Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 435 posts

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#151

Post by 23443463453 »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #81

It's us , the USA, that is causing this paper to shutdown. The cartels are financed by the insatiable drug appetite of its close neighbor. Our inability and/or unwillingness to legalize recreational drugs is the feeding tube for these vicious groups.

Although I get your point; it's fundamentally asinine both on a logical basis, but also on a practical basis relative to the massive, treasonous, seditious, and self-destructive (almost as if it were drug fueled) opposition to the very President trying to curtail "the insatiable drug appetite of it's close neighbor". I don't know what it is with the Liberal mindset, but it is so screwed up and distorted and twisted that people like you are not only blaming those who are addicted to drugs that are addicting, but you are thereby also siding with some of the most vile terrorist organizations that have totally and utterly overtaken the Mexican government and who are using drugs as a weapon of war to socially fracture America while also draining billions upon billions of dollars from the USA, while leaving nothing but broken families, neighborhoods, and a broken society behind.

The argument you make is akin to saying that we should legalize rape because rape is happening. It turns out that Colorado's black market marijuana market is actually booming ( http://kdvr.com/2017/03/03/black-market-marijuana-business-b... )... so much for that argument that if we just make undesirable, socially destructive behaviors easier and more freely to partake in, it would somehow for some reason decline ... against all rational sanity.

If get your head out of the sand or cast off your drug addiction and addict mentality, you would come to the realization that the people using DRUGS ... ADDICTION CAUSING DRUGS are not the primary source of a system. Imagine if no more drugs flowed into the USA, would the demand increase or decrease? Imagine if people tried to kick their addiction by everyone going into rehab, would the drug cartels try to push their drugs harder or less because "shit, geez, I guess we need to stop shipping DRUGS to the USA since no one will want the ADDICTING DRUGS"

You're essentially guilt shaming, placing blame at the effect, not the cause. When cocaine first made its way to the USA, it wasn't because there was a massive demand by people in the USA for a drug and they found cocaine. It is ALWAYS the drug and those that push them that are the impetus, the source, the cause that needs to be eradicated to terminate the cycle .

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#152

Post by 2_listerine_pls »

therealdrag0 wrote: post #141
2_listerine_pls wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's surprisingly simple to locate the plantations using LIDAR + spectrometry. Even easier in Afghanistan, where fields are cultivated in the open. It's so well documented that the UNDOC provides an anual report with the amount in acres. I could go on, but this is enough to make one wonder why they aren't being stopped.

Here's an interesting podcast on the supply of drugs: http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2017/02/tom_wainwright.html The guest mentions that in the Ande's mountains it is still tough to identify drug growing.

LIDAR can go through canopy because there are spaces between leaves. Take a look at the Carnegie Airborne Observatory's tech.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#153

Post by _delirium »

Trill-I-Am wrote: post #148
_delirium wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to give some objective analysis, but I don't personally feel safe walking alone at night in large areas of NYC, Baltimore, Chicago, Atlanta, Detroit, St Louis, Miami, etc.

What parts of NYC?

Most of the Bronx, about half of Queens, about 1/3 of Brooklyn. Manhattan is mostly gentrified these days, with only a handful of exceptions. Staten Island is odd b/c it is barely walkable to begin with, so it's neither safe nor dangerous to walk.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#154

Post by _delirium »

LeanderK wrote: post #142
pdog wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is not like a safe European city center where you can go almost anywhere alone on foot at any time of day. Which European city are you referring to? The major European cities (e.g., Paris, London, and Berlin) don't fit this description either.

don't agree with berlin either, of course some areas are more criminal (almost anywhere), but going on foot alone is still possible, even at night and i've been to most of the trouble-spots. Also: Munich, it's unbelievable safe, more boring than berlin, but safer.

I've been around central Berlin a good bit and honestly never had such a problem. If anything I end up with the opposite problem, I'm the foreign hipster who hasn't kept up with the trends enough to realize that this area has gentried sufficiently that I am no longer welcome here, because it's now an area for rich West Germans.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#155

Post by hwillis »

mikeash wrote: post #145
hwillis wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think so. What I'm thinking is that "state green cards" would let you live in one state, and your residence will be checked up on periodically. If you don't live there, or if you're found in another state without a visa, you become an illegal immigrant, and fall under the purview of the federal immigration services. This has very little negative changes- since many/most illegal immigrants are here on overstay…

You're right that overstays are a big problem. Now imagine how much worse it would be if every state got to choose who comes in. The federal government tries real hard to issue visas only to people who won't break the law. They're not entirely successful, but the bar is decently high. The Syrian refugee hypothetical would have a different problem altogether. The opposition to admitting refugees isn't economic, it's a…

Like I said, the federal government would handle screening. States just admit a number of people, they don't vet them- the fed has primacy there because of national security and immigration control. Regardless you can replace Syrian with Mexican and probably should. I only said Syrian refugees for the sake of variety.

But again, as a national security concern it isn't a problem. As long as the number of state green cards is less than the number of visas granted, a terrorist will be much more likely to get a visa and overstay it if necessary.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#156

Post by gph »

_delirium wrote: post #137
pdog wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is not like a safe European city center where you can go almost anywhere alone on foot at any time of day. Which European city are you referring to? The major European cities (e.g., Paris, London, and Berlin) don't fit this description either.

When were you last in central London or Paris? It's been a long time since Limehouse or Montparnasse were dangerous to walk in at night.

Yea, but that's like restricting NYC to Manhattan. I wouldn't feel that unsafe walking the majority of Manhattan at night either.

Or for another city center, I go downtown inner harbor/fells point/federal hill Baltimore at night plenty. Most city centers in America are perfectly safe any time of day.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#157

Post by hwillis »

toomanybeersies wrote: post #135
mikeash wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leaving immigration to the states would require internal border controls. This is not something most people want.

The EU manages to have immigration on a per-nation basis (for non-EU countries), without internal border controls.

True, but there are some partial exceptions (Britain and France) and reality hasn't stopped people from pointing to the EU as an example of the system gone horribly awry.

Despite the lack of conditionals placed on EU immigrants, the lack of tracking and free movement, there has been very little migration from border countries that accept migrants willingly.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#158

Post by Arizhel »

Trill-I-Am wrote: post #148
_delirium wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to give some objective analysis, but I don't personally feel safe walking alone at night in large areas of NYC, Baltimore, Chicago, Atlanta, Detroit, St Louis, Miami, etc.

What parts of NYC?

I wouldn't want to walk around Washington Heights in Manhattan alone at night; I didn't feel terribly safe there during the daytime.

The Bronx is not a terribly safe place either.

Sure, downtown/midtown Manhattan are very safe, but Manhattan is a minority of the overall area of NYC.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#159

Post by unethical_ban »

jfim wrote: post #117
2_listerine_pls wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's surprisingly simple to locate the plantations using LIDAR + spectrometry. Even easier in Afghanistan, where fields are cultivated in the open. It's so well documented that the UNDOC provides an anual report with the amount in acres. I could go on, but this is enough to make one wonder why they aren't being stopped.

> I could go on, but this is enough to make one wonder why they aren't being stopped. Except for that pesky sovereignty thing.

Sovereignty and the concept of hostile action/influence on life can make the line blurry.

If, through inaction, violent warlords displace thousands or millions of people, are the destination countries not adversely affected? The US has millions of economic and war-affected Mexican refugees.

Same with Syria... should Germany, Turkey, Greece, etc. say "Syria is sovereign, nothing we can do" when their countries are being overrun?

The US should look to improve life in Mexico and reduce cartel power first through economic and peaceful political means, and then, PERHAPS and after much thought, bombing the shit out of every cartel leader on the same night, Godfather style. I'm only half kidding.

Re: Mexican Newspaper Shuts Down, Saying It Is Too Dangerous to Continue

#160

Post by _delirium »

branchless wrote: post #144
_delirium wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When were you last in central London or Paris? It's been a long time since Limehouse or Montparnasse were dangerous to walk in at night.

Head out of canary wharf onto the isle of dogs. Or parts of peckham. Or West Ham. Christ.

If the goal is to prove that going to some godforsaken suburb miles out into the countryside is dangerous, sure. This is true in any country. But not if you live in an actual city.
Post reply on HN