# Perspective-Violence in Mexico



## conklinwh (Dec 19, 2009)

I sincerely apologize if the following is against the rules but the persecutive in this post is well done. I don't think anyone wants to trivialize violence and he doesn't.



How Not to Get Beheaded in Mexico
by Douglas Anthony Cooper


I can't even remember when I last experienced the beheading of a close friend. Everyone assumes it must be a weekly, or even a daily event: after all, I live in Mexico. The truth, however, is that you are as likely to have your head removed against your will in my town -- Oaxaca -- as you are to be murdered by roving, machete-crazed gangs in Martha's Vineyard.
You protest: slavering butchers are thin on the ground in Martha's Vineyard. Ah, but we do not have beheadings in Oaxaca. To be honest, they're unconscionably lax about slaughtering tourists in this city. It just doesn't happen. There are whole great swaths of Mexico -- some 95% of the country -- that are untouched by the drug war. In these places, tourists are annoyingly safe.
Take out a map. Mexico is rather large. To avoid all of Mexico because you fear drug violence, is like cancelling your trip to the Napa Valley because you hear that people are flying airplanes into towers in New York City. (I'm sure a lot of Europeans did just that.)
The homicide rate in most Mexican cities is just not very exciting. People who read newspapers -- they are legion -- will tell you that Mexico City is Elm Street on steroids. No way any vacation is going to take them near the Mexican capital. Yet these same people do not think twice about hauling their beloved brood to Disney World.
Disney World is in Orlando. Orlando, Florida.
What, you're not trembling? The rate of violent crime in Orlando is really something. At the theme park itself you might not encounter drooling gangs with machetes, but the likelihood of getting slaughtered is much higher in the city of Orlando than it is in Mexico City. The homicide rate in Mexico City is sub-terrifying: 8.3 out of 100,000. The rate in Orlando? Honey, you don't want to know.
If you're truly bent on living dangerously, hit the French Quarter for a shot of faux absinthe. New Orleans is gunning them down at a rate of 51 per 100,000. To be fair, that is an improvement upon the post-Katrina high of 71 or so. No doubt champagne is flowing at the tourist board.
I happen to love New Orleans, but Mayor Mitch Landrieu admitted -- discussing a local high school -- that for part of last year "a student attending John McDonogh was more likely to be killed than a soldier in Afghanistan."
Funny that people are not dissuaded from visiting New Orleans -- or Disney World -- by travel advisories that read like torture porn.
Oh, you do want to know those Orlando stats? That would be 11.7: which is better than New Orleans or Baghdad, but way higher than Mexico City. (28 homicides, in a population of 238,300.) Ironically, in the UK you'll encounter the same kind of hyperventilating press about Orlando that you'll see here damning Mexico. To Brits, Orlando is the Mouse That Roared, Then Indiscriminately Dismembered.
In fact, the capital of America is a much more dangerous place than the capital of Mexico: You are 10 times more likely to get beheaded on a school trip to the Lincoln Memorial than you are strolling through downtown Mexico City.
Okay, I'm lying. You are ten times more likely to be murdered in a drug-related crime. (The rate of actual beheadings is suppressed by travel agents on both sides of the border.)
People ask me, regularly, how they can travel safely to Mexico. Here I have impeccable advice: follow this, and you're pretty much guaranteed to keep your head. Taking notes? Good. 

Do not, under any circumstances, take a job with a major drug cartel. Just say no. You do not want to be a hit man, or a mule, or even middle management -- that's how people get killed.
I mean it: that is how people get killed. Sunbathing, on the other hand, is oddly uneventful. Yes, there are a few places in Mexico that I would avoid, unless I were applying for that gig (which I urge you to reconsider). Most border towns are not the destination of choice, unless you are brothel-hopping, in which case a soupçon of danger is probably bracing. Acapulco has gone, sadly, from a town in which you had a good chance of having a bad time, to a town in which you have almost no chance of having a good time.
And Mexico City, while not particularly murderous, is somewhere to be very careful: petty crime is rife, and not-so-petty crime (kidnapping) is a real issue. I travel through Mexico City all the time, and even chose to live there fairly recently, but I take the usual precautions -- I restrict myself to taxis from official taxi stands; I don't use bank machines on the street; and I suppress the urge to wave my arms around and yell, "Rob the Canadian!" (If you would like to give it a shot, that would be: "¡Robe del Canadiense!")
Lots of really nice cities are getting a bit hairy: Guadalajara, for instance. The San Francisco Chronicle has a useful list of places to avoid -- mostly areas on the American border, and south along the Pacific Coast to the state of Guerrero. The Washington Post has another useful list: they add to this the entire state of Veracruz (which is very sad -- it's lovely). These two guides will steer you clear of all the places you have been reading about, including the very few resort towns that have become dangerous: Mazatlán, for instance, and Acapulco.
Again, however, this is a tiny part of Mexico. "Of 2,500 municipalities (what we call counties), only 80, orfewer than five percent, have been affected by the drug war."
Graphic anecdotes are hard to ignore, by design, but they are useless when trying to grasp the nature of a country that is not simply vast, but immeasurably diverse. You know how Los Angeles doesn't have a whole lot in common with an Amish community in Pennsylvania? Well, multiply that difference a thousand-fold when comparing Ciudad Juarez (a genuinely dangerous place) to an indigenous town in the Mayan Riviera (that edenic coastal strip between Tulum and Playa del Carmen).
In fact, you are a whole lot safer in this entire region -- the Yucatan Peninsula -- than you are in Canada. The national homicide rate in Canada is 1.85 victims per 100,000. Sorry, kids, but that's a war zone relative to the Yucatan: .1 in 100,000.
Mexico's homicide rate as a nation isn't even world-class. The country is in fact something of a sissy relative to the thugs in the neighborhood. Before avoiding Mexico, cross the following nations off your list: Honduras, El Salvador, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Venezuela, Jamaica, Belize, Guatemala, Bahamas, Columbia, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Brazil... ah, but I'm boring you. I shouldn't be: All of these countries -- and this is only half the list -- are murderfests relative to Mexico. Some of these places are worse than Miami.
Let's put this in perspective. Imagine a nice family from Oaxaca planning their vacation in Canada. They do research on the internet, and decide that some things are just too risky. Tea at the Empress Hotel, for instance. Victoria, B.C.: the second most dangerous city in Canada? Must be called Butchart Gardens because people get butchered.
So our family turns elsewhere. Hm. Probably best to avoid "Edmonton's Murder Belt." Aiee. We'll go east. Regina? Are you out of your mind? "Saskatchewan reported the highest Crime Severity Index, followed by Manitoba." How about the West Coast? Not if our worried Mexican family cares about that crime severity thing: "St. John's had the largest increase." This is awful.
At last, after carefully considering Prince Edward Island, our sensible family decides it is just not worth the risk. (After all, homicide in PEI has skyrocketed.) You would have to be a fool to leave Mexico.
All right, all right. The beyond-exponential increase in homicide associated with Prince Edward Island -- when looked at closely -- is not really that alarming. One whole person was killed in 2011. As opposed to zero, in the five preceding years. Prince Edward Island is hilariously safe. The Mexican government has been decent enough to refrain from issuing travel advisories, despite the crime rates in Abbotsford and Thunder Bay. Level heads have prevailed.
The truth is that most of Canada is almost as safe as the Yucatan.




__._,_.___


----------



## terrybahena (Oct 3, 2011)

!! Thank you for this. I just copied it in full and emailed it to my daughter who keeps telling me about these videos she sees online about murderous Mexico! I live above San Francisco and do not go to some neighborhoods in nearby Oakland at nitght or day...
It's about being smart. I've traveled around Mexico including the Yucatan and find Mexico to be the most spiritual and friendly place I've ever been, hence our decision to move there. (I've been to many other countries, Africa, Asia, Russia, the Middle East- enjoyed them all, but feel Mexico in my heart). I hope my grown children will come to feel it as I do.


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

conklinwh said:


> ...
> Lots of really nice cities are getting a bit hairy: Guadalajara, for instance.
> ...


Nice article except for the knock on Guadalajara which is still safer than most any big city in the United States. In this case, I think the author (Douglas Anthony Cooper) fell victim to the same misleading press that he is arguing against in the article.


----------



## DebMer (Dec 31, 2011)

Well done! Thanks for posting this. I plan to copy and save it, then disseminate it amongst friends and family a few months before we head south.


----------



## conklinwh (Dec 19, 2009)

Tundra, I did think that the Guadalajara comment came somewhat out of left field with no backup. Otherwise I thought he did pretty well.


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

conklinwh said:


> Tundra, I did think that the Guadalajara comment came somewhat out of left field with no backup. Otherwise I thought he did pretty well.


Yes, it was a little out of sync with the rest of the article. Apparently it is based on the San Francisco Chronicle or Washington Post lists of places to avoid. I couldn't find either list.


----------



## joaquinx (Jul 3, 2010)

TundraGreen said:


> Yes, it was a little out of sync with the rest of the article. Apparently it is based on the San Francisco Chronicle or Washington Post lists of places to avoid. I couldn't find either list.


Douglas Anthony Cooper: How Not to Get Beheaded in Mexico

This is where the quote was originally published (maybe), but it has links to all the quotes.


----------



## HolyMole (Jan 3, 2009)

Sigh. Another attempt to downplay Mexican crime and violence with the old "You think it's bad here: you should see Peoria" line - with the predicable "likes" from many of the folks who probably own Mexican property they wish they hadn't bought.
On Monday evening, at 6 pm in downtown Guasave, Sinaloa three Mexican Army soldiers were killed in a shootout with suspected narcos. In spite of their radioed calls for assistance, the local municipal police refused to come to the scene until after the shooting had ended. In response, the Army and State police detained, handcuffed and questioned 32 municipal police officers. There was reportedly a state of panic as the area was filled with residents tried to avoid the gunfire. Hundreds of empty cartridges littered the streets.

Guasave ! 

For the life of me, I can't recall the last time there was a pitched battle between Army and provincial police forces and criminal gangs in Prince Edward island. Or Orlando.

Of course the chances of being beheaded in Mexico are infinitesimal-to-none. But the chances of being robbed? Or mugged? Or shaken down by a crooked cop demanding $600 or $800 US or he'll take you to the station and leave your car on the roadside? Unfortunately, those chances are increasing. And I really wouldn't worry about any of those possibilities in PEI, or the rest of Canada or the USA, save the "tenderloin districts" of any large Canadian or US city that we all know enough to avoid.

Guasave !


----------



## terrybahena (Oct 3, 2011)

Well I haven't even completed my Move to Mexico but I have known for quite some time that Sinaloa is a state to stay away from!


----------



## kazslo (Jun 7, 2010)

HolyMole said:


> Sigh. Another attempt to downplay Mexican crime and violence with the old "You think it's bad here: you should see Peoria" line - with the predicable "likes" from many of the folks who probably own Mexican property they wish they hadn't bought.
> On Monday evening, at 6 pm in downtown Guasave, Sinaloa three Mexican Army soldiers were killed in a shootout with suspected narcos. In spite of their radioed calls for assistance, the local municipal police refused to come to the scene until after the shooting had ended. In response, the Army and State police detained, handcuffed and questioned 32 municipal police officers. There was reportedly a state of panic as the area was filled with residents tried to avoid the gunfire. Hundreds of empty cartridges littered the streets.
> 
> Guasave !
> ...



Since none of us are Mexican soldiers, or cartel members, I'd say your story provides even more support to the article. Nobody is denying that violence exists. However, as the article more or less is trying to say, to judge the COUNTRY of Mexico, all of its 31 states, based on crime occurrences in certain areas is no better than judging the USA based on reading the crime section of the newspaper in Gary, IN.

===Don't read this section...'extremist' viewpoint===

Now, I'd much rather be robbed, mugged, and extorted vs. shot dead by a teenage gangbanger with a shaky trigger finger. In my 4 years living in a rougher neighborhood in Chicago, I've seen 3 people gunned down right in front of me (ok, they were really across the street or within viewing distance down the block). 2 of those were 'mistaken identity' where the gunman thought the other person was a rival gang member. At least here in Xalapa, I'm not mistaken for much more than an American who has nothing to do with drug trafficking or hitman-ery. And I can walk to the store feeling secure thinking just that.

===END Viewpoint===

I personally liked the article. Other than the hit to Guadalajara, I thought it took a nice all around approach - not denying that violence exists, while understanding who that violence actually affects. When you read news, its important to understand bias, and take that into consideration when you judge what is fact and what is opinion.


----------



## pappabee (Jun 22, 2010)

There are gang-land shootouts in the major cities of the US on a regular basis. No you don't see the army fighting the locals. But maybe that's because the army is deployed to protect the cities. Maybe if the local police were more effective and the army wasn't needed you'd see less army vs locals in Mexico. If you remember that during the civil rights movement the National Guard was sent into places like Selma AL. to enforce the law. Don't forget about Kent State, Ohio where the National Guard killed 6 kids. The US has had it's share of problems with army vs locals. Thank G-d much of that is over.

Let's all hope and pray that someday soon that will be the case here in Mexico also.


----------



## johnmex (Nov 30, 2010)

Hmmm, where the heck is Guasave? Should I care? 

Ok, looking on Google maps I see that it is in Sinaloa(strike 1), near the beach(strike 2), on the highway leading to a major market for the narcos(strike 3). After having this revelation I can say that the news does not surprise me. Why the municipal police didn't help isn't a surprise either. If they are not actively helping the narcos they are probably scared for their lives or those of their family. Being such a little town they must be known and as such don't have the protection of being anonymous. Helping out the army could be tantamount to a death sentence....


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

As to Holy Mole's comment:
His point is valid - a comparison of how bad you have as to how bad I have it is not a valid one. When I have "it" it affects me, and if "it" is about you does that really affect my life? You know what I mean?

Now, that being said, in Baltimore City in 2011 there were 197 murders/homicides in a city of 400,000. Now I'd say that is pretty bad, and we called it a triumph, down from around 300/year. So, what do I do? Avoid the areas where the crimes occur, pretty common sense. Avoid actions that can make me a target. Common sense, street smarts.

In our move to Mexico, the location we have chosen does just that - it is as safe as we can determine, short of a few incidents in all of 2011.

If you choose to move to a war zone, shooting, drugs or otherwise, then you are taking your chances.

So, Holy Mole, I do not think we are minimizing the news, just putting it in context.


----------



## vantexan (Sep 4, 2011)

Read in today's Dallas paper that an elderly missionary couple got murdered in their home a couple of days ago. In Santiago near Monterrey if I remember right. It does matter very much where you live in Mexico. Police said they had several suspects, said couple most likely knew their attackers. An in-wall safe was chiseled out, computers, plasma tv and Suburban were taken. Before anyone says it could happen in the States I knew a couple in Sedona, AZ who were murdered in their home. It could happen anywhere, but it does appear the chances go up quite a bit in northern Mexico. I spent about 6 years in 3 locations on the border, and met some wonderful people there. I also met quite a few who just oozed hatred for me without even knowing me. Just hated Anglos with a passion. I don't think it's a stretch to believe if given the opportunity, especially if they could make some money at it, that some of the angry ones would do me harm. It's a tough world near the border, just as it's tough in certain areas of major American cities. Don't go into those areas, don't linger near the border.


----------



## whatcom (Nov 8, 2011)

One's viewpoint depends upon one's point of view. 

Where I live (Bellingham, WA), I can't watch Seattle news because it's nothing but crime stories. I also can't watch CTV Vancouver (B.C.) because it's so depressing. I have relatives who live within shooting distance of Cd. Juarez. But in the last, oh, I don't know, five or so years, less than five stories about murders in Mexico's interior have caught my attention. Kinda puts things in a positive light for me.


----------



## Jessica-Mty (Sep 26, 2010)

I read the artice recently. I give it to people who ask me frantically if bad things will happen to them at their five star all inclusive cancun resort. BUT - as vantexan and the article say there are a lot of problems in northern mexico. Today i walked to the nearest taco stand (ten minutes away) and discovered i couldnt buy the tacos owing to the massive police presence and the body with a bullet hole in his head. Its easy to dismiss violence as not quite real until you see the brutal evidence of it. The violence is primarily narcos and the police fighting them, but bystanders do get caught out (have yet to find out if this dead guy was a narco or not).I worry sometimes about living in Monterrey...but unless my fiance agrees to move (he's from here) this is where im staying =S


----------



## Lukito (Apr 11, 2011)

TundraGreen said:


> Nice article except for the knock on Guadalajara which is still safer than most any big city in the United States. In this case, I think the author (Douglas Anthony Cooper) fell victim to the same misleading press that he is arguing against in the article.


Well, GDL right now is not as safe as you think. Let's leave out the bad parts and AV. Jalisco, every city has bad parts. The problem is that 1-2 months ago they started to discover a lot of dead bodies. As my Mexican friends told me, there is a cartel moving into GDL and the two that are already here don't want to move.

I have seen a balacera last wednesday at 2PM, a year ago they have found a "descuartizado" right below my apartment (then I moved to some other part of the city). So, it makes you think a bit different when you don't live in the same part all the time and do the same things every day.

Don't get me wrong, some people are retired here and they live in safe comunities, nothing happens. I have traveled a lot, seen Juarez, seen Tamaulipas, etc... it's not nice it's a warzone.

Nothing will probably happen if you use common sense. You could also get hit by a truck in Switzerland.


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

Lukito said:


> Well, GDL right now is not as safe as you think. Let's leave out the bad parts and AV. Jalisco, every city has bad parts. The problem is that 1-2 months ago they started to discover a lot of dead bodies. As my Mexican friends told me, there is a cartel moving into GDL and the two that are already here don't want to move.
> 
> I have seen a balacera last wednesday at 2PM, a year ago they have found a "descuartizado" right below my apartment (then I moved to some other part of the city). So, it makes you think a bit different when you don't live in the same part all the time and do the same things every day.
> 
> ...


What is AV. Jalisco? Do you mean Av. Juarez? Yes, one of the cartels left some bodies here a few months ago. Apparently they were killed in Sinaloa. And I am aware of the fact that Jalisco is in the cross hairs between the Sinaloa cartel controlling the Pacific coast and the Zetas wanting access to it. But I still think the article that casually categorized Gdl as dangerous was misleading.

Incidentally, what did you see in Ciudad Juarez that made it look like a "warzone"? I passed through there in August. I arrived at the bus station, took a local bus to the border, walked around in centro a little bit, then reversed it a week later coming the other direction. I didn't see anything that made it feel any different than any other city I have visited. The most frightening thing that happened to me was an empty bus and a very large bus driver who turned around and pulled down her pants to show me a tattoo she had at the base of her spine.


----------



## Isla Verde (Oct 19, 2011)

TundraGreen said:


> The most frightening thing that happened to me was an empty bus and a very large bus driver who turned around and pulled down her pants to show me a tattoo she had at the base of her spine.


What do your think she was trying to tell you?


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

Isla Verde said:


> What do your think she was trying to tell you?


It was a pretty funny scene. I got on the bus at the end of her route. We were chatting while she ate lunch on her break before starting the route again. I don't remember what we were talking about but she decided to show me the tattoo she had.


----------



## Lukito (Apr 11, 2011)

TundraGreen said:


> What is AV. Jalisco? Do you mean Av. Juarez? Yes, one of the cartels left some bodies here a few months ago. Apparently they were killed in Sinaloa. And I am aware of the fact that Jalisco is in the cross hairs between the Sinaloa cartel controlling the Pacific coast and the Zetas wanting access to it. But I still think the article that casually categorized Gdl as dangerous was misleading.


Hm, could be Juarez or I could ask again. It's not just a problem of Zetas, there is Cartel Jalisco and some other guys here.



TundraGreen said:


> Incidentally, what did you see in Ciudad Juarez that made it look like a "warzone"? I passed through there in August. I arrived at the bus station, took a local bus to the border, walked around in centro a little bit, then reversed it a week later coming the other direction. I didn't see anything that made it feel any different than any other city I have visited. The most frightening thing that happened to me was an empty bus and a very large bus driver who turned around and pulled down her pants to show me a tattoo she had at the base of her spine.


I was in Juarez approx. 2 years ago and it looked like ghost town. After sundown there was nobody on the streets (and it's supposed to have 1.2M people). Next day our local partner took me around town and started explaining stuff like here they shot that guy las week, here this happened... etc. Then we went to his place of business and the building next door was closed and full of federales, balacera, etc. One of our guys (Mexican) went from the aiport in taxi and saw people shooting. Same night they had to move all the people from the hotel to another one, because there was some shooting going on nearby and the cops were clearing the zone out.

However, a few months ago I went from GDL to San Francisco by car (don't ask...), so I took Sinaloa, Sonora, passed through Nogales and returned the same way 2 months later and nothing happened. Might be that Sinaloa right now is a lot safer than Jalisco. At least noone is fighting over there because everything is under control of "one" cartel?


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

Lukito said:


> Hm, could be Juarez or I could ask again. It's not just a problem of Zetas, there is Cartel Jalisco and some other guys here.


The east end of Av Juarez in Guadalajara is not as upscale as the west end of Av Vallarta even though they are the same street with a name change in the middle. However, I don't see any problems on Av Juarez. Actually, the rare incident seems to occur in Zapopan which is the wealthiest of the five cities that make up the Guadalajara Metropolitan area. That is where the leaders of the cartels have their families and the rare incidents that occur seem to be in Providencia, one of the most upscale neighborhoods in an upscale part of town. 

There are a lot of cartels around, Sinaloa, Nueva Generación, La Resistencia, Los Templarios, La Familia, los Beltrán Leyva, I can't keep them all straight.


----------



## Lukito (Apr 11, 2011)

TundraGreen said:


> The east end of Av Juarez in Guadalajara is not as upscale as the west end of Av Vallarta even though they are the same street with a name change in the middle. However, I don't see any problems on Av Juarez. Actually, the rare incident seems to occur in Zapopan which is the wealthiest of the five cities that make up the Guadalajara Metropolitan area. That is where the leaders of the cartels have their families and the rare incidents that occur seem to be in Providencia, one of the most upscale neighborhoods in an upscale part of town.
> 
> There are a lot of cartels around, Sinaloa, Nueva Generación, La Resistencia, Los Templarios, La Familia, los Beltrán Leyva, I can't keep them all straight.


Well, all the incidents that happened to me happened in Zapopan actually. Descuartizado around Clouthier y Patria, balacera last week aswell (on Moctezuma). So then I moved to Bugambilias and one week later they shot a guy at the plaza 1ra seccion (and everyone started laughing about me moving to a safer place). Providencia is high end, but I have also heard about balaceras at Andares. Other high end is Valle Real - a few weeks ago there were police and army entering, looking for narcos.

Not to mention "levantando las cabezas de las empresas", a lot of directors have to hire a transport to get from point A to point B and not get kidnaped in the process.

I'm not saying that all is bad, a lot of that is the nature of my work.


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

Lukito said:


> Well, all the incidents that happened to me happened in Zapopan actually. Descuartizado around Clouthier y Patria, balacera last week aswell (on Moctezuma). So then I moved to Bugambilias and one week later they shot a guy at the plaza 1ra seccion (and everyone started laughing about me moving to a safer place). Providencia is high end, but I have also heard about balaceras at Andares. Other high end is Valle Real - a few weeks ago there were police and army entering, looking for narcos.
> 
> Not to mention "levantando las cabezas de las empresas", a lot of directors have to hire a transport to get from point A to point B and not get kidnaped in the process.
> 
> I'm not saying that all is bad, a lot of that is the nature of my work.


Fortunately, none of those neighborhoods had much appeal to me when I was looking for a place to live. I'd rather live in a more traditional neighborhood with mercados, small shops and bus service. So I do.


----------



## Lukito (Apr 11, 2011)

So, you can't really compare the situation from Guadalajara to US. I have seen Steve Balmer using Facebook check-in almost every day and he doesn't get kidnapped. I can not say the same for... well noone in Mexico


----------



## circle110 (Jul 20, 2009)

Lukito said:


> I have seen Steve Balmer using Facebook check-in almost every day and he doesn't get kidnapped. I can not say the same for... well noone in Mexico


Huh??

I have never been kidnapped either. Maybe it's because I don't use Facebook much...


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

Off you go now. Slovenia is looking really safe for a change, isn't it?


----------



## ensenadafan (Sep 5, 2010)

A guy living in northern california mentioned to his neighbor that he was going to Mexico, neighbor said, Isn't going to Mexico dangerous? Guy paused and said yes, I have to drive through Oakland and LA!


----------



## ensenadafan (Sep 5, 2010)

terrybahena said:


> !! Thank you for this. I just copied it in full and emailed it to my daughter who keeps telling me about these videos she sees online about murderous Mexico! I live above San Francisco and do not go to some neighborhoods in nearby Oakland at nitght or day...
> It's about being smart. I've traveled around Mexico including the Yucatan and find Mexico to be the most spiritual and friendly place I've ever been, hence our decision to move there. (I've been to many other countries, Africa, Asia, Russia, the Middle East- enjoyed them all, but feel Mexico in my heart). I hope my grown children will come to feel it as I do.


A guy living in northern california mentioned to his neighbor that he was going to Mexico, neighbor said, Isn't going to Mexico dangerous? Guy paused and said yes, I have to drive through Oakland and LA!


----------



## DebMer (Dec 31, 2011)

ensenadafan said:


> A guy living in northern california mentioned to his neighbor that he was going to Mexico, neighbor said, Isn't going to Mexico dangerous? Guy paused and said yes, I have to drive through Oakland and LA!


:clap2:


----------



## telcoman (Feb 11, 2010)

From an RV'ers perspective, a Canadian guy in an RV was murdered in Florida this week.

Never had any problems in Mexico


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

telcoman said:


> From an RV'ers perspective, a Canadian guy in an RV was murdered in Florida this week.
> 
> Never had any problems in Mexico


That sucks! So I suppose random violence can happen anywhere. Like it's been said, street smarts, take all precautions you can, but random acts we have no control of.

Man, that really sucks - bums me out.


----------



## Detailman (Aug 27, 2011)

FHBOY said:


> That sucks! So I suppose random violence can happen anywhere. Like it's been said, street smarts, take all precautions you can, but random acts we have no control of.
> 
> Man, that really sucks - bums me out.


I agree that random violence can occur anywhere.

About two weeks ago in Vancouver, BC a 37 year old gangster was shot dead in a high end restaurant in the Sheraton Wall Centre, which is a new iconic high rise in downtown Vancouver. Extremely high-end.

Attached you can see pics of it.

www.*sheratonvancouver.com*/gallery

Keep your wits about you. Once I was in my TD Bank in Burnaby and I got a funny feeling about the person behind me. Normally I would turn and size him up to burn a pic of him in my mind (habit from RCMP friends). I broke my rule and ignored my feeling. I went to one teller and he went to the teller beside me and robbed the bank. We were thereafter locked in for almost 1/2 hour.

Go by your feelings. Gut instincts are often right. But if you happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time there is little that can be done. "Time and unforseen occurence."


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

From another thread:


Merida Yucatan said:


> Sorry to be a wet blanket, but if anyone feels it's relevant, here's Stanford
> University's map of murders in Mexico by state and municipality:
> Mexico Crime
> 
> US Travel Advisory constantly update the safety of cities and states in Mexico.


Follow the link, it is interesting. Here is my comment in reply to MeridaYuctan:

Hey, that's a great map, thank you. Where we are heading, Chapala, reported 5 murders, where we thought we were going, PV had 15. We live in Baltimore, last year in the city alone, not counting the surrounding counties, had 192.

Yes I am ignoring total population - so it is just "gut" - but I'll take those odds any day. Thank You


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

Is it 'murder' when the deaths result from a battle between cartels, or between authorities and cartels?


----------



## Lukito (Apr 11, 2011)

Depends, if they cut the head off it's murder 1.


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

*Stastics on murders*



RVGRINGO said:


> Is it 'murder' when the deaths result from a battle between cartels, or between authorities and cartels?


This "has" to been interpruted as murder between cartel members doing battle and murder of police, military and innocent citizens when killed by the bad guys and deaths when police or military kill a bad guy for any reason, I would suspect. If that is the case what are the statistics really? Or is it not technically using the word murder correctly?


----------



## pappabee (Jun 22, 2010)

Murder is taking a life without their permission. AND yes that includes capital punishment.


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

Murder: The unlawful, premeditated taking of a human life, by another human.
Homicide: The deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another.
Assassination: Surprise murder for political or religious reasons.
Killing: Causing death of another living thing.

So, it would seem that many of the deaths reported as murders, may have been either homicides or assassinations. To call them 'murders' is to spread fear unnecessarily, since homicides and assassinations are generally targeted to specific groups or classes; sometimes an individual. Murder is usually a premeditated act against one specific individual by another individual; seldom for political or religious reasons and not as a part of a larger conflict.


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

pappabee said:


> Murder is taking a life without their permission. AND yes that includes capital punishment.


Murder by simplified legal definition in the US is: 
_The unlawful killing of another human being without justification or excuse._

The precise definition of murder varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Under the Common Law, or law made by courts, murder was the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. The term malice aforethought did not necessarily mean that the killer planned or premeditated on the killing, or that he or she felt malice toward the victim. Generally, malice aforethought referred to a level of intent or recklessness that separated murder from other killings and warranted stiffer punishment.

By that definition, Pappa, as abhorrent as I find capital punishment, it is not murder. The logic can be circular, however, for a court brings the finding in of non justification and who are they to judge this. Oh, my head!

A question: can the police, then, commit murder if (s)he is appointed by the state to maintain order for the greater good?

Obviously this is a nice academic discussion, but on the ground murder is taking place, as well as manslaughter: 

_The unjustifiable, inexcusable, and intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation, and malice. The unlawful killing of a human being without any deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful act without due caution and circumspection._

I don't know why I got into this discussion, so excuse me while I bow out and go back to work.


----------



## Detailman (Aug 27, 2011)

RVGRINGO said:


> Murder: The unlawful, premeditated taking of a human life, by another human.
> Homicide: The deliberate and unlawful killing of one person by another.
> Assassination: Surprise murder for political or religious reasons.
> Killing: Causing death of another living thing.
> ...


I think that RVGringo is making a very valid point. I would put it slightly different but I notice that other posts are really getting into legal "definitions". I don't want to get into any arguments over semantics. Let's just think it through simply.

What do you call it when a war breaks out between two countries or even between two parties in the same country (eg. US Civil War)? Do you call it murder? homicide? That is not how it is generally referred to! We refer to it as killing. (103 were killed in the battle of #####. Three more soldiers were killed yesterday by a suicide bomber. Sometimes there is an assassination. We generally don't use the words "murder" or "homicide".

With the drug cartels it is normally said that the governments (US, Mexico) have declared "war" on the drug trade/cartels/(whatever you want to call it). The cartels have declared "war" on other cartels. Even here in Vancouver whenever there is a killing of an important gang member the police openly report that they are concerned that a gang "war" may result. With some of the cartels, they definitely decide to assassinate specific individuals (like judges, police captains, etc.)

I agree that it would clarify the situation it we broke down the killings in a declared "war" versus the murder of individuals, but of course that will never happen. Based on what we know about the "killings" I would say that Mexico is relatively safe, more so than many countries in the world.

Summary: I think that RVGringo's last definition fits "most" of what is happening in the cartels. (Note I said most and not all.)

Just an opinion and I wouldn't bother to defend it. Simply for thinking about.


----------



## Jibbarra (Oct 14, 2010)

*living close to Guasave*



HolyMole said:


> Sigh. Another attempt to downplay Mexican crime and violence with the old "You think it's bad here: you should see Peoria" line - with the predicable "likes" from many of the folks who probably own Mexican property they wish they hadn't bought.
> On Monday evening, at 6 pm in downtown Guasave, Sinaloa three Mexican Army soldiers were killed in a shootout with suspected narcos. In spite of their radioed calls for assistance, the local municipal police refused to come to the scene until after the shooting had ended. In response, the Army and State police detained, handcuffed and questioned 32 municipal police officers. There was reportedly a state of panic as the area was filled with residents tried to avoid the gunfire. Hundreds of empty cartridges littered the streets.
> 
> Guasave !
> ...




Is it possible that you live in or near Guasave? We live near Guasave and it would be fun, interesting to know more gringos that live here.


----------



## HolyMole (Jan 3, 2009)

Jibbarra said:


> Is it possible that you live in or near Guasave? We live near Guasave and it would be fun, interesting to know more gringos that live here.


Sorry, we just drive through Guasave both ways when we drive from British Columbia to Zihuatanejo in Guerrero.
(We flew this year because of one too many stories of shakedowns by crooked cops. But we may throw caution to the winds and drive again next year.) 
I mentioned the Guasave story simply to counter the usual nonsense that Mexico's narco-violence is restricted primarily to border towns. But, predictably, there were those who found the usual excuses to downplay the story:
---Guasave? Where's Guasave?
---it's in Sinaloa: what do you expect?
---it's located on the Pacific coast
---it's located between two major population centres

etc., etc.


----------



## kazslo (Jun 7, 2010)

HolyMole said:


> I mentioned the Guasave story simply to counter the usual nonsense that Mexico's narco-violence is restricted primarily to border towns.


So what are you trying to say? You've found a place that is violent and is not along the border. From that, we should draw the conclusion that all of the country is overflowing with 'narco-violence'? And if we stay we should expect to be kidnapped, pillaged, and killed? I'm lost as to what your underlying message is and what actions you expect the reader to take.


----------



## HolyMole (Jan 3, 2009)

kazslo said:


> So what are you trying to say? You've found a place that is violent and is not along the border. From that, we should draw the conclusion that all of the country is overflowing with 'narco-violence'? And if we stay we should expect to be kidnapped, pillaged, and killed? I'm lost as to what your underlying message is and what actions you expect the reader to take.


There's no underlying message, nor do I expect readers to take any action at all....except perhaps to be as critical of articles downplaying the situation in Mexico as they are of those in the US and Canadian media they accuse of over-reacting.

(How, I wonder - just for an example - is the press supposed to describe the dumping of some 35 bodies in a busy Veracruz underpass in mid-afternoon without "sensationalizing" it?) 

Your statement that I have "found a place that is violent and is not along the border" strongly suggests that you are among those who would still have us believe that this is an aberration.

The article that started this thread has, for obvious reasons, shown up on most Forums and Message Boards dealing with Mexico. I wrote the following response on one of those Boards.

"In his effort to make light of Mexico's crime problems, Mr. Cooper confirms that Mexico City is somewhere to be very careful, with rampant petty crime and kidnappings, that places to avoid include "areas along the border with the USA and south along the Pacific coast to the state of Guerrero", "lots of really nice cities getting a bit hairy", like Guadalajara, (Mexico's second largest city - my note), and "resort towns that have become dangerous, like Mazatlan and Acapulco".

His statement that this amounts to only a "tiny part of Mexico" is ridiculous. Since he acknowledges that many of the largest cities in Mexico are now places to avoid, or have become "hairy" - (his own list would have to include Mexico City, Tijuana, Mexicali, Ciudad Juarez, Matamoros, Ciudad Victoria, Guadalajara, Mazatlan and Acapulco at a minimum - and I could add Monterrey, Guasave, Tepic, Durango, Zamora, Apatzingan, Morelia, etc., etc.- all of which have experienced drug-related violence) - his subsequent statement that only 5% of some 2500 municipalities have been affected by the drug war simply lacks credibility.

I am starting to lean more in the direction of those who insist that life for regular folks in Mexico remains relatively safe, in spite of the drug war raging around them. But what really bugs me are those people who keep insisting that the problems are restricted to the border areas. Give us the truth, and let us make our own informed decisions as to whether we think Mexico is still a relatively safe destination or not."

You'll obviously disagree.


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

We only can draw conclusions from what we read and what we witness. In the first case it is a second hand account, and in the second there is a matter of trust in the source. There is no doubt that risky behaviors anywhere will increase the odds of something bad happening to you.

IT is also true that trouble in Mexico as in teh US and Canada is not universal and country wide as. let's say it was in Iraq. Yes, within any municipality there will be a percentage of crime and murder and everything else.

What I am saying is there is no right or wrong answer to the question, nor is there cause for animosity of opinions and observations and in the end we all must decide from teh sources we use what decisions to make.

From what I have read here, there is an acknowledgement that there is a crime problem in Mexico, I don't think anyone here on the Forum is hiding their head in the sand, but from the first hand accounts from those "on the ground" here, the "scary" does not enter their every day lives. What I read here is choose wisely.


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

Glad you are 'starting to lean'. Actually, there were banners put up in the last few days, by a cartel, apologizing for the recent traffic interruptions and bus burnings. Evidently, they don't like being unpopular. They reiterated their desire to protect us from the Zetas.
One could suggest analogies to the current situations in Syria, Afghanistan or Pakistan. Most of us on 'this side of the pond' have absolutely no understanding or concept of the tribal/religious/ethnic divisions, centuries old, which cannot be overcome by western meddling. As such, the media, particularly in the USA and Canada, sensationalize that which they don't understand, unnecessarily destroying the tourist economy which is so vital to Mexico. 
We're happy that expat residents and tourists aren't involved and that innocents of any ilk are hardly ever involved, unless by accident. One is more likely to be run over by a bus; especially in Monterrey, where the buses are even more 'wild' than in Guadalajara, where the death toll by bus sometimes reaches one per day. What? No headlines in the USA or Canada!
The authorities 'dispatch' the bad guys whenever possible & the competing bad guys 'dispatch' each other and 'uncooperative officials'. Bodies, and sometimes just heads, are used as 'messages', as they have been throughout the history of humanity.
If you want to stop the narcoviolencia, you will have to ask the consumers to please stop buying and using drugs. The vast majority of them are US citizens & the government seems unwilling to 'cut them off' or to stop others from selling illegal arms to the Mexican cartels, in and outside of the USA.
Now, about 'crime', and entirely different subject with little direct connection to the narco situation. Crime ebbs and flows with the economy, just as anywhere else. We saw an increase in crime locally, when there was a huge building boom some five to seven years ago. Why? Imported labor with no local connections. There is less now, but still some. It will always fluctuate, but we still note that it is less, and less 'random and violent' than in the USA. Yes, it is probably more than in Canada, where children are still 'civilized'.
Now, can we end this topic ...... please. The majority have no idea what they are talking about.


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

HolyMole said:


> His statement that this amounts to only a "tiny part of Mexico" is ridiculous. Since he acknowledges that many of the largest cities in Mexico are now places to avoid, or have become "hairy" - (his own list would have to include Mexico City, Tijuana, Mexicali, Ciudad Juarez, Matamoros, Ciudad Victoria, Guadalajara, Mazatlan and Acapulco at a minimum - and I could add Monterrey, Guasave, Tepic, Durango, Zamora, Apatzingan, Morelia, etc., etc.- all of which have experienced drug-related violence) - his subsequent statement that only 5% of some 2500 municipalities have been affected by the drug war simply lacks credibility.


Designating places to avoid on the basis that something bad happened there, is not a very useful characterization. I have visited about half of the cities mentioned in the quote and live in one of them. Yes, bad things have happened in Guadalajara and in the other cities. Does that mean a careful person would avoid these cities completely? You can make up your own mind, but in my view, the violence in Guadalajara is isolated and affects very few people. If it gets worse, and I start running into narco-blockades every time I go the mercado a block away, I will probably reconsider my decision to live here.


----------



## Detailman (Aug 27, 2011)

TundraGreen said:


> Designating places to avoid on the basis that something bad happened there, is not a very useful characterization. I have visited about half of the cities mentioned in the quote and live in one of them. Yes, bad things have happened in Guadalajara and in the other cities. Does that mean a careful person would avoid these cities completely? You can make up your own mind, but in my view, the violence in Guadalajara is isolated and affects very few people. If it gets worse, and I start running into narco-blockades every time I go the mercado a block away, I will probably reconsider my decision to live here.


So true. Am I going to avoid Vancouver when I hear of several gang killings and several attempted gang killings, all within a few days? (Just a few weeks ago.) No, it has nothing to do with me.

Is FHBoy going to move out of Baltimore with all the murders there? No! Yes, he is moving but it is not based on that reason. He knows his city like I know mine and we don't venture into the trouble spots and we do not live a lifestyle that will get us into trouble and we have a certain amount of moxy that should come with age.

Guadalajara is a HUGE city. A lot bigger than the Greater Vancouver Area. Don't get carried away with the news. There are probably large areas of Gaudalajara that are very safe. So too, in "most" (note I didn't say "all") cities in the Americas.


----------



## mickisue1 (Mar 10, 2012)

Detailman said:


> So true. Am I going to avoid Vancouver when I hear of several gang killings and several attempted gang killings, all within a few days? (Just a few weeks ago.) No, it has nothing to do with me.
> 
> Is FHBoy going to move out of Baltimore with all the murders there? No! Yes, he is moving but it is not based on that reason. He knows his city like I know mine and we don't venture into the trouble spots and we do not live a lifestyle that will get us into trouble and we have a certain amount of moxy that should come with age.
> 
> Guadalajara is a HUGE city. A lot bigger than the Greater Vancouver Area. Don't get carried away with the news. There are probably large areas of Gaudalajara that are very safe. So too, in "most" (note I didn't say "all") cities in the Americas.


Exactly.

I live in a suburb of the Twin Cities. A few weeks ago, a three year old boy was killed in his home from a stray bullet shot during a gang confrontation in one of the more gang-infested neighborhoods in Mpls.

But tonight, because it's St. Patrick's Day, there will be hundreds of silly people drinking green beer and Guinness, getting stinky drunk, even if the closest they are to Irish is having an ancestor who pillaged a town there during the Viking invasions.

And they'll be doing it within a couple of miles of that little boy's killing.

Being aware of one's surroundings is not something that is wise only in MX, or Detroit, or wherever. It's always a good idea. There have been, and will always be, people who are willing to hurt others for gain, for pleasure, for whatever. 

They are, however, greatly in the minority, no matter where you are talking about.

My DIL's mom still gets her traditional Christmas Eve tamales by walking across the border into Nuevo Laredo, to the shop where she's bought them for years. She is no less safe there than in her home, because her safety is related to more to her willingness to be careful, than to the fact that the town has gained a bad rep (and, I might add, a richly deserved one.)

Be careful out there, people.

But don't let fear govern your life.


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

mickisue1 said:


> Exactly)
> 
> Be careful out there, people.


Love your Hill Street Blues reference.
Sincerely,
Pizzaman


----------

