The rampage of violence against helpless citizens in Mexico should be a lesson to all in the U.S. who hunger for restricting, then registering, then ultimately collecting our firearms.
Drug gangs have carte blanche run of their country with the ability to lay siege to any town in their “turf” and eliminate all who don’t follow their orders. The reason they operate with impunity is because innocent Mexican citizens have been disarmed by their government!
They are not allowed the inalienable right to defend themselves and their families, but the criminal element is falling all over itself awash in guns and ammo — some of which were supplied to them via the U.S. government. Talk about a double whammy: our government arms the bad guys while their government disarms the victims! With the possibility of weapons being in every casa and the residents willing and able to defend themselves, the cartel cowards would be stopped in their tracks.
If the leaders of Mexico were any way serious about putting a damper on the spread of beheadings, torture and anarchy that is crippling the country, it could do no better than to free up its citizens by restoring their inherent right to keep and bear arms. The wisdom of the bumper sticker cannot be denied: “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”
P.J. O’Malley
Mesa
Arizona Willie posted at 10:54 am on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
Mexico will NEVER allow legal gun ownership the way we have it.
Mexico has had several revolutions and they will try to keep guns under control to prevent the people from overthrowing the corrupt business and political system that rules the country now.
truth posted at 11:03 am on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
Many conservatives now insist that Obama is pursuing a conscious strategy to exacerbate the GOP-s internal divisions and cause the party to implode in bitter in fighting. House Speaker John Boehner and conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh both recently said Obama's is to annihilate the Republican party, with Limbaugh warning listeners that Obama was seeking nothing less than the destruction of conservatism itself and the elimination of all viable options. After four years of watching the GOP block even the most political elements of his agenda, Obama has given up negotiation with the right.
Despite liberal pundits scoffing, it has been obvious since the election that Obama is more interested in breaking the back of opposition and in governing responsibly.
truth posted at 11:04 am on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
Obama's doing it again: offering compromise solutions he knows the GOP won't accept, then rushing to the cameras to complain again about Republicans intransigence. Rather than let bipartisan consensus develop, Obama is trying to push immigration legislation so far left that the GOP can't accept it, and then use the issue to drive minority turnout in 2014.
They use to be the party of Testosterone, but now they're self-pitying babies bleating, Mama, President Obama is picking on us. Don't all politicians want to win elections and crush the opposition? Would the Tea Party like to annihilate liberal Democrats ? Heck, yes. So Republicans can stop wining about big, bad, President Obama. He's a skilled ambitious politician, but he has no super power.
sockratties posted at 11:07 am on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
Pedro Jose O’Malley... Let's let Mexico run Mexico. Everyone here got upset when the Mexican President made suggestions about U. S. demand making it difficult for Mexico to stem the supply. We have enough problems here without trying to stick our nose in our neighbor’s business.
valleynative posted at 11:40 am on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
sockratties, He's not trying to stick his nose into Mexico's business. As he says in the very first line, he's simply suggesting that we learn a lesson from their mistake.
VofReason posted at 11:48 am on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
Yes Sockraties and it would be much easier to let Mexico deal with Mexico if we were not the benefactor of the poor and oppressed that run away from that country. Sure, if the border was secure (oh I know, it is more secure now then ever) we could leave them to handle their own affairs. Though since we are here in reality and have to deal with the fact that they cannot deal with their own affairs, it may make sense to try to influence the situation.
VofReason posted at 11:49 am on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
Az willie hit it on the nose. Mexico give it's people the ability to have arms, the Government of Mexico will have a big problem on it hands.
Bluepoet posted at 1:18 pm on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
Well, which is it, we are getting the poor political refugees coming over, or the criminals, who want to steal our children and take our jobs? Should we be welcoming the oppressed, or throwing them in jail? Answer: Neither, we should put them in camps, pay them next to nothing, and then complain that they get sick , have no insurance, and won't "go home"...
Our government arming the cartels? Yeah, like it isn't stupid easy for them to buy guns, anywhere. But your are paritally right, it's our MO to supply "rebels" in other countries, with arms, and support. Until we install a puppet government, then we abandon all, and let the next generation of that country grow up hating us, for meddling...only to start the same thing all over again. But, the main thing is the guns, and not the people, right? It's always about the guns...and bumper sticker wisdom...
Rich posted at 6:14 pm on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
Whether or not you are aware of it every Mexican citizen has the right to keep a weapon, a firearm if he wishes to. They cannot bear the weapon except in areas designated by the government. That is the only difference. With us, it's a baloney game. The government slices off cities, airports, and schools (so your kids are in jeopardy). Mexico isn't a lesson in banning guns, it's a lesson in being able to carry them. Mexicans can have an arsenal at home, but on the street they are helpless. Like the kids in our schools.
Ateam1 posted at 6:34 pm on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
Bluepoet: For real?! They use the gun's they aquire here? I thought all they want is a way to feed and take care of there families, ie More US dollars going to Meehico!I don't give a hoot what they do in Meehico! They can figure it out for themselve's!
bobunf posted at 11:25 pm on Wed, Mar 13, 2013.
Reducing the homicide rate in the US is not complicated. It is mind numbingly simple and obvious. Attempted solutions based on mental health, video games or armed guards is attempting nothing; is falling for the diversion.
The US has the world’s most heavily armed civilian population – an incredible 20 times more guns per capita than the average of the rest of the world. More guns than people. And, with that, we have more homicides per capita (with guns or without) than any other developed country in the world. More than:
Monaco, Japan, Singapore, Iceland, Norway, Austria, Slovenia, Switzerland, Spain, Germany, Denmark, Italy, New Zealand, Sweden, Malta, Australia, Poland, France, Netherlands, Ireland, United Kingdom, Portugal, Serbia, Hungary, Andorra, Croatia, Slovakia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Greece, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Belgium, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Romania, Israel, Finland, Luxembourg, South Korea, Liechtenstein, Latvia, Chile, Taiwan, Turkey, Argentina and Montenegro.
In most cases many more homicides; on the average the US has four times as many murders per capita -- not even counting accidental shootings of children, parents, friends and others. The Canadians and Czechs have a third as many murders per capita as the US. Australia, Italy, the UK, France and Portugal have a fourth. Japan, Spain and Holland a fifth. Switzerland a seventh. Austria and Norway a tenth.
Switzerland, by the way, has half the number of guns per capita, both military and private, as the US has private guns. The Swiss have stringent regulation of access to guns and ammunition. Ammunition for military weapons must be kept at arsenals. Weapons acquisition permits and gun carrying permits are required. The number and type of guns an individual can purchase is limited in multiple ways.
The US has about 50 times the number of privately owned guns per capita as Israel. In Israel gun licenses are only given to those who have a reason because they work in security or law enforcement, or those who live in settlements where the state has an interest in them being armed. Anyone who fits the requirements, is over age 21 and an Israeli resident for more than three years, must go through a mental and physical health exam, then pass shooting exams and courses at a licensed gun range, as well as background checks by the Public Security Ministry.
Once they order their firearm from a gun store, they are allowed to take it home with a one-time supply of 50 bullets, which they cannot renew. Gun owners must prove they have a safe at home to keep their weapon in.
Israeli comment: “Those people over there [United States] are barbarians when it comes to weapons, the situation there is insane.”
China, the most populous country in the world, containing almost one-fourth of all humans is not a developed country, but it has much stricter gun control laws and a homicide rate less than a fourth of the US.
If we’re having massacres a couple times a month, and more killings in the last 20 years than died in World War II, does it not make sense to at least try what everybody else in the world has implemented with great success?
valleynative posted at 7:56 am on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.
bobunf, as a rule of thumb, when the solution to a problem seems to be mind-numbingly simple and obvious, you're either using poor logic or bad data.
In this case, your logic is flawed. Correlation does not imply causation.
Ignoring guns, our murder rate involving blunt objects is still higher than most of those same countries. It's not the weapon, it's the society. American society pretends to be a melting pot, but in reality, we're just a tossed salad of groups of people who are angry at the other groups.
bobunf posted at 10:25 am on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.
valleynative "our murder rate involving blunt objects is still higher than most of those same countries"
Do you have a source for this statement? Which I do not believe is true
bobunf posted at 10:41 am on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.
Actually valleynative does have a point.
Guns per 100 residents
Murders per million residents per year
Guns Murders
89 50 United States, 28 murders involving guns, 22 not involving guns
16 10 Median excluding US - all countries with GDP per capita in excess of $24,000
30 3 Iceland
30 5 Austria
1 5 Singapore
1 5 Japan
31 6 Norway
25 6 Bahrain
14 6 Slovenia
46 7 Switzerland
25 7 Oman
30 8 Germany
23 8 United Arab Emirates
19 9 Qatar
16 9 Czech Republic
12 9 Denmark
10 9 Spain
35 10 Saudi Arabia
32 10 Sweden
23 10 Greece
12 10 Italy
12 10 Malta
4 11 Netherlands
15 12 Australia
9 12 Ireland
8 12 Portugal
8 12 United Kingdom
1 13 Poland
31 14 France
23 15 New Zealand
8 15 Slovakia
36 17 Cyprus
17 17 Belgium
31 18 Canada
7 21 Israel
25 22 Kuwait
45 23 Finland
15 25 Luxembourg
1 29 South Korea
5 36 Taiwan
valleynative posted at 10:41 am on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.
Google crime statistics. Look for the FBI's report of violent crime broken down by weapon type. Do you have a reason to doubt it, other than having already made up your mind that guns are the problem?
More mass murders are committed using fire or blunt objects than with assault weapons.
Rich posted at 7:40 pm on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.
"Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock. " Harry Lime in "The Third Man"
bobunf posted at 11:18 pm on Thu, Mar 14, 2013.
valleynative, using the source you suggested (FBI's report of violent crime broken down by weapon type) located at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8
Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Total 14,916 14,224 13,752 13,164 12,664
Guns 10,129 9,528 9,199 8,874 8,583
%w guns 68% 67% 67% 67% 68%
In EVERY year guns account for over two-thirds of the murders.
Do you have a reason to doubt your own source? Do you have a problem with reading comprehension? Or have you already made up your mind that guns are not the problem, and as Hegal put it, "Then so much the worse for the facts."
valleynative posted at 9:20 am on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.
bobunf, that doesn't refute what I said. Of course guns account for most murders, because they're the easiest tool to use. The point is that if you don't have that particular tool available, you use one of the many other suitable tools, and more people in the U.S. kill with baseball bats, gasoline, knives, frying pans, etc, than are killed in such ways in other nations. We are simply more murderous as a society. Take away guns from honest citizens and violent crime will go up.
VofReason posted at 12:38 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.
Bluepoet sure has it nailed down. Of course the fact that we have no idea whether the illegal immigrant crawling over the border is a dishwasher or a criminal. That is the whole issue about having "legal immigration" to weed them out and limit numbers. Maybe you missed the main point, if they cannot jump the border illegally, they will deal with their problems at home. If your country has problems and you don't have the financial resources or the ability to sneak in somewhere else- you deal with the problem at hand- right? Or additionally ask for help to solve the situation from the US- right?
downtownresident posted at 1:27 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.
truth,
Rush Limbaugh???????????????? Really??????????????
Only a complete idiot would even listen to that radical fat pig.
Ateam1 posted at 7:12 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.
dtr: I don't listen to Rush very often because i think he is way too far to the right. Call him what you want, but the man , Tell's the truth! Believe want you want, TIME WILL TELL!
Ateam1 posted at 7:19 pm on Fri, Mar 15, 2013.
I think Bill Clinton was one of the best presidents we have had ,But he was a sleaze. Too bad for that. Now the Lib's are going to put Hillary in the next time around. It's any and everything but a white,grey, rich boy! RIGHT!!!
sockratties posted at 11:21 am on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.
Ateam1... Rush mixes bits of fact with large doses of innuendo. If telling a half truth twice in a row amounts to the truth in your mind, so be it. Rush is just another media joke profiting from the ignorance of those who want to believe what he says. There are a lot of them on both ends of the political spectrum. They're a lot like evangelists with politics as their religion.
onerebel posted at 11:27 pm on Sat, Mar 16, 2013.
"Rush Limbaugh???????????????? Really??????????????
Only a complete idiot would even listen to that radical fat pig."
He said as he turned on MSNBC and Chris Matthews and then fell into a trance!
[wink]