Alejandro Arcos is the second politician to be killed in a week in the city of Chilpachingo.

The mayor of a Mexican city plagued by drug violence has been murdered less than a week after taking office.

Alejandro Arcos was found dead on Sunday in Chilpancingo, a city of around 280,000 people in the southwestern state of Guerrero. He had been mayor for six days.

Evelyn Salgado, the state governor, said the city was in mourning over a murder that “fills us with indignation”. His death came three days after the city government’s new secretary, Francisco Tapia, was shot dead.

Authorities have not released details of the investigation, or suspects. However, Guerrero is one of the worst-affected states for drug violence and drug cartels have murdered dozens of politicians across the country.

  • InverseParallax@lemmy.worldEnglish
    11·
    2 months ago

    Oh, and for an even better example:

    The number of people dying everywhere from lung cancer in America has plummeted, exactly because tobacco is FAR harder to get ahold of compared to before when we handed it out casually.

    That also had collateral damage.

    But no, we should rely on everyone’s self-control and nothing else.

    • Dasus@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      2 months ago

      If you weren’t so asininely obstinate, you could’ve actually looked at any of the science on the matter, which shows that drug decriminalisation and drug legalisation REDUCES overdose deaths, drug abuse, and all the adjacent crime.

      “We should rely on everyone’s self-control and nothing else.”

      Ah, so you think fast food should be banned, right? It causes MASSIVE issues on the national scale, costing billions to the healthcare system. The number of people dying of obesity related disease is incredibly high and constantly rising. So… ban fast food, ban candy, ban anything that isn’t a beige, flavourless nutrition drink? (See this is how it felt like when you wrote your idiotic nuclear weapon comparison. It’s known as a strawman.)

      We should rely on the methods we can use. Which methods of control are there when there’s total prohibition? Oh, right, none. And who is selling the drugs? Responsible salesmen who follow laws? No? People who don’t give a fuck about the age or addictions of the person they’re selling to? Huh?

      It’s much easier to buy illegal drugs than it is to buy illegal booze. Why? Is it because illegal booze isn’t really made, because it’s vastly shittier than actually commercial products, and it might have methanol, and no-one in their right mind would ever drink such shit? Is it because the black markets have gone away when we the prohibition of alcohol was lifted? Oh they did? Wow. Was alcohol safer and were people abusing it less during the prohibition? No, they abused more and there was just so much more crime and alcohol abuse.

      You do not understand that the only way to impose any sort of control to the thing that WONT GO AWAY NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU HIGHROAD ANYONE, is legalising it.

      I’m not gonna write any more actual replies. Something snarky probably, because you’ll feel like responding, out of some juvenile compulsion to “get the last word”, but you just aren’t a big enough person to actually read any of the links I’ve posted, which would reiterate everything I’ve said (albeit in a nicer fashion) and you could actually learn something that would stop you hindering societal progress. You just won’t. So I won’t reply in good faith any more either. Goddamn I’m tired of people like you. Like seriously. If you can’t question a stance you have, then that stance can’t really be that strong, can it? Any stance I hold, I can defend. I can’t say the same for you. Well, you pretend to. You keep repeating these bullshit drug war slogans (in your own words, though), not realising just how counterproductive it is if you actually cared about helping people with substance abuse issues.