Apparently, this is considered treason by Mexico. It sounds like they're seriously unhappy about this.
this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2024
123 points (100.0% liked)
Not The Onion
12164 readers
575 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It was kidnapping and extradition without due process.
This is a legitimate concern, but I also question Mexico's ability to adhere to those standards and administer justice correctly when El Chapo managed to give them the slip twice, even while under "maximum security".
People suspect that this argument is not being made by Mexican authorities in good faith, and it is easy to understand why people think that.
So Mexican authorities should stop enforcing the law?
Do you think that in order to deliver him to the US he didn't commit multiple crimes? Should Mexico grant him amnesty?
No, of course not. He shouldn't have broken the law. That will always remain wrong, and it must be if we want to enjoy an orderly rule-based society.
But at the same time... I'm glad it happened.
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Not particularly applicable to this case, just a reminder not to get used to the taste of polish.
Is it wrong to say that I'm glad the head of a cartel is in jail?
I'd say it's more like it's wrong to pretend that laws are what separates man from beast and order from chaos when laws are only loosely correlated with morality, and everyone's personal preference on order vs chaos is different anyways.
I am more saying that "the ends must not be used to justify the means".
It doesn't matter if the argument is in good faith, or not. The issue is either nations abide by rule of law, and adjust as necessary, or not. For example, torture being reclassified under GW Bush administration as "enhanced interrogation." By any good faith reasoning, it was torture, but the AG Yoo authorized it, so technically by the USA, it was within legal limits.
America doing something wrong doesn't mean it's okay for other countries to do that thing as well.
No one said it does; it was an example to illustrate the point, which seems was lost.
God I hate badfaitg
"You're not supposed to take the drugs outside."
More the handing a Mexican citizen over to foreigners authorities in this case.
Sounds like a two-for-one deal. Win! Win!
America: “I used the crime lord to capture the crime lord.”
Step one to being a Bounty Hunter: have no warrants or serious criminal charges/convictions of your own.
Step two: Avoid crossing jurisdictions at all costs.
Step three: survive a free person yourself long enough to realize that being a repo-man is far safer or at least less likely to get you extradited for all those times you broke rule two. Maybe you'll even survive this long enough to graduate to Security Guard, Body Guard or an even more legitimate profession like literally anything else.
Side note: most of these people would still make better cops than most cops. The Dead in "Dead or Alive" is almost never profitable any more.
Underworld die an episode on this (use the YouTube link to find your platform of choice per the creators). There’s a lot of controversy around the whole thing and there’s a chance this is being done to save face. There’s basically no plausible explanation for a major cartel leader being kidnapped in this way so insiders think it was arranged by the parties. Mexico calling it kidnapping is an interesting escalation.