Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: When Men Hate Women: Femicide in Ciudad Juarez [View all]gejohnston
(17,502 posts)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.
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 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.
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.)
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.
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.
Response to: BainsBane (Reply #147)
Forum or Group: General Discussion (Forum)
Reply title:
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
244 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
k and r for this horrific story. I used to go to ciudad juarez years ago, when it was relatively
niyad
Jun 2013
#1
I would guess that NAFTA contributed to a flood of new female workers to Juarez...
antigone382
Jun 2013
#26
Do you have any evidence that the killers are Americans crossing the border for kicks?
GreenStormCloud
Jun 2013
#16
Why are you making this a fight? Why does this conversation make you jump to being offended?
Squinch
Jun 2013
#41
I know - American CCW holders killing women and smuggling the bodies into Mexico
hack89
Jun 2013
#58
What percentage of guns did the Mexican goverment submit to the US government for tracing?
hack89
Jun 2013
#145
no, i get it and you are correct. its an attempt to define a protected class. i fight it often. nt
galileoreloaded
Jun 2013
#27
i think you might need or want a break from DU because your ability to read my mind
galileoreloaded
Jun 2013
#39
men are murdered 3-1 over women nationally. go bark up a different tree nt
galileoreloaded
Jun 2013
#44
so men killing men doesn't count. most sexist quote ive seen on DU. please stop making
galileoreloaded
Jun 2013
#48
Yeah, that has to do with the minor fact the serial killers are targeting women
BainsBane
Jun 2013
#32
Reading comprehension, much? The OP DOES mention men, but notes that their murders ARE NOT
WinkyDink
Jun 2013
#42
If you would like to make an OP about the deaths of men in Juarez, which are primarily from the
Squinch
Jun 2013
#65
there is nothing stopping you from posting an article on the number of men killed, you know.
niyad
Jun 2013
#114
Most of the cartel's guns are smuggled in for countries that make real AK-47s.
GreenStormCloud
Jun 2013
#86
The ATF shows 87% came from the US, murder apologist corp. says 90% didn't come from US
BainsBane
Jun 2013
#138
Start your own thread, then. BTW: Serial sex murders are not the same category as other killings.
WinkyDink
Jun 2013
#45
I don't think that illustrating concern for A denies in any way any additional concern for B.
LanternWaste
Jun 2013
#117
So it's OK for you to hijack a discussion about a serial killer to push a fight from another thread?
Squinch
Jun 2013
#126
In the other thread she referred to this thread to make her point. N/T
GreenStormCloud
Jun 2013
#165
its nice to see rational thought rewarded 6-0. DU never lets me down! nt
galileoreloaded
Jun 2013
#221