The Importance of Speaking Rationally about the Drug War

Call me a narcissist, but I like to know what people think about my work. I get comments on my blog posts, emails from readers, etc. that often provide me with all kinds of feedback, and it's almost always pretty civil. I've been interviewed by several news outlets over the last year, but none (I believe) have been as widely read and re-posted on blogs and message boards as the Q&A I did with AOL News' Dana Kennedy a few days ago.

So, like I do every few days, I Googled my name and the title of my book to see who was saying what, and what blogs might be picking up the story. I also tried to go through some of the more recent comments on the article itself, which numbered more than 2,600 at my last check; that in and of itself blows my mind. I was heartened that the article's subject - the invasion of the US by Mexican DTOs - had inspired concern and discussion by so many people. I was also disturbed that it prompted people to make racist comments against Mexicans, violent statements like "let's bomb Mexico into oblivion," and spurred some interesting name-calling in my direction.

Lucky for me, I grew a pretty thick skin as a Special Agent. I'm also happy to say that the majority of comments I get on my blog and via email are from readers who are genuinely concerned, interested, and well-read enough on the subject to offer constructive and informative feedback. Any time I bring up the subject of weapons trafficking here, I can always count on some of my "regulars" to start going at each other in the comment threads. But as a moderator of comments posted here, I've never had to delete one for being too rude or obscene. I take a lot of pride in putting forth information that people can talk about - even if it gets heated - intelligently without having to resort to uglier forms of conversation.

With this more widely-real AOL News piece, things have changed a bit in that regard. I've been called a leftist liberal - which I find incredibly amusing, for folks who haven't seen my voting record or know my views on fiscal policy or abortion - for even alluding to the mere possibility that some guns used by DTOs in Mexico were purchased at US gun shops. Even though I work pretty hard to say that no one knows the exact scope, facts, figures, or details of southbound weapons trafficking, it's such a political hot potato that some readers get really hot no matter how I try to word things.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, I've been called an imperialist and told to shut up because I'm an American advocating policy changes for the Mexican government in order to deal with the drug war more effectively. It's too bad those same folks haven't also read the litany of changes I advocate for US government policies. Ironically, I'm viewed by others as a "sympathizer" for pointing out the plight of so many innocent Mexican people who have to live through this drug-fueled hell every day.

The same thing tends to happen when I talk about illegal immigration, even though I never offer up personal opinions about it. The topic is integral to discussions about DTOs because they're increasingly attacking, killing, and abusing illegal immigrants for their own purposes. However, some have the knee-jerk response that shutting down the border and kicking out all illegals will solve the drug war problem.

The drug war and border security are extremely important issues that need to be discussed by a wide variety of people. There's no easy solution, no matter how you look at it. I personally don't care what readers call me; getting insults putting me on both sides of the aisle are kind of a weird compliment because it tells me I'm looking at the issues from all sides. But getting too heated over the issues involved prevents us from really getting to the root of the problems with border security, and keeps us from having productive discussions over how both governments might best deal with the drug war. I actually love receiving well-written lengthy emails from readers who disagree with me because I learn so much every time. But I'm saddened when I read comments on a news site from people who use racist, violent, or ignorant remarks. 

I'm not trying to be preachy, and I offer my sincere apologies if I'm coming across that way. It's just that I so enjoyed finding dozens of message boards, ranging in topics from travel to firefighting, that had links to the article posted and real insightful back-and-forth about the drug war and what it means for Americans. Some people are scared, some people are angry with our government for not doing more, and others ardently advocate for marijuana legalization as a way to make a dent in cartel profits. There's plenty of disagreement, but it's real conversation. It makes me feel so incredible that a simple Q&A article with a reporter could inspire people to really talk about an issue that may have seemed distant to them just a day earlier. That's my goal with Cartel, with my blog, and with my work in general.

So if you must lash out because you disagree with me - or anyone else who writes about the drug war - please just be courteous, and even send me some ideas of your own. Although being called a "dimwit" was probably my favorite today :).

Comments

[Beltonwall]

Silvia . . .. you say it doesn't bother you, but it does. . . . that's ok, though, b/c it'd bug me and anyone else, too. Not a politician, though, they're not human so nothing bothers them.

Let me be the first to welcome you to the limelight!

p.s. it's quite an accomplishment to be labeled a dimwitted leftist liberal imperialist.

[Sylvia Longmire]

@Beltonwall - Thanks :). Honestly, it doesn't bother me in the sense that it hurts my feelings. Those folks don't know me, and are only criticizing me based on what I write, so I don't take it personally. What does bother me is that grown-ups resort to name-calling when a publicly written opinion doesn't suit them, and that's so 8 year-old schoolyard to me. And yeah, if I've provoked someone enough to call me a dimwitted leftist liberal imperialist, then I've done my job by making an impression :).

[andres]

Sylvia: Good post.

The problem is a lot of people view a problem like this through a political prism. This in turn both makes rational discussion impossible and debate on practical policy solutions impossible.

Hopefully people will read your post and your message will sink in.

Cheers.

[John Westin]

The drug war is a losing proposition. Calderon's effort (that we are largely funding) has made things worse, to the point that Mexico is becoming a wild and dangerous land ruled by the cartels. Calderon's efforts have resulted in the exact opposite of what was intended and the cartels are now much more powerful and brutal. There is only one way to cripple the cartels, and that is to dry up their source of profits. And that can only be done by legalizing drugs. This county came to that realization with prohibition a long time ago, but somehow we don't see that the drug situation is exactly the same. Just as the violence related to prohibition disappeared when alcohol became legal, the drug related violence will disappear when drugs are legal.

[Beltonwall]

@Westin; legalization brings it's own set of problems. For example; Who can sell? How much? Where? To whom? How often? At what tax rate? Who gets the tax revenue, state, local or federal? Where is the product sourced? Who can grow? How is it transported? What potency is allowed? Are blends allowed? etc. . . ..

And of course, what will keep "Big Tobacco" companies from dominating this current cottage industry? Keep in mind that they have already the infrastructure in place to maximize profits of any product related to smoking. Their public image can't get any worse, so I'm sure they'll be at the trough. They have nothing to lose and literally billions to gain. I encourage you to buy stock in Altria or Reynolds to reap maximum financial gain from legalization and enjoy their 6% dividend until that day arrives!

[landis]

Hi Sylvia;
Don't agree with everything, but overall I think you doing a good job.
Hang in there, all this far from over.
thx

[Ike]

Sylvia:

As I have previously posted, I have high respect for your opinion, and read your blog with interest. I find your opinions to be generally objective and well thought out - with one significant exception.

I find it interesting that you say, "I never offer up personal opinions about it [illegal immigration]. Yet you frequently offer strong opinions about advocating for the ATF breaking the law to enforce the law, and against the NRA.

I don't always agree with what the NRA has to say, but.... As a gun owner yourself, I hope you realize that, if it wasn't for the NRA continually protecting 2nd Amendment rights for well over 100 years, you probably wouldn't be a gun owner today - except in a law enforcement capacity.

And, as a law enforcement professional, I'm truly surprised that you have advocated for ATF "law enforcement tools" which violate the law. I'm speaking of the proposed ATF multiple semi-auto rifle reporting requirement, which is a clear violation of law.

[Sylvia Longmire]

@Ike - I don't offer up opinions on illegal immigration because of personal ties to the issue (my family migrated to the US from Cuba in the 1960s). I'm very passionate about it, and I don't like my personal feelings to cloud my analysis, so I try to avoid delving more deeply into it than necessary. As for the guns and ATF stuff, I'm not a mega-passionate gun owner, so I think that emotional distance allows me to be more objective about those issues.

[Bill]

"I love the Second Amendment. I don't like it, though, when it's used for political reasons and to prevent the effective pursuit of policies to address weapons trafficking." (Sylvia Longmire)

Thank you Sylvia for speaking up and supporting this very rational and reasonable stance on this issue. Obviously there is great debate about this point, but you have the the courage to speak your mind while maintaining a very balanced and objective point of view. You speak eloquently for those of us who support reform in this area. Do not be sidetracked by those who seek to further politicize this issue for their own benefit.

[Len]

Knowledge is power. Keep up the good fight. As one cop to another; "be safe."