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

381–390 of 435 posts

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

#381

Post by huherto »

cnnsucks wrote: post #204
chrischen wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, still America.

yes, that's why Canada is just as bad a Mexico, with Canadian drug cartels mass beheading their rivals in the streets of Toronto.

There was a time when we thought Mexican institutions would resist. I am from Chihuahua Mexico, and we thought this was just happening in the rural isolated areas. Then it spilled over the cities too. I have had family killed. Smart and educated, like you or me.

American and Canadian institutions are stronger. They have been able to stand.

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

#382

Post by m1sta_ »

runeks wrote: post #260
m1sta_ wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The legalisation is one part of it. The purchasing is another. The cartel is another. In that order.

I disagree. Prohibition transforms capital spent by drug users into income for drug cartels. Under full legalization, drug users would have as little incentive to buy their drugs from street vendors as alcoholics would want to buy their liquor from some guy standing on a street corner. The great news is that we are entirely responsible for this mess ourselves, so we can fix it if we want to.

You disagree that...

1. We have the option as a consumer of not buying illegal drugs?

2. Cartels have the option of not doing horrific things?

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

#383

Post by m1sta_ »

runeks wrote: post #260
m1sta_ wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The legalisation is one part of it. The purchasing is another. The cartel is another. In that order.

I disagree. Prohibition transforms capital spent by drug users into income for drug cartels. Under full legalization, drug users would have as little incentive to buy their drugs from street vendors as alcoholics would want to buy their liquor from some guy standing on a street corner. The great news is that we are entirely responsible for this mess ourselves, so we can fix it if we want to.

You disagree that...

1. We have the option as a consumer of not buying illegal drugs?

2. Cartels have the option of not doing horrific things?

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

#384

Post by jungletek »

Cyph0n wrote: post #306
andrepd wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slightly? As far as I know, the United Kingdom is a democracy while China is an oppressive, imperialist, authoritarian state under oligarchic rule, with complete disregard for human rights or the cries for independence and democracy from its dependencies. Would it be ruled by Britain instead of China there would be a world of difference, don't kid yourself.

Can you name a democratic country with 1 billion+ people that has achieved what China has in such a short period of time? Nope. Do you think China would have progressed the same if it wasn't managed as an autocracy?

So the ends justify the means, is what you're saying?

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

#385

Post by talmand »

mter wrote: post #363
mattmanser wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might not make you feel better, but Holland's gun death per 100,000 is in the 0.5's compared to the U.S.'s 10's and Mexico's 10's. You're 20 times more likely to get killed by a gun in the US or Mexico. Note that in the whole of Holland there are 50 gun homicides per year, so you were actually pretty unlucky to experience that. Your experience is exceptional and not a common occurrence, especially as I assume most…

> You're 20 times more likely to get killed by a gun in the US This is very misleading because this audience is primarily middle class/rich white/asians employed in the tech industry. There are 2 primary factors in homicide rates. Be poor or be a certain race. If you are not either of those things, your chances of being murdered in the US is very low. *edit 3 factors -- men. Women don't get murdered often.

Also, if I remember the stats correctly, you are more likely to kill yourself with a gun than to be murdered by one in the US.

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

#386

Post by talmand »

mattmanser wrote: post #321
sathackr wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it matter what weapon the murder/suicide was committed with? Yes, fewer guns mean fewer gun deaths -- but does it mean fewer deaths in general? If fewer people own Honda Civics, then fewer people will die in Honda Civic accidents. But that dip in Honda Civic deaths would likely be absorbed into deaths by all other car models, such that the overall death rate remains the same.

Overall suicides significantly reduce as suicide is easier to do on impulse with a gun.

Depends on the culture; Japan has high suicide rates but low gun ownership.

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

#387

Post by Pica_soO »

kakarot wrote: post #353
Pica_soO wrote: post #272

I wish there was some mafia approach to rebuild a civil state. This is our house, our block, our town, we avoid interacting with people who support the corrupt government and we do not interact with Narcosi. Just shut out all strangers, isolate people who pose a long term thread to your community. Shun the restaurant, where the cops eat, walk your dog to where the drug dealers are. Create small economy's, which do no…

Walk our dogs to the dealer's house but not touch drug money? Could you clarify this seeming contradiction?

It was a lame example for civil dis-obedience. You let your dog shit where the drug-deals go down. Have a farmer spray the whole parking lot with merde. Primitive, not over the violence threshold, and yet, unpleasant. Sorry, its really tough to come up with something that would deter, but not escalate.

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

#388

Post by duncan_bayne »

geebee wrote: post #347
cookiecaper wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's definitely sad and ironic to see people citing dictators, whose first actions are to consolidate the press into a state-controlled outlet and then to swiftly and ruthlessly crush all political opposition, as reasons to place more limitations on what people are allowed to say/think. Are these guys even listening to themselves? Our values and principles in favor of free speech have been a protection for us.…

I agree. I recall a scene from Stefan Zweig's "world of yesterday", where he describes how a group of young men, armed with clubs, stormed a student debate and beat the speakers severely. The police, honoring an old tradition of never entering the debate hall, stood outside as it happened. I guess I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to figure when and how this happened, who was behind it, and what it foreshado…

That's not far off, at this point. We already have University students rioting to prevent "unacceptable speech" on campus.

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

#389

Post by sctb »

mschuster91 wrote: post #37

Trumps goons are hunting immigrants as we write here. Trump supporters regularly beat up people of color. Police regularly shoots black people. And Trumps entire team believes climate change is fake news - this alone will lead the US and the world with it into a desaster.

Every bit of unsubstantiveness has that much more flamewar-starting potential on controversial topics like this, so we ask that commenters take extra care to post within the guidelines.

We detached this flagged subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14027528.

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

#390

Post by Cyph0n »

sqeaky wrote: post #373
Cyph0n wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not. Read my bio. But a fact is a fact: Dubai is one of the safest cities in the world.

I think you are willfully missing the point. You cannot compare Dubai's "Safe" to other place's "Safe" because other places view things like woman being raped as "unsafe" and Dubai does not. Being an Indian construction worker, means being more likely to be killed institutionally. For example by ridiculous hazards at work that any other "Safe" place outlawed decades ago. It could also mean being arrested, harrassed a…

That's exactly the point. I am not including the government in my definition of safety. Rather, the focus is purely on safety from an illegal point of view (murder, rape, robbery, etc.).
Post reply on HN