Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unable to go out to the streets and grab the guns from the armed and dangerous, I guess I'll hang around these forums and hope for the best. From Calderon's first visit, I learned that it has come to the attention of Mexico's president and the attention of our missing mayor that there are social problems in Juarez. I - and any other kid - could have given them that information many decades ago, and the social situation has certainly not improved under political guidance.
A few decades ago, when I lived in El Paso I was mildly troubled by its municipal self-righteousness. It wasn't such a big deal, but it didn't escape my attention that many of the most saintly El Pasoans didn't appear to have been in the US over six months. But, to keep the peace, I found Juarez attitudes equally provincial, equally narrow. So let's not get into a debate about which city breeds the most angels. But how much political game-playing goes into declaring El Paso one of the nation's safest cities?
I ask this for practical reasons, with some thought of moving to El Paso. I get mixed messages from the news that reports daily shootings in El Paso while stressing that it's the safest city in the US. It really makes one wonder what's going on in Detroit if El Paso shootouts are considered "safe."
Am I faced with the option of staying in Juarez where I may be shot dangerously, or moving to El Paso where I'll be shot safely? Such options make it kinda hard for me to make up my mind.
Going back to the observations that some violence in Juarez is perpetrated by citizens or residents of El Paso, I wouldn't want to make too much of such things. The proximity of the cities makes such bridge-crossing criminality inevitable. Those observing that some perpetrators of violent or criminal acts in Juarez are quick to identify the guilty as Mexican Americans. This paves the way for further nonsense about "racial" or genetic criminality. Sorry, folks, but it's hardly surprising that many citizens of El Paso are Mexican American. Do I have to keep reminding people that Juarez and El Paso are separated only by bridges and a river, that as rivers go, is nearly negligible? Mexicans and Mexican-Americans in El Paso are as common as snow in Alaska.
It is undoubtedly true that El Pasoans and visitors to the border have used Juarez as the place to get by with things they couldn't do at home. That has been the case since so far back that nobody can remember when it began. Usually, this rowdy activity amounted to nothing more than drinking too young or drinking too much, or was motivated by the youthful quest for paid sex. ....As though people in El Paso were incapable of having sex in their own city. I can remember groups of youngsters from Fort Bliss running past all the potential partners in El Paso to satisfy lust and passion in Mexico. I have no idea where they found so much attractive passion, and I have lived here for quite some time. A lot of the local charm has a peculiar way of remaining hidden from me. You can get paid sex in Skowhegan, Maine or Edmonton, Alberta. Apparently it must be more fun to pay for it in the desert. I'm not sure.
Not surprisingly, where people can make no money in the orthodox ways of the United Sates, people will turn to unorthodox ways of making money. This has something to do with needs for food and shelter that can't be met by exercising Puritan virtues. Of course, as fewer people can make a living in the traditional and accepted ways of the US, we may see a decline in the virtuous behavior of US citizens. We'll see. But, back in the day, many US citizens found that they only way they could cast aside their virtue and have a good time was to come here to Juarez and act like jerks. But, we can tolerate a jerk who is paying adequately for his right to be a jerk. We can't eat grass. Anyway, very little grass grows in this climate.
But back to one of the issues at hand.. The question that nobody is asking is: Why does a drug trade necessitate gunfire? Everybody seems content to believe that the buying and selling of marijuana or other unapproved recreational drugs somehow makes homicide a natural and predictable part of the transaction. That is simply not true. People have bought and sold recreational drugs throughout history without ever firing a shot.
I'm glad that the mayor, Jose Reyes Ferriz, is at least getting a glimpse of the absurdity of this situation. There are far greater problems than drugs in Ciudad Juarez. What we have are the combined forces of youthful ignorance and brutality being fired up by the bogus "war on drugs." Combine this with the need to make a living in a place where there are no paying jobs, and, there you have it: Mobs of uneducated young people with nothing to lose.
This is not a series of problems that will respond to any quick solutions. But I think we have to start with ending the war on drugs. Then place these youngsters in jobs that pay enough for them to have adequate food and shelter - and replace the totally inadequate Mexican educational system with real schools and teachers who know something to teach. The violence in Mexico is not drug induced. It is the result of having a generation of people who have nothing to gain and nothing to lose in Mexico. Their lives are pointless. So they see all lives as pointless. This is not a condition created by the inhalation of marijana fumes. As most people know, those who smoke dope do very little but look goofy while listening to music. They are not inclined to play with guns.
But give a bunch of energetic but hopeless youngsters a "war on drugs" to spice up their lives, and you see the bloody results in Juarez.
I doubt anyone joins the cartels to make a little money for food and necessities, they join them because they want a lot of big money and don't want to work hard.
I know the pro-drug argument is that if you legalize all drugs, the cartel members will put on suits and ties and go find legitimate jobs, maybe go work for McDonalds or as shoe shiners -- but would they?
Remember, they are in the drug business because they sneer at hard work and they sneer at small pay. They want to strut around in their pointy narco boots and clothes, they want to drive the big new SUV's and have plenty of women to play with, plenty of fine booze and all the rest that money can buy.
Will they head back to the little farm and get behind a plow?
I don't think so, they will find other ways to get big money that crime brings in. Plus like you said, there aren't that many jobs even if they were to become honest working types.
Or is the pro-legal-drug argument about letting these thugs and murderers import every and all kinds of poisons into he USA and addicting and killing Americans legally? Allowing the same drug lords to run legal meth labs and cocaine refineries and openly bring in tons of very addictive drugs into the USA to push in every American middle school?
Keep in mind that many families in the USA have been devastated by drug addiction, the true victims in all this. What other country has unlimited right to poison the citizens of another by unlimited rights to import any poison over a border?
I think there are two camps of pro-drug advocates. Those who believe that if Americans could grow pot legally and construct meth labs legally, their Mexican counterparts would just shrug their shoulders and close shop and find some good hard work to do. All the social problems of joblessness, broken families and drug addiction would magically evaporate.
The other wants drugs legal so the drug lords can become even richer, would have less overhead and fewer problems getting their drugs into the USA and sold openly in every corner store. For some reason they would not mind competition any longer, they would allow competitors to move in and take over much of the business.
I ask this for practical reasons, with some thought of moving to El Paso. I get mixed messages from the news that reports daily shootings in El Paso while stressing that it's the safest city in the US. It really makes one wonder what's going on in Detroit if El Paso shootouts are considered "safe."
Am I faced with the option of staying in Juarez where I may be shot dangerously, or moving to El Paso where I'll be shot safely? Such options make it kinda hard for me to make up my mind.
El Paso and Juarez are by far not the only two choices you have. You can care about your country and move to a safer city in it. Or stay and fight for Juarez but why on earth would El Paso be the only other option? There's Mexico City, Guanajuato, Monterrey, Cancun, Colimas, Leon, San Luis Potosi, and so on and and so on. All probably safer than El Paso.
Why give people the impression that all of Mexico is just like Juarez and that you cannot live in Mexico when that's not really the case?
I'm afraid I have to agree with the unreliability of FOX news, but I would be hard pressed to prove just who is providing the weapons in Juarez. Due to the proximity of the US, the fact that the US is the chief consumer of drugs, and considering the logic and relative convenience of trading illegal arms for illegal drugs, I can't fight thinking how likely it is that most of the arms are provided by the US. The nation manufacturing the arms was never at issue. Of course, I have to admit that I would certainly not be shocked to find that the source of some arms was the Mexican Army. I think it's preposterous to suggest that the Mexican Army intentionally armed the citizenry, but undoubtedly some arms have been stolen or illicitly sold.
So you don't like Fox News as a source. How about Factcheck.org? They back Fox that the "90%" figure is misinterpreted and misleading. That was the only point I was making. Factcheck also disputes Fox's number of 17%, estimating it at 36%. (They are wrong, making a serious mistake) Either way, the claim that 90% of guns seized in Mexico are traced to the U.S. is wrong.
Nobody suggested the Mexican Army is officially providing cartels with weapons. That's ridiculous. But corrupt military officials (corruption in Mexico? ack, say it ain't so!!!) and deserting army soldiers (very high desertion rate in recent years) are very possible sources. Los Zetas were formed from ex-military forces and the group heavily recruits former military and police. You think they don't bring their own weapons and have inside contacts for more?
There's also the southern border where several countries are awash in guns from decades of civil war.
Malamute, There are personal considerations about my moving to El Paso rather than to a more distant place in Mexico. I'm not getting any younger, and prefer to remain within close proximity of friends and family. I realize that there are safer options in Mexico, and if neither distance nor money had to be considered, I would take them. In fact, if distance and other considerations were not at issue, I would be tempted to move to France. But so much for day dreaming. Like most people, I have ties and obligations right where I am. That leaves me in what may be a situation of selecting the best of the worst.
People who "join the cartels" are hardly among the rich and famous of Juarez. In fact, the brutality of local gangs has little to do with any cartel loyalties. These are young people I have already described, and simply calling them "lazy" reveals your ignorance of Juarez realities. These loosely organized gangs will perform acts of brutality for one cartel during one month, then do the bidding of another cartel for another month.
One of the best jobs offered in recent months in my neighborhood payed a whopping 60 dollars a week for a six-day week, ten-hour day. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't get out of bed for a mere dollar an hour. (Actually less than that, but I don't feel like calculating the real exchange rate.) And, no, the cost of living in Juarez is not low enough to allow decent survival on such a wage.
Your melodramatic suggestion that "Mexico is poisoning the poor innocents of the United States" gets no mileage with me. I regret that alcoholism and drug addiction are harmful conditions, but people consume these substances of their own volition. They always have and they always will.
Thank you for pointing out that there are still many attractive places in Mexico, but I'm afraid we remain quite distant on relevant issues. The war on drugs is bogus, expensive, and a waste of lives, money, time, and other resources.
I remind you that this is agreed on by nearly all nations other than the US and Mexico. I believe they continue the folly actually to support the wealth of those who know that there is more money to be gained from criminalized activity.
Your view of the world strikes me as divorced from reality, and I suppose the feeling is mutual. In the meantime, I can only see you as another obstacle to stopping the bloodshed in Juarez. But, there are so many such obstacles that I cannot see you as a relevant factor. Unfortunately, some of your thoughts reflect the thoughts of more powerful forces. Trying to reach them seems like talking to the wall. Maybe if they lived where I lived and had lost what I have lost, they would see another view. We'll never know.
Diver Todd, By no means would I want to discourage your loyalties to Fox news. From my point of view, most news has a conservative slant. In any event, I would want far greater variety than is provided by any single source. When you are actually in a situation that is considered newsworthy, you might find that none of the common sources seem to be reporting what you see before your eyes. I don't put full confidence in any news source. As I said, since we can't be everywhere, we are at the mercy of what news agencies want to tell us, and at the mercy of how they tell their views. If you are satisfied with single source, that's between you and your reality. I'm sure nothing I say will move you to lose your loyalty to Fox, and the demonstration of loyalty is admirable. But I would rather know what's actually happening.
Malamute, please, I realize that we are all probably engaged in "spontaneous prose" when we post, but try giving a couple of seconds to thought before you write.
Legalizing drugs does not allow existing cartels to thrive. The idea is to control and tax the drugs, just as is done with alcohol and tobacco. Just as happens with alcohol, tobacco, and legal pharmaceuticals, controls and taxes could be imposed, putting some money in the public coffers.
If you don't approve of alcohol, tobacco, or pharmaceutical drugs, don't buy them. Don't consume them. You do have some degree of free will, I hope.
Malamute wants all the bad and lazy Mexicans to give up their sinful ways, go back to the little farms and get behind the plow.
Has anybody checked the viability of making a living off a small farm lately? Small farms have failed throughout southern Mexico. That is one reason why Juarez was overpopulated. (The population problem is unfortunately being dealt with in brutal ways.) I blame NAFTA for the failure of farming in so-called third-world countries, but I'm sure to invite harsh criticism from this forum. These forums sometimes make me feel like the only sane person at a meeting of the John Birch Society. It's nice of y'all to let me feel sane from time to time.
I wonder if Malamute has considered the economic futility of running a plow through the Chihuahuan Desert?
I'm accused of being unduly sensitive, but the very suggestion that Mexicans resume a simple agrarian life in the digital age shows a thinly veiled contempt for Mexican people. There is no hope for the youth of Mexico "behind the plow." Education is needed and jobs that allow employment in the digital age.
Perhaps Malamute belongs behind a plow. I find him remarkably unimpressive behind his keyboard. Then again, I'm not entirely up to date on reports from Fox news.
There is clearly no offense intended in my making such a suggestion. Just as Malamute clearly meant no offense in advising Mexicans that they belong behind the plow, I am simply recommending an honest, hard-working way to occupy one's time.
In the meantime, with all due respects to the plow, it would be nice if we could end the bloodshed in Juarez. But that topic seems to draw very little interest.
Well it sounds like you're going to give up your country and while you blame the USA for all your nation's problems, you'll be soon a part of it, paying your taxes to it and benefitting in every way from living in the good ole USA. To me it seems kind of ironic to want to live in the country you think brought the downfall of your own. At least once you have packed up and settled in, try to stop blaming the USA, the land of the drug addicts and DEA but the land where you will choose to make your future.
When Detroit had a lot of violence, that did not become the excuse for all Americans to move to another country, but many moved out of Detroit which didn't help Detroit of course.
Well it sounds like you're going to give up your country and while you blame the USA for all your nation's problems, you'll be soon a part of it, paying your taxes to it and benefitting in every way from living in the good ole USA. To me it seems kind of ironic to want to live in the country you think brought the downfall of your own. At least once you have packed up and settled in, try to stop blaming the USA, the land of the drug addicts and DEA but the land where you will choose to make your future.
When Detroit had a lot of violence, that did not become the excuse for all Americans to move to another country, but many moved out of Detroit which didn't help Detroit of course.
That's the paradox of many Juarenses that are patriotic and lambast the U.S. for all of Mexico's woes...they have no issues going to shop in El Paso, fill up on El Paso gasoline, send their kids to school in El Paso, etc.
I have to point out the abundance of myopic views throughout this whole thread. It's a big blame game, and like Hillary Clinton said, it's a two nation issue.
Mexico is to blame because the lack of strong governance, a ubiquitious prevalence of corruption in people of authority and a weak economy together foments a breeding ground for the drug war. JuanPabloMagno, if a country like Sweden, Germany, Japan or Singapore were to be located between Colombia and the United States, I am certain that this violence wouldn't be happening. Would there be trafficking? Some... but the structure of these nations are such that wouldn't allow for so much disfunction.
The U.S. is to blame because a weak Mexico is beneficial to the U.S. in many ways. Cheap labor and a market to dump all it's highly subsidized agriculture have been big wins for the U.S. Moreover, American society is actually glorifying coke use more, with many hollywood stars using it socially, and all the MTV, VH1 reality shows shownig all the cool people doing lines. There is a lot of social irresponsibility among the young American idiots. It doesn't register in their heads that everytime they do a line, theyre basically propping up the violence in mexico.,
Juan, saying that legalizing drugs would totally solve this problem is symptomatic of severe myopia. You yourself pointed out that people in your neighborhood are earning a whopping $60 a week. Do you think that by legalizing drugs, their lives will improve so much that criminality will no longer be lucrative? You think they'll choose to go to school and educate themselves? IF you legalize drugs, they'll just turn to other clandestine activities and an environment of criminal activity will prevail until the very deep social problems that Mexico has go away.
No, the youngsters that join these cartels aren't lazy. It's really a tragic situation. If both a wife and husband bust their A****S off, they can make just enough to barely live in Juarez. The problem is, there are many around them not busting their butts as much, living a way better life, and then a whole city across the border that lives, in their eyes, a cushy life. So they look for ways to that better life that so many enjoy. High crime rates always exist in societies where the chasm between rich and poor is profound, deep and permanent.
Well it sounds like you're going to give up your country and while you blame the USA for all your nation's problems, you'll be soon a part of it, paying your taxes to it and benefitting in every way from living in the good ole USA. To me it seems kind of ironic to want to live in the country you think brought the downfall of your own. At least once you have packed up and settled in, try to stop blaming the USA, the land of the drug addicts and DEA but the land where you will choose to make your future.
When Detroit had a lot of violence, that did not become the excuse for all Americans to move to another country, but many moved out of Detroit which didn't help Detroit of course.
Good post and I agree with you 100 %. Why are not Mexicans trying harder to right the wrongs in their own country rather that fleeing across the border ? So many of the jobs have gone south, there isnt much left here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
