Standing Ovation for Mexican President in Congress on AZ Immigration Law and Assault Weapons Law

[sabrina 1]

Mexican President Calderone made some excellent points about Immigration when he spoke to Congress today. He addressed some of the causes of immigration and the violence on the border which he said is made easier by the Bush Administration's lifting of the ban on assault weapons.

He expressed his opposition to Arizona's 'Show me your papers' law:

Mexico's Calderon criticizes Arizona immigration law in speech to Congress

WASHINGTON - Mexican President Felipe Calderon took his opposition to a new Arizona immigration law to Congress Thursday, saying it "ignores a reality that cannot be erased by decree."

"It is a law that not only ignores a reality that cannot be erased by decree but also introduced a terrible idea using racial profiling," he said to cheers, mainly from the Democratic side of the chamber.

Speaking in English, he warned of the risk when "core values we all care about are breached."

Calderon has called the law discriminatory, and Obama agrees the Arizona law could be applied that way. He has ordered a Justice Department review.

Many people other than Calerone, have spoken about the easy access to assault weapons as contributing to the awful violence related to the drug-trafficing business. If what he says is true about gun shops making these weapons available along the border, then it seems to me that it is insane to expect Mexico to be able to control its criminals as long as the U.S. is basically supplying them with weapons.

I remember Hillary Clinton broaching this subject during the campaign basically confirming what Calerone is saying.

Calderon also got a standing ovation from Democrats when he asked the United States to stop the flow of assualt weapons and other arms across the border and reinstate the ban on many assault weapons that was enacted in 1994 but allowed to expire during the George W. Bush presidency.

He said there are more than 7,000 gun shops along the border where almost anyone can purchase weapons.

Calderon led off his 40-minute speech by emphasizing Mexico's war against narcotics traffickers that has left roughly 23,000 dead since the end of 2006.

But he added that "we cannot ignore the fact that the challenge to our security has roots on both sides of the border." At the end of the day, it is high demand for drugs in the United States and elsewhere that drives much of the illicit trade."

Why are we in Iraq and Afghanistan again? 23,000 dead since 2006 and the media rarely mentions this actual war right on and across the border but spend endless, wasted hours on failed, goofy would-be 'terrorists'.

As for those 7,000 gunshops arming criminals, I hope Democrats while they have the majority will replace the ban on assault weapons.

It is so easy to just be against immigration and to support what AZ is doing. Calderone's visit hopefully will make a few think a little more about the causes and how to fix them.

The failed drug war has not only fed the prison industrial business, it has been the cause of this real brutal war raging right next door.

Legalizing drugs seems to be the only way to end this ....

[LakeSamish706]

1. Screw Calderone! Thats all! n/t

[sabrina 1]

2. Care to say why we should screw him?

[LakeSamish706]

6. Because he has the audacity to criticize to US laws instead of fixing

the problem in his country that would keep his citizens at home. If Calderon spent some time and energy getting Mexico up to speed, we wouldn't have an illegal immigration problem to begin with. Treat your citizens with some dignity and get a reasonable working wage and the problems go away.

[EFerrari]

9. We didn't pick him to do that. Edit: Or rather, our owners didn't. n/t

[LakeSamish706]

11. Not sure I understand your post, but I think you are refering to the fact that he stole the election

and I agreed with you last night and certainly I agree with you today.

[EFerrari]

14. The thing is, those elections are never stolen for the reformers, are they?

It's a clear pattern in Mexico, Central America and South America. I want to do a rundown on the candidates our government has supported but it would probably be too demoralizing. lol

/oops

[Nuclear Unicorn]

21. Kinda hard to steal for honesty.

It'd be like screwing for virginity or using war for peace.

US interventionism in the Cold War employed the "Yes, but at least they're OUR bastards" mentality. Well, bastards beget other bastards.

LakeSamish made the point of Mexico needing to clean up its act so as not to drive Mexicans out of their homes. Perhaps if we had used that same advice there wouldn't have been a Cold War. I'm a progressive because my eyes tell me capitalism is exploitative. If the captialists don't like my conclusion they should cease exploiting people.

:toast:

[EFerrari]

23. If we don't like economic refugees, we should stop funding their dispossession.

:hi:

[sabrina 1]

27. Well, I agree that he should treat his citizens with dignity and

insist on a livable wage for them, but if he should have an epiphany and realize that those who helped install him are no friends of Mexico, but mostly exploiting the country's resources, and push for a livable wage, he would probably meet the same fate as Aristedes and Chavez.

He is right about the law, and that's what Democrats are reacting to.

[oldlib]

34. Helping the Mexican People.

I strongly feel that the best way to reduce illegal immigration is for the U.S. government to support a policy that helps the people of Mexico. Mexico has always been ruled by corrupt governments, that only supports the ruling class and they make no attempt to create a decent atmosphere for the working class.

[sabrina 1]

43. I agree and have said so many times. We are partly

responsible for the dire conditions, especially since NAFTA, that exist for the people of Mexico and supporting corrupt governments doesnt' help either.

[HillGal]

65. Mexico is a prime example of what happens when a middle class are driven out of the country, all you

have in Mexico are the rich and the poor.

[a la izquierda]

41. oh lord, get a clue.

you cannot, CANNOT place all of the blame on mexico's doorstep, savvy?

man, i'm sorry DU, but this immigration law has really brought out the nuts and knuckleheads.

THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT IS CENTURIES OLD! This is a problem that the US shares blame in having created.
If you want to hate Calderon, there are plenty of other reasons.

[JackRiddler]

56. Actually, he's wasted all of his energies enforcing the stupidest US laws of all...

those on drugs.

Your response is ignorant, but typical.

[laughingliberal]

3. Rec nt

[emilyg]

4. He needs to help his own

people and talk less.

[LakeSamish706]

8. I'm with you on this one! n/t

[sabrina 1]

10. It looks like that's why is here.

He is asking the U.S. to help solve a problem, other than passing racist laws, to help both countries.

[EFerrari]

12. He can't repeal NAFTA. And I'm assuming that if our citizens were abused

in a foreign country, Obama would object to that.

Or, is that only good enough for American citizens?

[slackmaster]

5. FACT CHECK - The defunct federal "assault weapons" ban expired automatically in 2004

The Bush administration had nothing to do with it. It was up to Congress to renew it, but when the time came around, proponents of the ban had no evidence that the ban had done any good.

Congress allowed the ban to expire as it was designed to do.

(end of FACT CHECK)

Calderon can go fuck himself. He needs to clean his own house before criticizing how we run ours.

[sabrina 1]

7. Well if that is the case, maybe Democrats at least have

changed their minds. He got a standing ovation for asking that something be done about the free flow of assault weapons again.

Do you have anything to prove that it 'did not good'?

[slackmaster]

13. The "ban" had no effect on the availability of semiautomatic firearms based on military patterns

Sales of firearms that had only minor cosmetic differences from the "banned" ones continued at a brisk pace during the failed 10-year experimental ban. Today there are far more scary-looking rifles than there were before the ban (partly because of the ban).

[sabrina 1]

36. That's typical of many laws that are merely meant to appease

for political purposes. They leave gaping loopholes that can be abused. Either Congress is incredibly stupid, or those loopholes are deliberate.

Basically you are saying the ban didn't work because the law left a question about what is or is not an assault weapon. That could have been fixed, if anyone had an interest in doing so.

[katzenjammers]

18. But he is either ignorant or a liar. Or both. Knows nothing about weapons.

What exactly is an "assault weapon"?

[X_Digger]

38. Here's a study saying that it did no good..

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/jerrylee/research/aw_final2004.pdf

We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence, based on indicators like the percentage of gun crimes resulting in death or the share of gunfire incidents resulting in injury, as we might have expected had the ban reduced crimes with both AWs and LCMs.

<snip>

The ban’s impact on gun violence is likely to be small at best, and perhaps too small for reliable measurement. AWs were used in no more than 8% of gun crimes even before the ban. Guns with LCMs are used in up to a quarter of gun crimes, but it is not clear how often the outcomes of gun attacks depend on the ability to fire more than 10 shots (the current limit on magazine capacity) without reloading.

AW = "Assault Weapon", LCM = Large Capacity Magazine

eta: graph from the above research:

[sabrina 1]

44. Thank you, apparently that particular ban was not

effective. As others have pointed out below, it was not specific enough.

[benEzra]

47. A more specific law would have also done nothing.

Rifles are rarely used in homicides (less than three percent of murders involve any type of rifle) and modern-looking guns don't work any differently than 19th-century-looking guns.

Which of the following stocks would make this rifle non-usable as a rifle?



Legislating stock style and other miscellany does nothing whatsoever. Any "assault weapon" ban is going to be cosmetic, unless you ban all autoloading rifles. And given that more Americans lawfully own so-called "assault weapons" than hunt, it is not going to happen.

[sabrina 1]

58. Thanks for your answer, my fiancee always said the same thing

so I'm not totally unaware of this issue regarding the problem with banning assault rifles.

From the thread, and the responses from others, and from doing a little research which I will do more of when I have time, it seems that we have enough laws forbidding bringing guns of any kind across the border.

I haven't read those laws, so don't know if that means guns cannot be sold legally at all by ordinary citizens to other gun businesses in Mexico, with only the government having the right to do so. Or how drug cartels are getting their hands on so many American weapons, even if it is far less than Calderone said (as another DUer pointed out below).

Anyhow, thanks for the information you provided and for being civil on a topic that I know is very controversial :-)

[benEzra]

39. Well, it doubled or tripled sales of AR-15 type rifles and civilian AK's

and sent civilian handgun sales through the roof. Unless you believe that doubling the number of military-looking semiautomatic rifles in private hands drove the crime rate down, then you can't really credit the 1994 non-ban with having anything to do with it.

The 1994 law banned no guns. Zero, zilch, nada. I bought my own civilian AK (2002 model) in 2003.

[Statistical]

40. Well by no good do you want to consider it tripled sales of AR platform rifles?

Maybe you mean made Americans look at the platform for the first time and resulted in low powered "evil black rifles" which look scary to be the most popular weapons sold in the United States today?

Oh you mean actually reduce crime, violence, or death. Well that would be kinda hard because according to FBI own data "assault weapons" (a made up distinction) are only used in <2% of crimes. Even if "assault weapons" crime had gone to 0 it would have been a rounding error.

[ShortnFiery]

15. I must admit that I was wrong in the past for supporting this ban.

I'm far from a flaming nationalist but I also thought it was, at the least, inappropriate for the Mexican President to ask us to change our gun laws within a speech to our Congress.

Instead of changing OUR laws, he needs to partner WITH US to protect the border area.

[LakeSamish706]

16. He needs to make an all out effort to bust and jail the Drug cartels in his country.

Never mind criticizing the US for weapons and other things, get your own space cleaned up if you can.

[ShortnFiery]

22. Excellent Point. Also both governments can do more for "the people" instead of only

servicing "the privileged."

If you raise the standard of living for the common citizen, everyone is much more willing to work as a team and respect their government.

[eShirl]

26. we could help by ending prohibition here and taking away the cartels' cash cow

but I suppose that would be too logical

[Flaneur]

55. Have you even been awake for the past few years?

More than 20,000 people have been killed in Mexico's drug wars since Calderon ROLLED OUT THE ARMY in December 2006.

In fact, making "an all out effort to bust and jail the drug cartels" is precisely why the violence has gotten so bad. Back in the "bad old days" of the PRI, the government did not so much try to repress the drug trade, but to manage it. It was much more peacable back then.

[katzenjammers]

17. Suddenly this far rightwing screwball is a darling of our Democratic "representatives"???

holy shit.

[LakeSamish706]

19. Scary huh?

[EFerrari]

24. I think this means the AZ boycott is working.

lol

[sabrina 1]

25. I doubt that. But it's kind of ironic that someone who was

supported by the Bush administration should end up having it backfire on them, and on HIM.

I think they are merely reacting to his opposition to the Republican racist law in AZ.

Here is someone who was supported by Bush, now opposing Republicans on two very rightwing issues. I think that deserves approval.

[katzenjammers]

28. Well, I'm a cynic so I believe he opposes it simply because it makes his job more difficult.

(or would, if he were actually persuaded to do it...)

[sabrina 1]

31. Yes, it is more than likely that that is the reason.

Hopefully Mexico, like many of the countries in South America, will finally get a true democratic government. I also think the U.S. should have paid more attention to the corruption in the Mexican government during the Fox years.

We have a habit of supporting rightwing corrupt governments and slamming left-leaning governments. Imho, the problem is here as both parties refuse to give support to emerging democracies like Venezuela eg, but back corrupt rightwing governments.

[EFerrari]

32. He was put in office with BushCo help specifically NOT

to reform Mexico.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

51. Everything's relative.

Compared to the nuts who created and promote this AZ law, he's Noam Chomsky.

[kctim]

20. Seriously?

This guy really believes people should listen to him speak about discrimination, racial profiling and core values? :rofl:

[ohheckyeah]

29. Pres. Calderon

would be better off trying to stem the corruption in his own country and doing something substantial to improve the living conditions of Mexicans.

[amandabeech]

30. Calderone said something in Spanish, but his English translation

didn't make any sense.

I have a itty bitty bit of Spanish and I couldn't get it all.

Did anyone here catch that?

[pampango]

33. A handful of Republicans join Democrats in cheering Calderón’s condemnation of Arizona’s immigration

law.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/20/calderon-republicans/

Yesterday, Mexican President Felipe Calderón and President Obama spoke at a press conference and strongly condemned Arizona’s anti-immigration law. Today, Calderón took his message to a joint meeting of Congress. In his address, Calderón said, “I strongly disagree with the recently law in Arizona.” Not surprisingly, the entire Democratic side of the room stood an applauded. However, a significant handful of members on the Republican side also joined in.

[sabrina 1]

37. Thanks for the link ~

At least he was successful in getting some kind of bi-partisanship on something. I'd like to know why and which Republicans supported him.

[Catherina]

35. Rec'd but it's going to take more than just legalizing drugs

NAFTA, US Fortune 500 corporations exploiting Mexican workers in maquiladoras, US agricultural trade wars, US backed coups and interference in foreign elections, the list goes on. And on.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[aikoaiko]

45. Hopefully, Obama will muzzle any attempts to reauthorize the AWB as he has done since inauguration

Calderone sounds like an idiot trying to connect the increase in violence in Mexico with the sunsetting of the AWB.

[sabrina 1]

46. Calderone is not the only one. Hillary Clinton has

spoken about the guns going to Mexico from the U.S. and ending up in the hands of violent criminals. Several months ago she called for a ban on assault weapons to try to stop the flow and was blasted by the Gun Lobby.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's call for assault weapon ban in U.S. gets blasted by gun lobby

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/03/26/2009-03-26_secretary_of_state_hillary_clintons_call.html#ixzz0oXrf1SuC


80% of all guns confiscated in Mexico come from the U.S. and according to Mexican authorities, the flow of guns into Mexico increased after the lifting of the ban.

And there are others who paint a very dire picture of how U.S. weapons laws are helping to arm Mexico's drug cartels:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/0510/Calderon_presses_Congress_on_assault_weapons.html

One former senior U.S. narcotics and law enforcement official called the decision not to reinstate the ban disgraceful.

“There’s no question at all that a tremendous amount of violence in Mexico and Central America is fueled by the export of guns by the United States,” the former senior told POLITICO on condition of anonymity.

“The law enforcement authorities in the U.S. are first not making much of an effort to try to stop it," he continued. "But the reason they are not is they are hampered enormously by the lack of federal regulations and by state and local laws. And so there are gun dealers who are just sending almost by the truck load into Mexico and that is also getting to gangs in Central America.”

23,000 people have been murdered over the past four years in Mexico ~ is human life less important than regulating the ownership of such weapons? Or is it really about more profits for the weapons industry, arms dealers who not only have no concerns for human lives, they thrive on wars, like the drug war being fought in Mexico right now?

[benEzra]

48. The U.S. made M16's/M4's used by the cartels were sold to the Mexican military and police,

with a few also probably coming from ex-Cold-War proxy stockpiles in Central America. Those guns are not available on the U.S. civilian market; the manufacture and sale of automatic weapons is restricted to military/police/government only and their suppliers in this country. The Mexican government and police can buy new M16's, M4's, and whatnot, but U.S. civilians cannot. And of course military AK-47's and RPG's are not only restricted here, they're not even made here; those come from former Warsaw Pact nations and their former Central American proxies.

And since the 1994 Feinstein law banned no guns (military or otherwise), and its expiration legalized no guns (military or otherwise), Calderon claiming that its expiration released a flood of civilian rifles into Mexico is just grandstanding.

Here's the rub: outlawing the most popular non-automatic civilian rifles in the United States won't do a damn thing about the cartel violence in Mexico. What it will do is reenact the 1994 debacle and resurrect the "Dems'll-take-yer-guns" mantra. More Americans lawfully own so-called "assault weapons" than hunt, and a lot of us are Dems and indies. We'll keep them, thanks.

[sabrina 1]

76. I meant to respond to your post earlier and to thank

you for the information. You did answer my question below about who is permitted to sell weapons to Mexico. But, how are the drug cartels getting weapons sold to the police and military? I know there is a lot of corruption in Mexico so maybe they are being sold by some of those in the military and police.

I do see your point now. But what about stopping the legal sale of weapons by our Government to theirs, if that is how drug cartels are getting them?

[aikoaiko]

49. You're relying on distorting numbers.

Yes, SoS Clinton did mention reauthorizing the Assault Weapons Ban (as did AG Holder) and by most accounts they were told to stop talking about by their boss. Obama once campaigned on reauthorizing the AWB, but has stayed away from it since being elected.

The true number of US guns confiscated in Mexico is far less that you say.

Fox News (yes, that Fox news) put the rate of US firearms confiscated in Mexico at 17%.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/02/myth-percent-small-fraction-guns-mexico-come/

But even FactCheck (Funded by the anti-gun organization the Annenberg Foundation) put the number at 34%.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/counting-mexicos-guns/

You may say that that is still a lot of US guns and I agree. But if every US gun was kept in the US, there would still be plenty of guns for drug runners to kill each other. We should stop that flow of guns as best we can, but without violating the 2nd Amendment Rights of US citizens.

Its not even clear if one life would be saved in Mexico or anywhere if the AWB was reauthorized. Its not like a criminal or Mexican drug runner says, "oh no, I can't get an semi-auto AK-style rifle with a flash hider so I won't kill anyone." They'll simple use a different gun -- maybe an semi-auto AK-style rifle without a flash hider.

I get it Sabina1, you're concerned. I am too, but I will not allow any US contribution to Mexico's massive drug wars to be used as a reason for violating US civil rights. And woe to any US politician who does.

[sabrina 1]

50. I know numbers can be distorted especially for political purposes

So how do you stop criminals, drug dealers (some of the murders, the kidnappings and torture in that country are as bad if not worse than in Iraq or any other war) from getting weapons from the U.S. even if the numbers are less than those quoted by Calderone?

[aikoaiko]

52. Two things come to mind immediately

1. Enforce the laws currently on the books better. The ATF already has the tools to investigate and prosecute corrupt buyers and sellers, but not enough of it is done.

2. Improve border control.

But I think the best thing that could happen for Mexico (and the US) with regard to drug violence is to legalize recreational drugs.

And I am open to other ideas but gun bans to lawful American residents are off the table for me.

[sabrina 1]

53. Legalizing drugs would be the best thing to do. But we have

an administration that will not even talk about legalizing marijuana, and it's a Democratic administration, so unless the public demand it in overwhelming numbers it is not likely to happen any time soon.

Is it legal btw, to bring guns from the U.S. to Mexico in either or both countries?

[aikoaiko]

54. oh no. Bringing guns or ammo into Mexico is strictly verbotten

http://www.mexonline.com/mexguns.htm

Except when its sales to the Federales.

As a gun-owner person, I would never even bring my car over the border because even on round of stray ammo could land you in jail.

[sabrina 1]

57. So, that seems to be a good place to start. As you mentioned

above, enforcing the laws already in place. I didn't think so, just wondered how so many guns are getting to Mexico.

So, it is a profitable business. We don't hear much about it on the news, but are given the impression that guns are being bought at the border from gun-shop owners and then being brought to Mexico without any problem.

I will be doing some research on that, arms dealing. Thanks for the civil discussion, I know this is a controversial topic. Btw, we own guns, and I'm not a bad shot, target shooting only though :-)

[aikoaiko]

59. You're welcome. And thank you for a civil discusion.

These are difficult subjects and there are open wounds regarding the last AWB.

[flamingdem]

70. So Calderone is full of it? And everyone applauded, for what. nt

[aikoaiko]

73. That's a good question. I attribute the applause to politics.

If you watch carefully, everyone applauds Calderone when he says the illegal flow of guns must be stopped, but not everyone applauds when talks about the AWB.

There are still many legislators who think the Assault Weapons Ban was a meaningful. Sad, but true.

[UTUSN]

60. To Post #6: Capitalism/supply'n'demand: STOP demanding drugs & MX won't send them. WE (here)

need rehab and willingness to SWEAT AND WORK DIRTY AND MENIAL AND CHEAP.

It's hard to accept the self-blame, AIN'T it.

HOOkay.

[MicaelS]

61. Calerone is a fool....

The only thing gun bans do is cause Democrats to lose elections.

[UTUSN]

62. Well, whoEVER this "Calerone" or "Calderone" eye-talian dude is, he speaks English... n/t

[HillGal]

63. I think Calderone needs to look at his own country's immigration laws before he starts criticizing

our laws, he also needs to look at the human rights violations Amnesty International has cited Mexico for. The Mexican Government doesn't give a damn about poor Guatemalans desperately looking for work and going into Mexico, men have been killed and women have been raped, Calderone needs to deal with his problems first.

[EFerrari]

64. If US citizens were being abused in another country, I would expect Obama

to stand up for their rights.

[HillGal]

66. You don't think Guatemala or other Central American Countries have complained to Mexico? where's

Calderone's compassion? We need to be honest here, Calderone doesn't give a crap about poor Mexicans, all he cares about is the money they send back to their families in Mexico.

[EFerrari]

67. If we were honest and not terminally hypocritical, we'd admit

that Calderon was put in office by the American government and that the refugees from Guatemala are also fleeing a government we supported.

That has nothing to do, however, with the fact that he is right in this instance.

[HillGal]

68. Yes, American physically went in and said to the people of these countries that they're

going to vote for these candidates and that's it, the people in these countries have no responsibility for the governments they elect, yeah right.

[EFerrari]

69. The Mexican election was famously stolen with BushCo help

and the Mexican people were out in the streets for nearly six months protesting, unlike us in 2000.

The information is all over the internets and there are many archived threads here, too. Calderon was the US pick over the reformer.

[sabrina 1]

71. EFerrari is right, the election was stolen and the demonstrations

were widely broadcast for months. He is a rightwinger and was backed by the Bush administration. The U.S. does not support real democracy in countries that have resources that can be exploited. However, he is right regarding the AZ law. Whether he actually cares about people or is just acting out of self-interest because as president, it would be expected of him to defend Mexicans from discrimination like this, doesn't really matter. As far as how his government treats their immigrants, that is a separate issue.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ter]

72. Eff him

You don't want an assault weapon? Don't buy one.

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.