> TEOTWAWKI Blog: Citizen Civilian militias fight back against cartels in rural Mexico

Pages

2/4/13

Citizen Civilian militias fight back against cartels in rural Mexico

A pretty interesting article in the WSJ today, about rural Mexican citizens arming themselves and standing up against the cartels and organized crime. Fearing reprisals, police are too afraid to do anything about the problem, and federal forces stretched thin. So, gathering up what firearms they have and donning masks to protect their identities, locals have started taking the battle against organized crime into their own hands, running patrols, check points and even raids against suspected cartel houses.

The article is subscription only, but a 3 minute video recap is available for free right here.

A real world example of the need for private firearms ownership, citizen militias and the failure of the state. Can't trust the state to take care of you.

Yes, the U.S. sure isn't crime ridden, civil war-torn Mexico--at least not at the moment. And, unlike the militias in the video, most of us can put up some better armament than an ancient double barrel shotgun.

TEOTWAWKI or a wide scale collapse is likely to look a lot more like this (at least in rural America) than something out of Mad Max. A tightly knit, self sufficient community with sufficient arms and manpower would do quite well. Those unable or unwilling to band together for mutual security will be fodder the wolves that will quickly come prowling.

14 comments :

  1. See also:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpIyaIHsJbc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let me start by saying that I am not commenting on the Mormon part of this story, just the misinformation about the guns in this story. Interesting story, although the “facts” about guns is the typical blame the US for all of Mexico's woes. In the video, ViceBoy says that 90% of all weapons used by the cartels come from America. He then repeats this continually throughout his "high researched" and "deeply vetted" piece of "journalism". Interesting how he has all this background and history on the Mormons but nothing on guns coming from America except the “factual statements” made by ViceBoy. This is the same punch line used by Clinton and Obama. The reality is the number of guns coming into Mexico from the US is far less.

      The National Review reported, “The debate over U.S. gun laws and Mexican drug violence brings to mind Mark Twain’s famous quip about lies, damned lies, and statistics. In a recent editorial, the Washington Post blamed American policies for exacerbating the bloodshed, pointing out that “70 to 80 percent of the traceable guns seized in Mexico can be tracked to the United States.” The key word there is “traceable.” While it’s true that most of the traceable guns originated north of the border, those weapons represent a very small portion of total Mexican gun seizures.

      According to a Government Accountability Office study based on data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), only 7,200 of the roughly 30,000 guns seized by Mexican authorities in 2008 were sent to ATF for a tracing analysis. Scott Stewart of STRATFOR has noted that just 4,000 of them were found to be traceable. Of the traceable guns, 3,480 were linked back to the United States. In other words, only 12 percent of the guns confiscated in 2008 were positively traced to the United States. In May 2009, the Associated Press reported that the Mexican military had “305,424 confiscated weapons locked in vaults.” Because those weapons were not submitted to ATF, their origin is unclear.” “No question, the United States should be doing more to help Mexico stem the rising tide of drug-related violence. But we should also be skeptical of claims that American gun laws are at the root of the problem”

      http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290584/american-guns-and-mexican-violence-sen-john-cornyn

      Get tired of the same old song and dance, “If only we could stop the guns from getting into Mexico the violence would end!” “If we could only outlaw guns crime and violence would end (how is that working out for you Chicago)!” And of course Mexico ONLY gets all of its weapons from America. The propaganda spewed by these outlets and the lies of omission by the MSM and our politicians is inflammatory and truly anti-American. Painting American and gun owners, by proxy, as evil has become the battle cry of anti-gun crowd, left leaning intellectuals and the current administration.

      Sooner or later, the blame game will become worn and attention will focus somewhere else, for a while. The reality is, we live in a very dangerous and uncertain world and while you may walk out your front door and think that statement a lie because of the beautiful houses, manicured lawns and children at play, evil can be visited upon you without warning and destroy your world. Responsible and law abiding citizens who own guns realize this and take steps to do what Americans have done for generations, take responsibility for and protect their freedom, liberty, family and loved ones.

      Again, interesting story on Mormons in Mexico but completely false on the facts and numbers assigned to guns coming into Mexico from America.

      Delete
    2. Anon, have you seen a teal deer? I have, just now. Brevity is the soul of wit.

      Personally, I place much of the blame for Mexico's gun problems on the drug war. Arms flowing into a society are a good thing; they don't have a gun problem so much as a they have an organized crime problem (drug war) a black market problem (drug war) and a smuggling problem (drug war, destructive immigration policy).



      Delete
    3. Watched the first few minutes and gave up when they went into anti-Mormon expose. Not worth your time, IMO.

      For the record, the angle on polygamy and other doctrine that they're presenting as Mormon doctrine is incorrect. For example, the church has never taught that more wives = better place in heaven. The standard practice of the Church is monogamy, with polygamy being an exception rather than the rule.

      Inaccurate reporting painting a religion as crazy people? Really shocking coming from a source that caters to hipsters and likes to glamorize snorting cocaine.

      I'm sure their spin on the gun problem and everything else has a similar, way-off-base slant.

      Back to your regularly scheduled blogging.

      Delete
    4. Teal deer and fairy tales, that about all your little news clip is. Aside from being grossly misleading and nothing but anti-gun, anti-mormon and of course ALL America's fault. Mexico's problem is the same it has been for generations. Corruption at all levels of the government and everyone enriching themseleves at the expense of those further down the food chain. The drug, organied crime, black market and smuggling problems are simply symptoms of the systemic corruption.

      Delete
    5. It's good to see that people are willing to really listen to a viewpoint that might offend them; especially Alex, who should know a thing or two about trying to get bias people to listen to a controversial perspective.

      First few minutes made the hackles on my neck stand up as well, but I didn't expect the godfather of NY hipsters to accurately represent the subtleties of the religion. What I did expect was a totally under-reported story that is worth exploring, and that's what Vice does best.

      That doesn't mean that there isn't valuable information in the video, in its entirety. I know my audience, and I figured this group would hit some stumbling blocks. It is disappointing that people are dismissing this because they see a political agenda that isn't there.

      I can lead you to water, but I can't make you drink.

      Delete
    6. Not saying that its not an under reported issue at all - clearly serious anarchy going on in Mexico. Just would recommend using a different source if looking for accurate reporting.

      Delete
    7. It's not reporting! It is some guy with a video camera spewing BS without having done any research or vetting his facts related to US guns in Mexico. Just because he drew attention to an underreported story does not give his "facts" any credibility. His numbers were so skewed it might as well have been Current TV doing the reporting. Come to us with a valid, sourced and vetted argument and we can have a debate about it. Of course when you refuse to listen to (in your case read) someone’s argument because it’s too long (ADHD can be tough), you tend to find yourself confused and disappointed that everyone isn’t, “willing to really listen to a viewpoint that might offend them.”

      As it relates to this fairy tale you brought us, the horse to water analogy is, like your story, completely wrong. A better analogy would be, “don’t piss on my back and tell me it’s raining!” Perhaps you should try posting this on the Daily Kos or Huffington Post. Surely there your cute little story would not be so easily proven false and dismissed.

      Delete
    8. I'd rather not go round and round on this. While I disagreed with some of the content, here are the things that I found relevant to this blog:

      13:08 Importance of close-knit social/familial groups in a mixed WROL/EROL environment. Failing or corrupt states (like Mexco) tend to be a mixture of these two concepts, and the people who fair best are those that can network well.

      20:10 checkpoints, roadblocks and watchtowers set up by the Lebarons to control ingress/egress routes.

      22:30 how the Lebarons arm themselves legally in a country that aggressively blocks legal gun ownership (while failing to disarm the drug cartels).

      It is unfortunate that some people get wrapped around the axle and dismissed the entire piece over perceived political/religious differences, but that's the internet in a nutshell; it's not enough to disagree on certain points, we've got to destroy anyone who isn't on our "team", because ceding any point is a retreat.

      Delete
    9. Wow, now you’re indignant. Ok, let me help you out since you seem to think your post has been unfairly attacked. Simply put, you reap what you sow! You put up a link and someone comments on the claims made about US guns in Mexico. Your response to that point of criticism, "Anon, have you seen a teal deer? I have, just now. Brevity is the soul of wit." So you choose to respond with insults and a snarky dig on a persons researched response as opposed to a valid argument for or against the factual information. As you are obviously way too smart for the rest of us, you cannot be bothered treat others in the manner you expect to be treated and instead you choose, “destroy anyone who isn't on our "team", because ceding any point is a retreat.”

      While the aforementioned points may be of value and relevant to this site, how can anyone discuss or debate that with you when all you choose to do is tell them it’s too long didn’t read (AKA: Teal Deer) and that they lack the grand wit you obviously exude. There are no perceived political or religious differences, only untrue facts and misleading statements. But you cannot disagree or challenge that position in a meaningful mature fashion. If you want to have an intelligent discussion on these issues, glad to do so but that is never going to happen when you start the conversation the way you did.

      Do us all a favor and stop the whining and sulking about the perceived unprovoked harsh responses. Either come to this forum with valid arguments and treat the people here with the same respect and courtesy you feel is due to you or go to another site where people think you are witty and clever instead of crass and pompous.

      Delete
    10. Oh, is there a mote in my eye? Do ME a favor and re-read the thread in it's entirety. The double standard here is insane.

      I posted a link that was related to the topic at hand, without comment. I literally offered no opinion whatsoever, but that the video was related to the OP's topic.

      Anonymous then replied, repeatedly referring to Shane Smith as "ViceBoy". Where I come from calling someone boy is rude and dismissive. Is this respectful where you live? Be honest.

      How about the "propaganda spewed" by "these outlets" again, dismissive and biased. I seriously doubt the poster has watched any number of Vice articles, or knows much about Shane Smith's positions on anything.

      What about "truly anti-American" this is the conservative's variant of the race card, and a thought killing trope if ever there was one.

      Some other anonymous poster jeered my "little news clip". Is this a polite response? Or dismissive? Be honest.

      Alex didn't even watch the video, but is just positive that he knows what the journalist's opinion on guns is. Is that challenging a position in a "meaningful mature fashion"? be honest.

      Don't preach about treating people with respect when none was given to begin with.

      The first anonymous posted trotted out Twain's "famous quip about lies, damned lies, and statistics", then immediately launched into two full paragraphs of statistics from his/her pet news source without a hint of irony.

      I am sorry if the teal dear joke went over like a lead balloon. I did read the whole post, but found it long winded for this format, and was reminded of Polonius' quip from Hamlet.

      Maybe the most frustrating thing here is that I don't agree with the statistics cited, or the political opinions expressed in the video; I simply found that parts of it were relevant to a blog about preparedness.

      Delete
    11. ::Facepalm::

      I'm sorry this turned into a back and forth. The thread is locked for new comments since it seems like everyone has had their say.

      032125:

      Given that this blog is read by mostly conservative, religious, pro-gun folks (and run by a Mormon!), I don't know how you thought the video you linked - without any kind of note or explanation - would be welcomed. If you wanted to, sharing your learnings from the 40 minute video would have been a wiser course of action.

      Delete
  2. "A tightly knit, self sufficient community with sufficient arms and manpower would do quite well."

    Woodbury, anyone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let's add "not run by psychotic dictators and murderous one-armed bikers" to the requirements.

      Delete