Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Bullet from Juarez Injures Woman in El Paso

Karma - in  a very loose definition, what goes around, comes around, what we do is reflected in what subsequently happens to us sooner or later.

Odds are, this bullet and the gun which fired it came from the United States, were made and sold in the United States and was illegally sent into Mexico at a profit to an American manufacturer with the approval and encouragement of the NRA and our gun nuts who love all guns all the time.  They love it, because it is a stupid pretext for them to carry around more gunz.

From :

Rogue bullet shot across Mexico border hits El Paso woman

A woman has become the first victim of bullets flying across the border from Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, into El Paso, Texas, the Associated Press reported.

Authorities say an assault rifle-type round went through the calf of a 48-year-old woman while she was shopping on a busy downtown street, Tuesday morning. The El Paso Times reported that she was pushing a child in a stroller.
Authorities on the U.S. side later determined that the bullet was fired across the border during a gunfight between carjackers and Juarez police.
Two suspects were injured by police gunfire and taken to a Mexican hospital, the El Paso Times reported.
The victim was taken to University Medical Center of El Paso and treated for a non-life threatening injury. Authorities said the woman is from Mexico and has a residency card; she lives in El Paso.
The bullet has been sent to a Texas Department of Public Safety lab for testing.
Stray bullets have crossed the border twice before in El Paso, although none have hit people, the El Paso paper reported. In June 2010, a round made its way to the ninth floor of City Hall. Months later, a rogue bullet hit a building at the University of Texas at El Paso.


  1. Seriously, you must be a licensed and registered idiot to come up with this nonsense.
    DG said,"Odds are, this bullet and the gun which fired it came from the United States, were made and sold in the United States and was illegally sent into Mexico at a profit to an American manufacturer"
    So, explain, forget that you have no frickin evidence whatsoever that the gun in question was American made, how an American manufacturer profits from a gun made and sold in America profits from a gun being sold second hand in Mexico/to a Mexican? Really? Does the original gun owner send a commission to Smith & Wesson?
    Seriously, I think people ought to be licensed and registered to post this kind of idiocy.
    orlin sellers

    1. Orlin, you are stupid beyond belief.

      IF there wasn't a market for a gun, there would be no sale of a gun.

      Mexico has very strict gun regulation, but a terrible time because of the cartels in enforcing that regulation.

      IF it were not for being able to sell guns illegally to Mexico, there would be a much smaller gun market for manufacturers of guns and bullets, resulting in less profit for the gun manufacturers.

      You appear to lack a fundamental grasp of economics, particularly supply and demand.

    2. Your lot loves - without real evidence - to assert that the guns used in Mexico violence come from south of Mexico. The actual recovered guns from Mexican gun violence indicate otherwise.

      But even if SOME guns come from south of Mexico instead of north of the border, not only is the overwhelming evidence that it is guns and ammo from American manufacturers that is used, it is far more plausible that one of the most common trafficking points for guns from the U.S. would be the source of guns and firearms in this incident.

      Your only response is to lie because the facts are horrible for what we have done with our gun policy, obscenely bad. Face it.

    3. But as Orlin said, you have no evidence that the gun came from America. We don't even know who fired the round--it could have been the police. In that case, it may be that the gun was from our country, since we give the Mexican government a lot of guns, and we know what happens to many of those. But Dog Gone, you refuse to understand how a gun could come in from the ocean or up from the southern border of Mexico, it seems.

    4. DG said,"You appear to lack a fundamental grasp of economics, particularly supply and demand..."

      Now explain how gun makers profit from second hand gun sales? That is what you said.
      And which is greater, the supply or the demand?
      orlin sellers

    5. "you have no evidence, you have no evidence." You know what, this is not a court of law, this is a blog. Here we're allowed to use our heads and make calculated assumptions.

    6. But we do have some evidence. It just happens to go against your claim. The AK-47 and variants are not made in the United States. They are cranked out by the job lot in other countries. Those have a full-auto option. Why would the cartels bother to buy American, when they can get something more to their liking from elsewhere?

  2. Authorities say an assault rifle-type round
    That line right there indicates that it was a foreign made firearm, imported from somewhere other than the US. Assault riffles are usually not available to US citizens. If we assume that the "authority" either mis-spoke or was mis-quoted and it was an assault riffle look-a-like, chances are it was a foreign made AK or SKS that fires the 7.62 round, which would likely be foreign made as well.

    1. Nope. Watch the Arming the Mexican Drug cartel videos. The U.S. assault rifles ARE available; they show them being purchased, lots of them, from U.S. gun shows in Texas, and then show Mexican drug cartel guys coming up to the documentary makers afterwards offering to buy the lot they just bought inside the gun show, no questions asked, and sales made even when the buyers indicated they could not pass a background check.

      You are wrong, you are factually inaccurate.

    2. the "documentary" is nothing but propaganda for the anti-rights establishment. The "documentary" claims that artillery, assault riffles and machine guns are walking across the border to MX, none of which is available to the general public and certainly not sold at gun shows.

    3. Hidden cameras clearly show it happening at gun shows, nor is this the only documentary to do so.

      You need more than you don't want it to be true for proof, B3 - and that's all you have.

    4. now that I wasted my time my time watching the docudrama, I can say there clearly were no assault riffles, machine guns, or artillery. What the video showed was a Bushmaster AR-15 and AK clones, clearly NOT assault riffles, machine guns or artillery. When asked by the MX nationals "what caliber", the response was 7.62. CLEARLY, the MX national wanted the AK, a foreign made firearm. There is a reason the Drug Trade Organizations want the AK type riffles. They require little to no cleaning. You can bury an AK in the sand, dig it up a week later and use it. With the AR type weapons, if you shoot it in a dusty environment, you'll spend hours cleaning it, otherwise it will not operate properly.

  3. "Authorities say an assault rifle-type round..."

    Impossible. Assault weapons are banned in Mexico and the antis here are constantly telling us how gun control works in all other countries that have tried it.

    1. Bullshit FWM. We have alwasy asserted that in developed and civilized countries where gun control and regulation have been successfully enforced that is true.

      You are the one who keeps trying to make false comparisons. They aren't getting any more true with your repeating this, but your integrity is getting a bit worn and threadbare by it.

    2. "We have alwasy asserted that in developed and civilized countries where gun control and regulation have been successfully enforced that is true."

      So you are saying that Mexico is not civilized and developed and that the government doesn't enforce their gun control laws.

    3. Nope. The government is not in control of their cities where the cartels run things.

      Bless them, they're trying, and they do what they can; there are many good people there. But no, Mexico is not economically developed or industrialized on anything like the same level as the Unites States, or similar / equal to most of the equivalent or comparable nations in Europe, particularly northern and western Europe.

      But of course, FWM, you know that; you, like Greg, and the others here, have to go with false comparison, distortions, extremes rather than norms, false analogies, and outright lies, because the truth and reality doesn't support your claims or your arguments.

      Using the List of Countries by GDP per capita, for example (wikipedia), the U.S. out of three different listings for comparison are 7th on 2 of them and 9th on the third; in comparison the highet Mexico rates if 58th, 61st and 65th; to see how we compare in education, you can see that here:

      If you are at all interested in how the process works that defines where a nation is in comparison to other countries, you can read that here:

      Mexico is usually classed as newly industrializing, but not industrialized / developed to anything like the same degree as the U.S.

      Mexico only reached the category of 'newly industrialized' from developing country status in 2011.

      Developing countryFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
      A developing country, also known as a less-developed country[1], is a nation with a low level of material well-being. Since no single definition of the term developing country is recognized internationally, the levels of development may vary widely within so-called developing countries. Some developing countries have high average standards of living.[2][3]

      Countries with more advanced economies than other developing nations, but which have not yet fully demonstrated the signs of a developed country, are categorized under the term newly industrialized countries.[4][5][6][7]

      Using those criteria, NO, they are not in the same category for fair comparison. But why didn't YOU already know that?

      As to criteria such as political stability and control - ie. government versus cartels - the U.S. and Canada and western Europe are tier 1 and 2; Mexico is tier 3 -- and not a particularly high tier 3 at that. Mexico is unable to enforce gun control laws to the extent that makes their cities safe from the cartels. Doesn't mean they don't try, it just means they lack the means because of economics and the politics of those economics.

      WHY don't YOU know this stuff, FWM? Are you really this uninformed about how we compare with other countries internationally? Or are you just pretending to be ignorant?

  4. The title says the woman was killed - by a bullet shot into her calf where she was sent to the hospital with non life threatening injuries...

    1. Thanks Jim, you are correct; the original report I heard when I first started this was life threatening. The report I included was a later one, and I failed to update the title, but I have done so now.

    2. Just a candle stub for her, I suppose.