`When writing about murder, the author should address three items; motive, means and opportunity. Means was discussed at length. Opportunity, kidnapping, was touched on. Conspicuously absent was motive. I suspect this is for a reason. The author is trying to convince the reader that the regular law-abiding citizens are the targets. This would generate sympathy and money via US government action.
Consider the discussion of means. This is a huge, almost industrial effort. Industry is conducted for profit, not revenge or pleasure. Can you imagine an industry of picking people out of the population at random for processing? That would be an absurd waste of resources, which, by description are comprehensive and expensive. What possible motive could somebody have to pay for this processing? It is most likely that the people killed worked for rival drug gangs. They are not, as implied by the article, ordinary law-abiding citizens.
Yes, the acts are reprehensible. But the American government and by extension, the American taxpayer, need to carefully pick the battles we engage in. What if we stepped in and shut down the cartel behind the murders? What would be the result? It seems to me the resulting vacuum would be filled by the rival cartel and the same cycle would begin anew. What then did we invest our capital to achieve?
Good analysis, FRiend.
That's what's been happening - the various fortunes of the different cartels ebb and flow, but add up to an unceasing supply to meet the demand. The only way to take drug money away from the cartels is the way we took alcohol money away from the mob: relegalization.