Mexican Police chief wants citizen's to have easier access to firearms...


PDA






mgregg85
May 31, 2011, 04:34 PM
I think this is a news story that we really need to spread. After 7 people died in drug related attacks in Acapulco, the Guerrero state police chief, Ramon Almonte, wants Mexican citizens to have easier access to firearms for self defense...
Ramon Almonte, the Guerrero state police chief, said on Monday he will ask the federal congress to make it easier for common citizens to get permits for weapons to defend themselves.

At present, Mexico's constitution allows citizens to have one or two low-caliber guns in their homes, but they must get a permit from the Defense Department and the process is complicated. Almonte did not give specifics on how he would make it easier.

"Having a weapon should be a right, because the bad guys are few and we, the good guys, are many, so we can't allow ourselves to be held hostage by the few," Almonte said.

If you enjoyed reading about "Mexican Police chief wants citizen's to have easier access to firearms..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Red Cent
May 31, 2011, 04:36 PM
They are going to need a new police chief very soon.

mgregg85
May 31, 2011, 04:54 PM
Sorry, forgot to post a link to the story...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap_travel/20110531/ap_tr_ge/lt_travel_brief_drug_war_mexico

Carl N. Brown
May 31, 2011, 04:55 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/31/travel/main20067528.shtml

From Associated Press posted by CBS News "7 killed in attacks in Mexican resort of Acapulco", Associated Press (AP), May 31, 2011

ATBackPackin
May 31, 2011, 05:19 PM
"Having a weapon should be a right, because the bad guys are few and we, the good guys, are many, so we can't allow ourselves to be held hostage by the few," Almonte said.



It is nice to know that someone finally gets it.

rocinante
May 31, 2011, 05:43 PM
Yeah he won't last long speaking such a simple truth.

KodiakBeer
May 31, 2011, 05:48 PM
"Having a weapon should be a right, because the bad guys are few and we, the good guys, are many, so we can't allow ourselves to be held hostage by the few,"

Simple, elegant, sensible...

semperfi63
May 31, 2011, 05:50 PM
between the BATFE and the State Dept, I thought firearms were easy to get in Mexico :)

Vyacheslav
May 31, 2011, 05:55 PM
they are if you're going to run across the border and shoot some gringos

Caliper_RWVA
May 31, 2011, 06:31 PM
between the BATFE and the State Dept, I thought firearms were easy to get in Mexico :)

Easy to get INTO Mexico, and only if bought as a straw purchase...

I betcha you will get all kinds of hassled or arrested trying to take a legally purchased firearm to Mexico for self defense. :banghead:

hermannr
May 31, 2011, 06:33 PM
This police chief is thinking, the problem unfortunately is, thinking does not buy votes, fear does.

JerryM
May 31, 2011, 07:14 PM
Since the cartels use full auto weapons, what would the citizenry use?

A few citizens armed with 1911s would not stand a chance in a fight.

Regards,
Jerry

KodiakBeer
May 31, 2011, 07:47 PM
A few citizens armed with 1911s would not stand a chance in a fight.

As opposed to a few citizens armed with pinata bats? I think I'd take my chances with a handgun or shotgun or whatever firearm I could get vs no firearm.

AlexanderA
May 31, 2011, 07:52 PM
Mexico is the poster child for the failure of gun control.

rooter
May 31, 2011, 08:01 PM
Obviously those nice cartel folks aren't aware of the restrictions on firearms. Once posted, I'm certain they'll adhere to the rules and everything will be fine.

Zoogster
May 31, 2011, 08:10 PM
He makes sense. The small number of bad guys can run around even with just a couple armed individuals and get things done because they are running around in a defenseless environment.



Of course there is more to the problem. Civilian trials for killing bad guys would be quite dangerous for the civilians.
I am reminded of the fallen mexican marines whose names were released after they died in gun battles with a cartel.
The result is the cartel went and killed the family members of each fallen soldier whose name was released.

Any time a soldier is given credit for taking part in an operation, or honored for their sacrifice the cartels research them and go after their families if they can be reached.
It would be the same for civilians who had to answer to the police for killing cartel members and so whose names became easily available to the cartels.

Imagine if every time a US soldier died someplace like Afghanistan and was mentioned in public record, or in the media, or a funeral that mentioned their name was held, the enemy hunted down their family members in the US and killed them.
That is what they deal with in Mexico.

semperfi63
May 31, 2011, 08:16 PM
Since the cartels use full auto weapons, what would the citizenry use?

A few citizens armed with 1911s would not stand a chance in a fight.

Regards,
Jerry
right because life is like a video game, so since automatic weapons are deemed "more powerful" any encounter between an individual with an automatic weapon and an individual with a semi automatic or bolt action weapon will result in the death of the individual with the non automatic weapon. Hey that whole Sergeant York thing was myth

M-Cameron
May 31, 2011, 08:18 PM
He makes sense. The small number of bad guys can run around even with just a couple armed individuals and get things done because they are running around in a defenseless environment.



Of course there is more to the problem. Civilian trials for killing bad guys would be quite dangerous for the civilians.
I am reminded of the fallen mexican marines whose names were released after they died in gun battles with a cartel.
The result is the cartel went and killed the family members of each fallen soldier whose name was released.

Any time a soldier is given credit for taking part in an operation, or honored for their sacrifice the cartels research them and go after their families if they can be reached.
It would be the same for civilians who had to answer to the police for killing cartel members and so whose names became easily available to the cartels.

Imagine if every time a US soldier died someplace like Afghanistan and was mentioned in public record, or in the media, or a funeral that mentioned their name was held, the enemy hunted down their family members in the US and killed them.
That is what they deal with in Mexico.


of course one wonders how quickly those cartels might second guess their actions if they knew they might be the last ones they make.

19&41
May 31, 2011, 08:34 PM
The people installed to rule them are few also. How long have they been held hostage by their government?

JerryM
May 31, 2011, 09:24 PM
If I had to be there I would want a SD gun, however, it is like trying to defend yourself against the Mafia. Notice that the police sometimes flee to the US and others get beheaded.

Jerry

Guns and more
May 31, 2011, 09:34 PM
Mexican Police chief wants citizen's to have easier access to firearms...
That shouldn't be a problem. When is the ATF walking the next batch across the border?

357 Terms
May 31, 2011, 09:35 PM
If a few fight back succesfully it can inspire the masses. The drug cartels are totally out of hand, desperate times.

Doubting Thomas
June 1, 2011, 12:37 AM
Edward Abbey once said that we should give every Mexican we sent back a rifle and a case of ammo.

He had a point.

Carl N. Brown
June 1, 2011, 07:35 AM
Some points for consideration.

One, most of the cartels' heavy weapons come from military arsenals in Central America, and the largest number overall are US government guns supplied to the Mexican, Central American and South American governments for their military/police.

Second, Mexico is the poster child for more of the same failed gun control policies. To the Sarah Brady and Rebecca Peters crowd, it is not that Mexican style gun control has failed (only one legal gun store in Mexico City run by the Army with paperwork up to here (hand over head)) but that the US does not have Mexican style gun control.

Third, is that American businessmen have reported for years that Mexican civilians who can afford a black market gun, get one in spite of the laws (or I suspect because of them). I am talking Mexicans who are middleclass professionals, in private, joke about giving full auto guns as house warming gifts: you have a new home, here protect it with this. (Kidnapping of people who look like they can pay ransom is big in Mexico.)

The police chief is talking about legalizing what is going on under the table for the lawabiding, because the gun laws are definitely not disarming the bad guys.

Friendly, Don't Fire!
June 1, 2011, 07:52 AM
If every Mexican citizen were given M16's and taught how to use them, we might see some balance in the bad guys vs. the good guys. As it is now, most of the good guys are just sitting ducks.

Sav .250
June 1, 2011, 08:59 AM
At the looks of things, I thought most all had a gun.

paramedic70002
June 1, 2011, 05:26 PM
OK I know nothing about Mexico other than what I can see on a map. So...

How about the POTUS declare Mexico an anarchy (which it basically is), declare them a clear and present danger to the CONUS, Congress declares war, and we cross the border as far as necessary to clean house, then turn over the new land to Texas.

hermannr
June 1, 2011, 05:51 PM
Invading Mexico is not a good idea, it has been done before, did not turn out well.

If we want to take the cartels out of the equation, we need to remove their source of funds. No money, they will fall apart. It was proven with the repeal of prohibition.

the "war on drugs" is just as stupid as the XVIII ammendment was, just as wasteful of resources and lives, and needs to be stopped.

If the US did what Protugal did, and make improper use of drugs a medical problem, not a criminal problem, the money would just disappear and the drug violence with it.

Remember, firearms control stated because of the criminal problems the XVIII ammendment created...study history, and learn from it...if you do not, you are bound to repeat it...as we are doing now.

armoredman
June 1, 2011, 07:58 PM
Maybe a few Tomahawks to cartel mansions? Just thinkin' out loud here...

There is a brave and intelligent man there, and the cartels will make sure he is never heard from again, with applause in the background from the Big O.

nyc71
June 1, 2011, 09:10 PM
I hope they don't take him out.


"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"- Benjamin Franklin

Neverwinter
June 1, 2011, 10:00 PM
Maybe a few Tomahawks to cartel mansions? Just thinkin' out loud here...

There is a brave and intelligent man there, and the cartels will make sure he is never heard from again, with applause in the background from the Big O.
Why would a tire store be glad that a Mexican police chief disappears?

MikeNice
June 1, 2011, 10:11 PM
When a Mexican drug cartel delivered an ultimatum to Don Alejo to give up his ranch or suffer the consequences, it was expected that within 24 hours the place would be vacant, and it would be just another asset captured by the cartel. But they didn’t know they were dealing with someone with true grit
Don Alejo Garza Stands Up To The Cartel (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/world-mainmenu-26/north-america-mainmenu-36/5334-don-alejo-garza-tamez-true-grit)

One man with a conscience and a hand full of hunting rifles defied the Cartel. If the Mexican citizens had the right to self defense maybe he wouldn't have needed to give his life.

armoredman
June 2, 2011, 01:51 AM
Amen.

CathyGo
June 2, 2011, 02:00 AM
Since the cartels use full auto weapons, what would the citizenry use?

A few citizens armed with 1911s would not stand a chance in a fight.

Regards,
Jerry

Our enemy out here carries full auto weapons. Doesn't mean they can hit the broad side of a barn with them. They somehow managed to miss a TOWER about 8 feet wide while shooting from less than 50 feet away.

Neverwinter
June 2, 2011, 02:18 AM
If the Mexican citizens had the right to self defense maybe he wouldn't have needed to give his life.
Having the right to self defense doesn't make you immune to explosives.

MikeNice
June 2, 2011, 02:51 AM
Having the right to self defense doesn't make you immune to explosives.
You're right. If they ran in to armed resistance more often they might be less inclined to try these types of things. It is kind of like the tactics used by America's enemies in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Enough small pockets of resistance make the cost on all fronts too high for many to stomach.

Neverwinter
June 2, 2011, 11:20 AM
You're right. If they ran in to armed resistance more often they might be less inclined to try these types of things. It is kind of like the tactics used by America's enemies in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Enough small pockets of resistance make the cost on all fronts too high for many to stomach.
They might also be inclined to change their tactics. Maybe next time they won't give advance notice. Or explosives might become a first option.

The arming of the populace to defend against the cartels is an attempt to address a problem too far downstream to make enough of a difference.

stevelyn
June 2, 2011, 11:51 AM
Mebbe we should recruit him to be a US citizen. He sounds like he'd be a good one.

BBQLS1
June 2, 2011, 12:32 PM
of course one wonders how quickly those cartels might second guess their actions if they knew they might be the last ones they make.

As crazy as their soldiers are, I think the people would need to string a few up.

MikeNice
June 3, 2011, 11:15 AM
Never, I do not think guns are the sole solution. It should be part of a larger solution that involves ending (or addressing) prohibition. Mexico also needs to focus on providing basic services like clean water, reliable electricity, and education to those in rural areas. Along with a whole host of other improvements.

Guns are a small part of the answer to a much larger and complex problem.

ArfinGreebly
June 3, 2011, 11:34 AM
Guns are a small part of the answer to a much larger and complex problem.

Self defense is not what I'd characterize as a "complex" problem.

Right now, the citizens of Mexico are, for all intents and purposes, disarmed.

An armed citizenry changes that dynamic.

And, if there are complex problems to solve, at the very least that baseline should be changed. I'd much rather attempt to formulate solutions to the cartel violence thing with "armed citizens" as an assumption.

No, it doesn't fix everything, but I don't see how keeping them defenseless makes the solutions any easier.

Carl N. Brown
June 3, 2011, 11:44 AM
The problem with Mexico is one party rule for over 80 years, politicians and police who make deals with cartels, only to have the cartels come back and demand more in the next round.

The Mexican balladeers who usually make heroes out of desperados are increasingly making songs about "Don Alejo" the 77-yr old rancher who went down fighting rather than surrender his ranch to Los Zetas.

jufam44
June 3, 2011, 01:04 PM
They are going to need a new police chief very soon.
^this

MikeNice
June 4, 2011, 05:09 AM
Self defense is not what I'd characterize as a "complex" problem.


Nope, cartel violence in Mexico is though.

Zoogster
June 4, 2011, 07:58 AM
It is increasing in intensity beyond Mexico as well.

In fact the US and Panama have turned Panama into another drug border to get around as it makes a natural geographic choke point as the narrowest land point between continents and divided by the Panama Canal. Just a couple years ago they started opening joint narco bases around Panama.
The US also publicly uses some Colombian and other bases for counter narcotics.

Now they have found cartel made fully submersible submarines in Venezuela and Colombia to transport drugs to Mexico, they have upgraded from semi-submersibles.
Here is one of them found this February:

http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/mexico_drug_war_2011/bp5.jpg


Combine this with the recent narco 'tanks' or APCs being custom made and used by the cartels:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef015432892b56970c-600wi

And these are just the things they are catching.
While the cartels themselves enforce a media blackout on several topics and in certain regions of Mexico. News outlets that report the wrong things have people killed, and so many don't even report certain things anymore, and a lot of what is going on does not make it into official media reports as a result. Town will have violent large scale firefights in public that most of the town is aware of, and the news that night and the newspapers in many towns will talk about trivial minor topics and never mention the firefight.

jahwarrior
June 4, 2011, 09:05 AM
Since the cartels use full auto weapons, what would the citizenry use?

A few citizens armed with 1911s would not stand a chance in a fight.

Regards,
Jerry

you do realize why we have a Second Amendment, right? the Founding Fathers had the foresight to understand that we might need them to protect ourselves from our own government someday. it's not about hunting, target shooting, or anything. it's about self defense, not just from muggers, but soldiers.

now, think about what weapons we're allowed to keep. yes, we can have full auto/NFA items, but what percentage of gun owners own full auto/NFA items? i'm betting a very small percentage. our government, on the other hand, has issues select fire, body armor, and NV goggles to our troops. a few armed citizens with Glocks, 1911's, and semiauto rifles wouldn't stand a chance.

but, it's better than nothing.

FIVETWOSEVEN
June 4, 2011, 05:10 PM
now, think about what weapons we're allowed to keep. yes, we can have full auto/NFA items, but what percentage of gun owners own full auto/NFA items? i'm betting a very small percentage. our government, on the other hand, has issues select fire, body armor, and NV goggles to our troops. a few armed citizens with Glocks, 1911's, and semiauto rifles wouldn't stand a chance.

Select fire isn't nessecery as a rifleman and someone can still lay down cover fire with a semi auto not to mention captured weapons aswell.

Carl N. Brown
June 5, 2011, 08:36 AM
"Having a weapon should be a right, because the bad guys are few and we, the good guys, are many, so we can't allow ourselves to be held hostage by the few," Almonte said.

Unfortunately here our anti-gunners are infected with a particularly virulent strain of Stockholm Syndrome and actually seem to enjoy being held hostage by the criminal, and want to disarm us all and criminalize self-defense, reducing everyone to the role of whimpering whipped dog, which they seem to enjoy playing so much.

Carl N. Brown
June 5, 2011, 08:48 AM
A few citizens armed with 1911s would not stand a chance in a fight.


I recall a recent story out of Mexico where kidnappers tried to take a 17-yr old girl; the townspeople rallied against them. A mob of 400 surrounded a police car where two of the kidnappers were being held. When it was over, the two kidnappers had bled to death.

What is the total civilian population of Mexico (most of whom seem to be fed up with the cartels and the corrupt system)? What is the total membership of Los Zetas and the Gulf Cartel (who don't exactly tend to live low-profile lifestyles)?

There is a storm building, and it won't be a just few citizens with 1911s in the fight.

íViva Don Alejo!

Too bad that a corrupt government that fears its own citizens and made deals with the devils has let things get to this point.

Neverwinter
June 5, 2011, 02:28 PM
I recall a recent story out of Mexico where kidnappers tried to take a 17-yr old girl; the townspeople rallied against them. A mob of 400 surrounded a police car where two of the kidnappers were being held. When it was over, the two kidnappers had bled to death.

What is the total civilian population of Mexico (most of whom seem to be fed up with the cartels and the corrupt system)? What is the total membership of Los Zetas and the Gulf Cartel (who don't exactly tend to live low-profile lifestyles)?

There is a more important question. What is the disparity of the resources available to the cartels compared to the people? We've already seen a link proving that they have sufficient resources for submersible vehicles and APCs.

I'm not sure that the kidnappers example is relevant, considering that the police have different rules and resources than the cartels.

armoredman
June 5, 2011, 03:18 PM
politicians and police who make deals with cartels, only to have the cartels come back and demand more in the next round.
Problem with paying Danegeld, is you never get rid of the Dane.
a few armed citizens with Glocks, 1911's, and semiauto rifles wouldn't stand a chance.
Quite a few thought a ragtag army made up of farmers and store clerks with squirrel rifles and fowling pieces wouldn't stand up to the most powerful, well equipped and regulated army in the world...but with some expert help, we did.
I wonder when Mexico's citizens will come looking for the same help when they have their Second Revolution.

If you enjoyed reading about "Mexican Police chief wants citizen's to have easier access to firearms..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!