified key
challenges related to restrictions on collecting and reporting information on
firearms purchases, a lack of required background checks for private firearms
sales, and limitations on reporting requirements for multiple sales.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09709.pdf

I taught research methods classes for several years. If anyone sites a secondary rather than a primary source for this kind of evidence, their work cannot be published in a peer reviewed journal. Secondary sources can be used only to analyze interpretation and reception, not factual matters where guns come from.

The absence of the ability to trace all the guns does not mean that the guns didn't come from the US. That means they aren't traceable. It is a logical fallacy to conclude that it constitutes evidence that they come from lands far away. The very best you can say is that there is not incontrovertible proof that those guns from the US, yet the fact the traceable guns overwhelmingly can be tied to the US makes it a safe assumption that most of the others come from the US as well. The ATF assumes they do, as does the Mexican government. The report shows that the percentage of guns that do come from the US have increased every year.

In the past gunners have pointed to Central America as an alternative source of guns. Their lack of knowledge of recent US foreign policy means they overlook the fact that guns in Central America were supplied by the US government in order to combat communist guerrillas there. We waged war on Central America, and the resulting violence in that region since is the fallout of the decommissioning of death squads. For proof to that I'll have to refer you to any number of publications on US involvement in the region: NACLA is one publication, and there are reams of books in the library. Those publications can in turn direct you to the primary sources they used.

Read the whole report. Just don't continue to falsify what it says.
You might also search ministerio de justicia reports for Mexico to read what they have to say about the gun issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #138)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 09:48 PM

144. actually, we knew all of that

87 percent of what they traced. That is 12 percent of total guns.
Page eight of the GAO report
While it is impossible to know how many firearms are illegally trafficked into Mexico in a given year, around 87 percent of firearms seized by Mexican authorities and traced over the
past 5 years originated in the United States, according to data from ATF.
IOW, 87 percent of the ones given to the ATF.

In the past gunners have pointed to Central America as an alternative source of guns. Their lack of knowledge of recent US foreign policy means they overlook the fact that guns in Central America were supplied by the US government in order to combat communist guerrillas there. We waged war on Central America, and the resulting violence in that region since is the fallout of the decommissioning of death squads. For proof to that I'll have to refer you to any number of publications on US involvement in the region: NACLA is one publication, and there are reams of books in the library. Those publications can in turn direct you to the primary sources they used.
The guns, including the Soviet suppled ones, are still there, in armories, in working order. They last awhile. Syrian rebels are using bolt action Enfields from World War Two. So is the Taliban. Thompsons that were used in Ireland in the 1920s found their way to Bosnia 70 years later. The average age of a gun smuggled from the US to Mexico if 14 years old. You can buy 100 year old Lugers being used at shooting ranges. There are military surplus AKs all over Africa, cheaper than a good sporting rifle. You need to research your subjects better. that is the difference between someone with a history degree and an intelligence analyst.


You might also search ministerio de justicia reports for Mexico to read what they have to say about the gun issue.
Yeah, of course they are going to mention guns leaving with deserting Mexican troops, also of US origin. I'm skeptical of government reports, including DEA ones that say "pot leads to heroin" yes I'm old enough to remember those. You seriously think I'm going to take some report at face value even if it comes from one of the most corrupt governments in the Western Hemisphere?

The absence of the ability to trace all the guns does not mean that the guns didn't come from the US. That means they aren't traceable. It is a logical fallacy to conclude that it constitutes evidence that they come from lands far away.
Actually, the Mexican government would turn over those that would likely come from the US, as in made in the US or have markings that show it was imported to the US. Yes the ATF can trace an M-60 even if it came through the southern border, the trace would show it was sold to El Salvidor in the 1980s. It would be pointless for Mexico to give full auto AKs to the ATF, because they could not trace it. The Russian government might. The G-36 assault rifle made by Heckler and Koch, same thing. They could ask the German government, but the ATF could not because they are full auto and can not be bought at Wal Mart. Pistols like the Glock 25, the Austrian government could, but the ATF couldn't because those pistols are not imported to the US, at least not on the commercial market. This is important since the cartels are using more true assault rifles, machine guns, weapons, crew serviced weapons, and destructive devices like grenades. None of which can be bought in a US gun store.

It is a greater logical fallacy to assume they are likely US origin with no evidence.
Those are just a few of the flaws in your reasoning.
You might be a good historian, but that isn't the same as being an intelligence annalist or investigator.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #144)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:06 AM

152. The logical fallacy is yours

and a pathetically desperate one at that. Yes, some guns likely come from Soviet and Cuban supplied arms to Central America, but the US provided far, far more. Your entire analysis is based on the most desperate effort to prove the gun industry in this country has nothing to do with violence in Mexico and to cling to propaganda that you think enables you to justify gun proliferation. Obviously the truth means nothing do you, so you will continue to provide fraudulent information and try to pass it off as fact. I will just inform you that I will do my best to ensure everyone sees exactly what they are dealing with as you continue to peddle your lies.


You obviously know nothing about basic statistics or the scientific method. No sampling is ever comprehensive. 26% is a very large statistical sample. To ignore the evidence from that sampling and then claim it says the opposite of what it actually does is a nothing short of fraud. You would be laughed out of any academic discipline for dong that sort of thing. It's the kind of fraud that would ruin a person's reputation for life and might even puncture tenure. Ask Buzz Clik. I believe he is a statistician or works in some discipline that uses statistics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #152)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:48 AM

155. sample frame error

and a pathetically desperate one at that. Yes, some guns likely come from Soviet and Cuban supplied arms to Central America, but the US provided far, far more. Your entire analysis is based on the most desperate effort to prove the gun industry in this country has nothing to do with violence in Mexico and to cling to propaganda that you think enables you to justify gun proliferation. Obviously the truth means nothing do you, so you will continue to provide fraudulent information and try to pass it off as fact. I will just inform you that I will do my best to ensure everyone sees exactly what they are dealing with as you continue to peddle your lies.
Sorry, most of the guns used in Mexico are not even made in the US. The truth means a lot to me. I just happen to know what I'm talking about. And yes, the Soviet Bloc did supply weapons, but many guns are US made and stolen from Guatemalan military armories.
http://www.borderlandbeat.com/2011/03/mexican-cartels-get-heavy-weapons-from.html
http://www.insightcrime.org/news-briefs/germany-gun-trafficking-mexico

You obviously know nothing about basic statistics or the scientific method. No sampling is ever comprehensive. 26% is a very large statistical sample. To ignore the evidence from that sampling and then claim it says the opposite of what it actually does is a nothing short of fraud. You would be laughed out of any academic discipline for dong that sort of thing. It's the kind of fraud that would ruin a person's reputation for life and might even puncture tenure. Ask Buzz Clik. I believe he is a statistician or works in some discipline that uses statistics.
I never claimed to be an academic, but it has nothing to do with statistical sampling. The fallacy is yours for the reasons I explained. I explained how an intelligence analyst or an investigator would look at it, and they do. BTW, I do think it is an example of sample frame error for the reasons I explained. In fact, I'm certain of it. Just search images for "guns confiscated from drug cartels" you will find a lot of pictures of machine guns, RPGs, gold plated pistols in calibers common in Latin America, not very rare here, so I know what I'm talking about.
http://www.qualtrics.com/blog/frequent-sampling-errors/
Real life is much more complex and nuanced than a math exercise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #155)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 04:40 AM

158. Now you've contradicted yourself.

You can't even keep your arguments consistent. You just said you didn't trust news sources. Do you not keep track of who you're talking to?

Sorry, most of the guns used in Mexico are not even made in the US.


It is possible that the sampling is not entirely representative, but your claim that most guns don't come from the US is patently and obviously false. It's not only false, since you've read government reports to the contrary, but you know it is false. You again are deliberately falsifying information. First you say newspapers are not legitimate because they didn't tell you what you want to hear, now citing the ones that tell you what you want to hear.

Do you ever consider honesty at any point? You know you aren't convincing anyone. You're just lying to yourself. It is the most desperate and dishonest thing I ever ever seen anyone commit to print. I really do feel sorry for you. I hope this whole effort isn't entirely on your own volition. It is even sadder if you actually believe these convoluted rhetorical machinations.

You know, if one simply maintains positions that are not morally and intellectually corrupt, there is no need to continually contradict oneself and twist information to fit a political agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #158)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:12 AM

172. when did I contradict myself?

the government source said most of those given to the ATF came from the US. But that was only the minority of guns. As I explained why, before. This graph is from the GOA data.
I am not lying to myself.
You know, if one simply maintains positions that are not morally and intellectually corrupt, there is no need to continually contradict oneself and twist information to fit a political agenda.
I'm sorry, you are projecting. I honestly don't think you read the GAO report. Judging from the rest of the posts, you are not convincing anyone else either. Actually, I'm being very honest. I think you believe you are.
this graph simplifies the GAO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #172)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 09:24 AM

182. I mentioned a case in Texas

the guy recently acquitted for shooting a sex worker because she didn't have sex with him. You said you didn't trust newspaper accounts. Then you go on to site newspaper accounts.

Now you claim there is proof that the the guns don't come from the US. That is NOT what the report says at all, nor does your graphic say that. It shows 87% of those that could be traced come from the US. The rest could not be traced. Is the concept really that difficult for you to understand?

When I pointed that out last night, you said you didn't believe the report. I suggest you reread your own posts.

What you think of me is entirely irrelevant. Your own posts speak for themselves.

I'm perfectly happy to stop this and any and all conversations with you. It's obviously getting no where. No amount of evidence means anything to you. You have made clear over and over again that the only evidence you consider legitimate is that which you agree with, whatever you think justifies gun proliferation. That you think you are being honest is even more disturbing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #182)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 10:25 AM

192. Some newspaper accounts are better than others

Last edited Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:15 AM - Edit history (1)

the Texas case was having not exactly passing the smell test.
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Jury-acquits-escort-shooter-4581027.php

Now that I am fully awake, I had to go look for the best article about it.

He didn't get off because she refused to have sex with him, he got off because Texas law, a law that dates back to the 1970s before SYG, allows the use of deadly force to retrieve stolen property, money in this case. You mischaracterized it. I disagree with the law, and has nothing to do with SYG or Mexico, but you still mischaracterize the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #182)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:38 AM

202. now that I'm fully awake,

it was about stolen money, not having sex. If she gave a refund, he wouldn't have been acquitted. That does not mean I agree with that law, it is simply being accurate.

Now you claim there is proof that the the guns don't come from the US. That is NOT what the report says at all, nor does your graphic say that. It shows 87% of those that could be traced come from the US. The rest could not be traced. Is the concept really that difficult for you to understand?
Why couldn't they be traced? Why were only a small number given to the ATF to begin with? That is 87 percent of what was given to the ATF, not 87 percent of all guns. Most guns were not given to the ATF for tracing. Why?
Perhaps I should have been, and would have been at a better hour, to point out that they did not come from US gun stores or gun shows. "US origin" doesn't mean that much. Many of the grenades seized are US origin. No, you can't buy grenades and machine guns at gun shows.
http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2009/08/atf_worries_about_mexican_drug.html

Back to the GAO report.
30,000 firearms were seized Mexican authorities in 2008.
Of these 30K:
7,200 were given to ATF for tracing.
4,000 could be traced
3,480 where shown to have come from the US

Evidence does, as soon as you provide it. When you do, it has to be good not from VPC or MAIG.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #172)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 09:47 AM

185. GAO report

Verbatim

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09709.pdf

Available evidence indicates many of the firearms fueling Mexican drug
violence have come from the United States, including a growing number of
increasingly lethal weapons. Many of these firearms came from gun shops
and gun shows in Southwest border states, such as Texas, California, and
Arizona, according to ATF officials and trace data. U.S. and Mexican
government officials stated most guns trafficked into Mexico are
facilitated by and support operations of Mexican drug trafficking
organizations. . . .

Using ATF’s eTrace data, which currently serves as the best data we found
available for analyzing the source and nature of firearms trafficked and
seized in Mexico, we determined over 20,000, or 87 percent, of firearms
seized by Mexican authorities and traced from fiscal year 2004 to fiscal
year 2008 originated in the United States. Figure 3 shows the percentages
of firearms seized in Mexico and traced from fiscal year 2004 to fiscal year
2008 that originated in the United States. Over 90 percent of the firearms
seized in Mexico and traced over the last 3 years have come from the
United States . . .

Around 68 percent of these firearms were manufactured in the United
States, while around 19 percent were manufactured in third countries and
imported into the United States before being trafficked into Mexico. ATF
could not determine whether the remaining 13 percent foreign sourced
arms had been trafficked into Mexico through the United States, due to
incomplete information.



Note that last part. They show that guns manufacturered elsewhere were trafficked to Mexico through the US. Amazingly, the US imports guns.

Where you got the idea that the majority of the guns did not come through the US escapes me because the report does not say that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #185)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 10:19 AM

190. key words being

Last edited Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:40 AM - Edit history (1)

"and traced". Likely means, "we don't know, but we think it is a safe bet."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #185)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:26 AM

197. That is 87% of 24% of the total.

Take a look at your same report, page 16. The vast majority of Mexican siezed guns are not submitted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #138)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:32 AM

175. Look at ALL the numbers, not just the ones you want to see.

The entire report is 83 pages. I am not going to devote that much time to an internet argument.

How many guns did the Mexican authorities confiscate? According to the GAO report, page 16: In 2008, of the almost 30,000 firearms that the Mexican Attorney General’s office said were seized, only around 7,200, or approximately a quarter, were submitted to ATF for tracing. http://www.gao.gov/assets/300/291223.pdf That is a direct quote from the GAO report.

Stratfor claims that the GAO report says that only 4,000 guns were capable of being traced. I was not able to find that in the GAO report so I will not use that number and use the 7,200 as capable of being traced.

That means that they didn't submit about 22,800 for tracing.

Of the 7,200 guns submitted for tracing, 87% were found to have come from the U.S., therefore 13% came from somewhere else. That is 936 guns came from somewhere else. I will round that to 900 since all of the other numbers are rounded off.

22,800 + 900 = 23,700 guns that came from somewhere else. That is 80% came from somewhere else.

Please notice that these are not NRA numbers, they come from the same GAO report that you are promoting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:06 PM

37. The people of Juarez have lots of guns

courtesy of you and the NRA. You have no one but your friends in the gun lobby to thank for those murders. You really need to write to the FBI and demand they close their serial killer unit. It's just appalling that anyone would care about women raped, killed, and murdered. While your at it, lobby to get those sex crimes units around the country shut down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:17 PM

45. Start your own thread, then. BTW: Serial sex murders are not the same category as other killings.

That is why we know Ted Bundy and not Random Mexican Gang Guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #22)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:30 PM

71. You realize we are talking about a single killer here, right?

Or a group of killers. The point is not general murder statistics, but the OP does note that more men are killed in Juarez than women. Still, you can't resist the opportunity to discount the lives of those women.

Where did you find those stats about murder in Juarez? How many are gun deaths?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #71)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:42 PM

88. When I count ALL the deaths, I am not discounting anybody.

ALL are people. I counted all 3,111.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #88)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 10:46 PM

89. Look at what you did here

You wrote an OP about the Zimmerman trial but not all the trials and all the murders in FL. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014506169
OMG, the injustice of it all. What about all the other people on trial in Florida. They aren't important to you? You only care about men on trial?

You see how stupid that sounds? That is exactly what you have done in this thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #22)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 10:25 AM

117. I don't think that illustrating concern for A denies in any way any additional concern for B.

I don't think that illustrating concern for A denies in any way any additional concern for B.

E.g., If I illustrate concern for the poaching of elephants for ivory, it certainly doesn't imply that I have no concern for the poaching of lions... though I readily admit that many idiots may infer it as that to better validate their own biases..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #117)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 12:53 PM

122. See my post #81.

Normally I would agree with you. However, given the context of this flame war, I do not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #122)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 05:30 PM

126. So it's OK for you to hijack a discussion about a serial killer to push a fight from another thread?

That's a pretty callous position to take with respect to a lot of dead and mutilated women.

But, hey, you have an agenda and all must fall before it. I get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Squinch (Reply #126)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 07:45 AM

165. In the other thread she referred to this thread to make her point. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #165)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:11 PM

225. No, I referred to this thread so you would learn something

about Juarez and stop using it as rhetorical fodder for your gun crusade. I was disgusted that you invoked these deaths as part of your effort to legitimate gun proliferation. I thought you might read about this and care about these women being killed. Obviously I was foolish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #225)

Fri Jun 21, 2013, 12:09 AM

243. I compared total HUMAN deaths to total HUMAN deaths.

Juarez, in 2010 had 3,111 murders. El Paso, in 2010 had five.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #165)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 04:07 PM

239. What the hell difference does that make?

Here are your words:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3042263

This was your response to a thread about hundreds if not thousands of women being butchered by a serial killer.

And when you are called on it, your response is, "she made me do it"? Seriously? You are not embarrassed to have that response representing yourself to other people?

What are you, five?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:49 PM

50. Great (and chilling) book on the subject

I'm sure it is available in English too.

http://archivo.univision.com/content/content.jhtml?cid=1125400

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arely staircase (Reply #50)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 08:55 PM

52. Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 09:27 PM

68. k&r

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 12:00 AM

93. K&R

Horrible story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 06:13 AM

105. I live in El Paso

The reason that El Paso usually maintains the rank of the second safest city in America, second to Honolulu, is that El Paso has more law enforcement than most other cities. Every agency is operational here. Border Patrol, DEA, DHS, state, local, county, Texas Rangers, etc. In fact, there has been an active FBI investigation of local government officials, including members of school boards as well as the County Commision, going on here for years which has yielded more than a few indictments and convictions. In addition, people know full well that the local police will shoot you if you should be caught stealing beer from a 7/11 store -- as that has happened in two seperate incidents twice before.
The reason Juarez is cited as the most dangerous city in the world is because of the infighting between and among the drug cartels. The local police were judged to be corrupt by former President Calderon. In an effort to control the violence, the police were replaced by military forces for a number of years, until recently when Calderon left office.
However, the long-running murders of young women remain unsolved as it continues unabated for at least a decade. But the federal, Mexican government has been investigating.
Guns or no guns. Mysogyny or not. Mexican culture or not. Americans in Juarez or not. Martial law or not. Investigations or not. The murders continue.
So, in truth, there is no "hot button" issue to debate concerning these murders. However, it is helpful for people to be more aware of this aspect of what's been going on in Juarez -- for years and years and years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BellaKos (Reply #105)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:16 AM

108. Thanks for sharing that

Interesting observations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BellaKos (Reply #105)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 07:47 PM

137. ?El Paso's low violent crime rate, high natual lithium

El Paso has an unusually high, natural lithium content in its water and soil...some suggest this, too, contributes to lower violent crime because the water is naturally treating those with bi-polar disorder.


And from an old DU thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2948674&mesg_id=2949566

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duhneece (Reply #137)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:34 AM

201. Shouldn't Juarez have similar lithium levels? N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 10:16 AM

115. . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 02:09 PM

123. Most likely several serial killers,

just my guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Wed Jun 19, 2013, 08:33 PM

142. the OP

 

believes "gun nuts" cross over the border from the US just so they can have free reign killing and raping women in mexico

I cant take this person seriously

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to downbythelake (Reply #142)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:41 AM

148. I didn't say a thing about guns or gun nuts in the OP

And no where did I say gun nuts were crossing the border to kill. The Harvard publication cited, like many other studies on this issue, speculate that US sex offenders MAY be involved. Get a grip on that paranoia. Everything isn't about you and your fucking guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 04:48 AM

159. I just want to say...

 

... that based on this and other threads...

Your signature is spot on for you.

Fuck logic... just act on emotion and judge others who don't feel the same way. Bravo...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pelican (Reply #159)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 04:49 AM

160. That's what you think my signature says?

and this OP? How sad for you.

Evidently you prefer 19th century positivism? That would be consistent with the rest of your positions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pelican (Reply #159)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 05:14 AM

161. But gun policy is a perfect example of what Paz meant

To pretend there is a moral equivalency between policies that result in death and those that seek to spare lives is to be complicit in those deaths. I firmly believe that. I need not shoot anyone to be complicit in gun violence. I need only sit back and pretend that justice does not require me to act in defense of life.

Another example would be an an analysis of genocide, like the crimes for which Efrain Rios Montt was recently convicted in Guatemala. One could pretend that there is an objective position in which genocide and the war on communism were equally valid positions, but that would be be fundamentally unjust. One sought to maintain US power through mass murder; the other for Ixil Maya's right to live, farm, and be free from extermination. To fail to denounce evil is to be complicit in it. That is at the heart of what it means to have a social conscience, and without a social conscience one is indifferent to justice and humanity. It is a continuation of Edmund Burke's idea that "all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men to do nothing.

Octavio Paz, Mexican writer, poet, and winner of the 1990 Nobel Prize for Literature, one of the greatest writers of the twentieth century:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octavio_Paz The sort of legacy you consider repulsive.

From his 1998 obituary by Edward Hirsch in the NYTimes, 1998

I have been devouring Paz's poems and essays most of my life now, and feel as if a radiant light passed out of the world when he died on April 19 at the age of 84. A literary era, the whole cultural landscape of the Americas, seems diminished. There was an energetic clash within Paz between poetry and history, each making its competing claims on his formidable intelligence. One was a wayward siren song calling him to a perpetual present, to an erotic consecration of instants and to a superabundance of time and being, whereas the other materialized as a measured speech reminding him of the social and political needs of others, a voluble lecture about the nature of civitas, the importance of worldly concerns and the laws of temporal process.


http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/06/07/bookend/bookend.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pelican (Reply #159)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 07:03 AM

162. you dont think the OP title wrote itself did you?

 

"when men hate women" as if its an epidemic. pure fear based response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #162)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 07:44 AM

164. A fear based response to serial killing?

Why would that frighten anyone. What do you call the rape, murder, and mutilation of over 400 women if not hatred? A love tap?

WTF is wrong with you? Please, stop spreading your bile in my threads.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #164)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:31 AM

199. i wasnt talking to you. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #199)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:11 PM

213. remdi95

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #213)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:58 PM

223. interesting....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to opiate69 (Reply #223)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:00 PM

224. Totally deserved

He makes you seem like a women's libber.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #224)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:37 PM

230. Careful, now. Your transparency page is recently clean.

And of course, I would hate to go back on my promise to Warren.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to opiate69 (Reply #230)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:48 PM

231. Did you take that as an insult?

It certainly wasn't intended as one. I thought it was rather complimentary. I'm not quite sure which side of that suggestion bothered you.

I don't think you'd have much luck getting that hidden, but who knows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #231)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 02:06 PM

234. My interpretation of it may have been wrong. If so, I apologize.

And fwiw, I'm behind you on the gun control aspect of this discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to galileoreloaded (Reply #199)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:11 PM

215. Jury results:

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Bwhahahahahahahaha! Seriously, the lamest alert I have ever seen. Alerter, you need to stay off of the internet. It isn't for you.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This is nowhere close to being alert-worthy.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I don't think:
1.) It was meant to be rude.
2.) An OP deserves any special consideration in the thread they started.
3.) Their previous comment was addressed to or was meant to reference BainsBane; I think it was addressed to Pelican. I think it was a slightly-unnice comment directed @ Pelican.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: FFS, alerter, is this your first time using an internet discussion forum? Step away from the alert button...
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: In what fucking universe is this worthy of an alert?
I think Skinner needs to add a regulation that serial alerters will be TOS'd. The alerter here deserves it!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #215)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:38 PM

221. its nice to see rational thought rewarded 6-0. DU never lets me down! nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 08:02 AM

170. prostitution and family violence both unchecked in the Mad Max lands

younger, prettier woman exploited for the $5-$7 dollar a day American owned factory jobs. It's a harsh life for the children of those factory workers, not many choices in life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 10:18 AM

189. Women and employment

I think there are a number of things going on in Ciudad Juarez that have made a "perfect storm" of violence against women, but I think women entering the work force and the perceived threat to male status is a huge part of the equation. I'm no expert, but as I recall the PAN party (Conservative) has it's roots in Northern Mexico, and nothing seems to freak out conservatives like a change in gender status, and women seen as independent economic actors is a big change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bosso 63 (Reply #189)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 10:43 AM

194. Yes, the documentary linked makes that very point

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Original post)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 10:25 AM

191. It's the culture....

 

I know this will probably get me flamed, but I'll press on because it helps make some sense of things.

The problem with Mexico is an Arabized culture that is mixed with local beliefs and a rather amazing level of racism.

Arabic culture stemming from the middle east was essentially a warrior culture in the seventh century. Those at the top of the social hierarchy didn't farm, they raided farms and took what they wanted. They didn't build things, though they may have commissioned them, the building was done by slaves. Manual labor was something to be done by the lower classes and slaves. Women fell into two classes, wives or concubines. Wives were for reproduction and concubines were as much about wealth and power as they were about pleasure. Concubines and slaves were equally disposable.

This culture spread eventually to Pakistan and India (rejected by the enslaved hindus), north as far as Georgia, and west as far as Spain initially. It took on a different aspect in Spain and then spread to the New World and into Mexico with it's conquest. Look up reports from the Spanish conquest. Spanish soldiers took on multiple wives and concubines from the tribes they conquered, that wasn't a Catholic ideal even if they claimed to be converting heathens. In the process the indigenous cultures were either destroyed or dominated. It probably gave the survivors and their descendants a massive inferiority complex.

Take a look at Mexican culture now, in general. A woman, especially a darker skinned or lower class woman, walking unescorted is viewed as little more than meat to be used by a man who wants to take her. That should sound familiar. The Upper class may commission new buildings, but they have little actual input, the manual labor is done by a lower class that is largely regarded as disposable. The Upper class of Mexico has waged war on numerous occasions against it's neighbors to take land and resources. It will also make war against anyone in the country that doesn't want to pay patronage to the upper class. The entire country is owned by something like 45 families.

Add in a drug trade crossing through from South America, which doesn't require much manual labor and you get cartels to add to a general lawlessness. Concentrate all of this in Juarez and you have a situation where law enforcement is so busy fighting to maintain some control that killers can work without getting noticed.

It's ugly as hell. Doesn't mean it isn't mostly the truth, but the truth isn't always beautiful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loose wheel (Reply #191)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 10:44 AM

195. The Harvard report specifically addresses that view

You articulate. I suggest you read it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loose wheel (Reply #191)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 11:42 AM

203. Yes. Mexican culture does treat women that way.

I hadn't considered that it has roots in the Islamic conquest of Spain, but that certainly makes sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #203)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:10 PM

212. OMG

FFS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #212)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:27 PM

219. Interesting

The culture of machismo is apparently misunderstood, unless its the American brand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #219)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 12:45 PM

222. witness how powerful the evil Islam is

Last edited Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:20 PM - Edit history (1)

That it contaminates 500 years later.

As I said, you can't make this shit up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #222)

Thu Jun 20, 2013, 01:18 PM

226. Nope

Blithely ignoring Euopean history is all the rage now, apparently. Kind of like colonialism apologists


Or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread