Comments on: El Paso’s Little Miracle

By: Les

Les — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:19:36 +0000

If so, wouldn’t you expect the U.S. to necessarily or at least probably become more like Mexico–there by adopting more of Mexico’s problems? I don’t see how it couldn’t. I can see how it’s an honorable, consistent position to take, but wouldn’t it be to the detriment of our country?

This assumption (which is demonstrably false) has been in action for over 200 years. Ben Franklin (one of my favorite Founding Fathers) said it about the Germans. Then it was the Irish and the Italians a hundred years later. No one thinks it was a mistake to let those folks in, because it wasn’t. And there’s no evidence that Mexicans are going to be any different.

By: Marty

Marty — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:49:12 +0000

chasing down these loose ends is going to keep me from having a productive day…

By: Bernard

Bernard — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 11:13:07 +0000

I think the El Paso Swat team have done a great job keeping the city safe.

It’s only just they be rewarded with a few decommissioned nuclear weapons to help keep the peace.

By: clark

clark — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 10:55:59 +0000

I do want to object to your wording. I feel like saying gun laws are lax implies that they are insufficient. Otherwise, good point.

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 10:41:19 +0000

It seems “lax gun laws” are usually an indicator of less crime, not more. Look at LA, DC and Chicago where firearms are banned but firearm crime is common. I don’t understand listing firearm accessibility as a cause of crime or violence in the column.

By: craig

craig — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:28:14 +0000

I’ll one up ya one Radley, not only is El Paso safe, but they discipline their police when they screw up as opposed to making excuses for bad behavior. The police officer who arrested a reporter was demoted for a use of force incident NOT related to the arrest, so his life can still get more interesting.

http://www.kvia.com/Global/story.asp?S=10313722

EL PASO, Texas — A police sergeant who was involved in a confrontation with an ABC-7 news crew has been demoted. The demotion of Raul Ramirez is for use of force in a matter that has nothing to do with the incident on I-10 two weeks ago in which reporter Darren Hunt and photographer Ric Dupont were arrested.

By: Kidseven

Kidseven — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 06:05:36 +0000

Interesting column–not sure about the conclusions. As a centrist of sorts with what I consider libertarian leanings, I’ve never been clear on the Libertarian position regarding immigration and borders–would you allow total freedom in terms of immigration? Everyone is welcome? If so, wouldn’t you expect the U.S. to necessarily or at least probably become more like Mexico–there by adopting more of Mexico’s problems? I don’t see how it couldn’t. I can see how it’s an honorable, consistent position to take, but wouldn’t it be to the detriment of our country?

By: John Jenkins

John Jenkins — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 04:01:17 +0000

@Bob: What Seattle is doing right is it doesn’t have two things that St. Louis does: (a) a large black community; and (b) a white-dominated police force that doesn’t do a whole hell of a lot to protect the members of (a) from criminals. I’d guess the same sort of dynamic explains Los Angeles.

Once you’ve decided that crime is not a social problem but a military one (“war on crime” anyone?) and then you have a police force largely made up of a single ethnic group (and a group in police that rallies around even its bad apples), then you’re going to get a siege mentality where they “protect their own” to the detriment of civil society as a whole.

By: Bob

Bob — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:45:01 +0000

I would point out that Portland, Oregon is similarly sized and has only a slightly higher homicide rate. But I’m pretty sure there are very few immigrants in Portland (I don’t know that… just an assumption.)

The data may not be indicative of the immigrant populations in the cities.

It may have to do with how the drug war is applied. What is the correlation between population, homicide, and arrests for small amounts of drugs? I would expect to see that in a jurisdiction that hunts it’s citizens for mickey mouse drug arrests, you’ll see a corresponding spike in homicides.

Cases in point:
St. Louis, Missouri. population 348,197. 40 homicides / 100,000
Seattle, Washington. population 585,118. 4 homicides / 100,000

What’s Seattle doing right?

Considerably more research needs to be done.

By: curiouser

curiouser — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:05:56 +0000

Oh yeah, lithium! I read that _Time_ blurb for a sociology class ( here it is). It does make me wonder just how long El Paso's crime rate has been anomalously low, and if this immigration theory applies over the past three decades.

By: Graham

Graham — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 23:42:08 +0000

Just to play devil’s advocate here…

Isn’t it possible that instead of spreading crime, Juarez attracts it?

Why would you run the risks of criminal activity in El Paso when there’s a lawless, Wild Wild West type city right across the border?

By: CraigF

CraigF — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 23:23:44 +0000

So this is for violent crimes?

Not my experience at all living on El Paso’s west side. In 3 years my house was burgularized twice and my car stolen in the Cielo Vista Mall’s parking lot.

Don’t buy or try to have anything nice because it will be vandalized or stolen; at least you’ll be alive to tell the story I guess.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:53:10 +0000

“Now explain Los Angeles.”

It’s in California. Nuff said. :)

By: Max D.

Max D. — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:33:57 +0000

That’s nice to know. Now explain Los Angeles.

By: Les

Les — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:08:09 +0000

As for the statement that Repubs just want to mold society into their own perception of their own personal philosophy, I can’t imagine where that came from. Besides the libertarians, what political party does that statement not apply to? Wait, include the libertarians as well! What does that even mean?

Actually, I said they (Republicans and Democrats) want to “mold society into a reflection of their own personal morality.” It means that because they don’t use cocaine, they think it should be illegal to do so. Most of them aren’t homosexual, so they think homosexuals shouldn’t have all the rights of heterosexuals. The morality they subscribe to is the morality they think everyone should subscribe to, and they often think the government should enforce that morality.

That’s what it means.

By: Laertes

Laertes — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:07:17 +0000

There was another Balko column some months back, one that would divide wingnuts-in-libertarian-drag from Real Libertarians, and I remember the crowd largely coming down on the wingnut side, and giving Balko a real beating in comments.

That’s when I formed my impression that this was a pretty conventionally Republican crowd. I’m trying now to remember which column that might’ve been.

By: Mister DNA

Mister DNA — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:34:01 +0000

Out of curiosity, I compared the crime stats of several Texas border towns against my hometown of Corpus Christi, TX at bestplaces.net.

The results were pretty interesting.

Corpus Christi has a violent crime rating of 6 and a property crime rating of 7; of the border towns I checked (Brownsville, Del Rio, Eagle Pass, El Paso, Harlingen, Laredo, McAllen), only Brownsville and El Paso matched the violent crime rate – all others were lower. Only McAllen matched Corpus Christi’s property crime rate – all other towns were lower.

As far as the other cities in Texas (Austin, Dallas, Houston, Fort Worth, San Antonio), their crimes rates are either equal to or higher than Corpus Christi’s.

Oh, and Ben #9: As a Marty Robbins fan, that got a +1 from me.

By: Bearded Beavis

Bearded Beavis — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:32:17 +0000

I remember from geology class that the Franklin Mountains contain some kind of natural lithium containing rock. Rain water runs down the mountains, picks up some lithium, and ends up in El Paso’s water supply. I would speculate that El Paso’s rate of mental illness is also very low. Juarez must get their water elsewhere.

By: Laertes

Laertes — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 21:30:44 +0000

qwintz: “I thought Libertarians (big L) were for open borders? Why would this article upset them?”

It wouldn’t upset real Libertarians. That’s why it makes such a worthwhile (to me) test case. I think a lot of the alleged Libertarians here are just wingnuts in Libertarian drag. This column will sort the former from the latter pretty cleanly, and I pleasantly surprised so far by the results. Based on the first dozen or so people to show up, it looks like I have been underestimating this crowd.

By: pegr

pegr — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:30:23 +0000

Of course libertarians (large or small L) are for open borders. The basic libertarian philosophy is minimal government interference in all aspects of life. It’s called freedom, people. Embrace it.