Mexican journalist Alfredo Alvarez, reported on his website that the shooting stemmed from a confrontation between active members of the Arellano Felix Cartel (CAF) and the Sinaloa Cartel.

According to local reports, the group of alleged hit men were targeting a member of the CAF cartel who was being investigated by the U.S. for drug trafficking. He was reportedly among those killed Saturday.
https://news.yahoo.com/baja-california-mexico-street-racing-110305723.html

Walker- paid for at least one abortion probably many more, so by his definition he’s a baby murderer, liar, philanderer, self admitted total shit for brains moron, wife and child abuser, mental defective, suicide case, attempted murderer, kidnapper, deadbeat father x 4 or more, police impersonator, fake businessman, fake graduate,….the list never ends. He is absolute proof that the right has zero morals, ethics, standards, or anything besides a blind lust for power.
I can only imagine the never ending jabs and accusations from you if he was a Democrat….and they would be well deserved.

Oz - puppy torturer and murderer, liar, quack, and snake oil salesman who made millions by selling fake miracle cures to morons and now wants to buy a senate seat. More proof that morals, ethics, standards, and honesty are 100% lacking in the right….but we knew that after Marmalade Mussolini.

Which party is the party of death, debauchery, and criminality again? ROTFLMFAHS!!

Edit- forgot Tina Forte, AOC’s opponent that calls AOC a “crime surge creator” while hiding the fact that Forte’s family are a major crime organization , her repeatedly convicted husband Joey Snapple and her son are recently convicted illegal gun and drug traffickers that used her failing beverage company to run guns and drugs, she is often found with terrorist Proud Boys, and was at the Jan 6 failed coup. Sure sounds like she’s much more of a crime surge creator all by her self. Funny enough, she was a hard core anti marijuana advocate until her husband was busted with $150000 in illegal marijuana among other illicit drugs and illegal guns, now she wants it decriminalized and conviction records expunged. No….she won’t abuse her office for personal gain….never.

As he was under investigation, it's possible they "fixed" his body cam to not stop filming when the Malfunction Feature button gets pressed.

Also, he should be going up on drug trafficking and distribution charges, not just mere possession.

Perhaps you are ignorant of the fact that the vast majority cross where walls already exist. To answer your question, nearly all of them would still try. Do you really think a fence is deterrence when the alternative is go home and see your family raped to death before you're decapitated? Would you just say "oops, sorry, didn't mean to trigger you....let me just take my daughter back to the narcos for a life of sex slavery and just die then, so sorry."?

A better immigration policy that makes it easier to get a work visa or asylum at ports of entry instead of making illegal entry easier, simpler, cheaper, and faster would discourage people from taking the easier, but illegal path. We are moving the other direction, which is why illegal immigration is on the rise under Trump after falling steadily for decades.

This doesn't cost America except for fighting it, they make us money with cheap labor, taxation without representation or access to government assistance, and by lowering the per capita crime rates by being far less criminal on average than Americans. You want to deport a group that's well above average in criminality, that would be Republican politicians and or Trump associates...no one will miss a single one.

A $50 billion wall (Trump's never built anything that wasn't at least 100% over budget) that can be evaded with a ladder, shovel, car, truck, saw, torch, boat, plane, and in many many places, absolutely nothing (it's no longer a single solid wall from coast to gulf, it's now a fence in a few more places for your $50 billion.) is not just vastly more expensive, it's also uselessly wasting that money for almost zero return, the few places it might help will just see the migrant paths move a few miles over.

If we had a 40+ ft high, 20 ft deep, 4+ft thick reinforced concrete wall coast to coast that was somehow ladder proof, it still wouldn't stop most illegal immigration or drug trafficking, because the vast majority of both come through ports of entry. The wall is a useless solution to a non existent problem that's been solving itself for decades....side note: what do you think it was like in the good old days when America was "great"? Contrary to Chump's claims, operation wetback (that he wants to reimplement) was a failure....
https://www.cato.org/blog/enforcement-didnt-end-unlawful-immigration-1950s-more-visas-did

I'm surprised his human wasn't claimed under civil forfeiture laws for being involved in drug trafficking and then sold at auction. Maybe that will be the next video.

Sadly this seems very plausible after the series I just watched on Netflix , Border Security, Australia's First Line. If people think we treat incoming people rough, they should watch that show. Almost every episode they show some poor sad sack that committed a crime or something 20+ years ago that just wants to come and visit. Most of the time the response is gtfo and don't come back for 3 years, except for one guy who did 12 years in prison for drug trafficking. He just happened to be Sugar Shane Mosley's trainer, so they were like "We should by all rights deny his visa, but we have to weigh the benefit to Australia's citizens that might have bought tickets to the fight....yep, let him in." Or they have a sniffer scanner that picks up what seems to be infinitesimal amounts of any sort of drug residue, which means you get body searched and they go through every thing you have with a fine toothed comb.

I turned to my wife and said, "We are never going to Australia." She asked why and I told her that every bit of the US cash anyone comes into contact with is inundated with multiple types of drug residues. We would probably show up and get cavity searched for 14 different types of drugs. Anyway, after watching the show, I felt it was clear that the government of Australia is very comfortable with the "Come here, spend shitloads of money, and then gtfo because we don't want you here" attitude.

As Samuel Clemens said, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

This 3 minute and 47 sec video can't begin to tell the full story.

One reason so many people in the US go to prison is because there are so many recidivists. You don't go to jail in the US unless you have committed a major felony crime or you are a repeat offender.

That's why those in prison for "mere" drug possession actually have a higher arrest rate for violent crimes than those in prison for burglary, robbery or even drug trafficking, according to innumerable studies, including one in the Journal of the American Statistical Association.

We now have more diversionary programs available than ever before. If you commit a theft crime, you get the opportunity to make recompense and/or attend a program. Same with DUI, take a 3 day class or get locked up for 3 days.

Another reason many black men get locked up is because they commit a lot of violent crimes. Violent crimes will almost always get your ass locked up.

I know a fellow in Oregon who used to be the prayer leader for the Seattle Seahaws, a white man, who to my knowledge has never committed a violent crime, yet he is a repeat offender on DUI driving laws. He was recently committed to prison for 3 years.

And as for these 'get tough on crime' laws...the last one passed in Ohio did just the opposite, making repeat felony thefts a misdemeanor. The lawyers in your local legislators know how to title a crime bill...most of which are an effort to save money, not fight crime.

Also, prison guard unions don't send people to prison, judges do.

As for fewer prisoners in China...they just shoot their offenders in the head...saves quite a bit on housing prisoners.

Making crack cocaine a stiffer penalty crime...well, crack is more addictive than cocaine. So why doesn't Al Sharpton get behind the decriminalization of crack cocaine? Probably not enough money in it.

If you want to make a point about people in the US being incarcerated compared to other countries, I'm going to need to see some numbers on the recidivism rates in those countries, not just some surface facts that don't tell the full story.

it's rather like some countries that don't count neonatal deaths unless the child has survived for 30 days...you can't compare that to numbers from countries that count neonatal deaths at 2 hours.

@RedSky

1) I never said that wasn't any research showing that rehabilitation can reduce recidivism. I said there's not enough research. The cultural and economic situation of a small European country isn't quite analogous to the current state of the U.S. Also, how does the death penalty not eliminate recidivism entirely? You can't commit crimes if you're dead. Thus, guaranteed results.

2) So by "first-world," you're basically talking about Europe. Does Greenland qualify? They have a murder rate of 19.4. I'll concede that the U.S. has a higher murder rate than Europe. Is that due solely to how we deal with criminals? Possibly, but I doubt it. It certainly doesn't prove that increasing surveillance, enforcement and punishment wouldn't reduce crime rates.

3) Like I said before, most criminals are fully aware of the severity of their crimes. The problem is that they think they can get away with it. Harsher penalties mean nothing without the enforcement to back them, which is why I suggested increasing surveillance and enforcement in addition to harsher penalties. You need both in order to provide an effective deterrent.

4) If you can provide more data than Scandinavia's recidivism rates, I'll gladly accept that rehabilitation can work in the U.S. But even then, rehabilitation will never reduce recidivism completely whereas death would. Is it realistic to expect the U.S. government to enact the death penalty for all crimes? No, not at all. It's unrealistic to expect them to enforce breeding restrictions too. That doesn't change the fact these things would reduce crime rates. If we're stuck on realism, the likelihood of the government ever adopting a rehabilitation policy like in Norway's is pretty low.

5) One could just as easily argue that crime in Venezuela is a result of drug trafficking dominating the country, resulting in corrupt police and politicians that let the cartels do whatever they want. You exclude third-world countries because they undermine your argument. Third-world countries have a lot of poverty, yes, and nobody is going to deny the correlation between poverty and crime. However, they also suffer from a distinct lack of police surveillance and enforcement, either because the police are corrupt or there simply aren't enough to sufficiently enforce the law in all areas.

Now do the southern border!!! That would be much more exciting, the shootings, the drug trafficking, the dying of dehydration, the fence, the lack of fence, the fence with holes, the towers, the net migration of zero as mexicans move back home as the US economy keeps tanking, you know fun stuff!!!!

Drug use has a far more pervasive impact on society than guns ever will because of how it affects lives.

Drug users health and the health of the people around them are impacted (the harder the drug the further that reaches). Drug use is a primary motivator to commit crime. Drug trafficking is yet another of the primary motivators and it grows as drug use grows.

This is not even addressing injuries and deaths related to drug use and people causing accidents while under the influence. The impact of drug related incarceration and its social impact are also numerous.

One could argue that some drug users may cause more aggregate damage over the course of their life than a murderer might, but that requires putting a value on human life which I'm not sure is possible.

This is a great example of how people do not weigh out the full impact of things in complex comparisons, particularly when there is a heavy bias clouding their comparison (not saying you are but it happens often with this topic and others).

#1 what DOESN'T cost money? I'll tell you what cost LESS money..video cameras. If I can't have a cop monitor an intersection 24/7, then I am fine with a red light camera.

#2 Well getting caught in your own traps is just your own problem. Has nothing to do with changing rules or slipper slopes. I think I understand what you mean by rules being added allowing the govt to add more rules un-opposed, but this MAINLY has to do with the publics becoming more lazy and not bothering themselves with politics, ie people not involving themselves with the rule making process anymore.

#3 CCTV Does it's job. It helps identify and catch spur of the moment crimes (Abuse, attacks, robbery) and at least causes planned crimes like drug trafficking to be moved elsewhere. You can't really STOP this with public CCTV coverage but at least you can prevent it from happening in front of your house or on the playground near the kids.

#4 While I think shatter went the extreme, I know what you mean. We have lots of old laws we break all the time now. This is not the CCTV's problem though. %99 of the time these laws are also ignore by the police, and we only find out about them when that %1 gets charged with one of those laws. This is just something else that needs to be fixed by the people and really has nothing to do with CCTV.

I understand people are afraid of loosing freedoms, but I also understand that we are not earning it either. Broken economy systems, failing healthcare, and lax education systems are causing chaos and hardship which leads to increased crime. If you want your freedoms back, you are going to have to become involved with politics more and make sure the right people are making your laws.

This isn't news; everyone knows:

More violence/deaths because of drug trafficking = More organized crime = More drug users = I'M THE HEAD OF THE DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND I'M DOING A GOOD JOB!

>> ^radx:

"Why don't more people know about this?"
Well, why didn't more people know about the existence of the Mafia previous to Joe Valachi's testimony before Senate? The CIA's involvement in drug trafficking? Police brutality? Climate change? Peak oil? Torture camps? Civilian casualties of drone strikes?
It was/is not part of the major consensus narrative.
Similarly, churches are entities of morality, protectors of the weak. At least that's what the narrative still says. So when people hear about these atrocious acts of child abuse, they don't buy it. It doesn't fit their world view, and overcoming the inevitable cognitive dissonance would require them to a) re-examine their own beliefs/perceptions and b) act upon it. That's not an easy thing to do.
Once they cross that threshold, "I don't buy it" turns into "I've known all along". Happens all the time.

Paedophilia in the Catholic church is part of the "consensus narrative"; so much so that it's the first thing I think of when I think of the Catholic Church.

"Why don't more people know about this?"

Well, why didn't more people know about the existence of the Mafia previous to Joe Valachi's testimony before Senate? The CIA's involvement in drug trafficking? Police brutality? Climate change? Peak oil? Torture camps? Civilian casualties of drone strikes?

It was/is not part of the major consensus narrative.

Similarly, churches are entities of morality, protectors of the weak. At least that's what the narrative still says. So when people hear about these atrocious acts of child abuse, they don't buy it. It doesn't fit their world view, and overcoming the inevitable cognitive dissonance would require them to a) re-examine their own beliefs/perceptions and b) act upon it. That's not an easy thing to do.

Once they cross that threshold, "I don't buy it" turns into "I've known all along". Happens all the time.

Neill Franklin barely addresses the issue, which makes me think he doesn't have much of a case.

His opening argument was that a lot of black crime is in drug trafficking and drugs shouldn't be illegal. While that may all be true, it doesn't change the fact that it is illegal now and the police aren't being racist by responding to those crimes.

Really a terrible debater.