Posted on 08/25/2024 4:48:07 PM PDT by Governor Dinwiddie
https://www.yahoo.com/news/two-arizona-residents-killed-armed-214920358.html
The women, identified only by their last names and ages, were 72 and 82, the attorney general’s office for the state of Sonora said in a release on social media Friday.
The victims, originally from Caborca, Mexico, which is further southeast, were dual citizens of the U.S. and Mexico.
I suspect they have to kill someone every now and then for cash flow.
Love that movie. Clint had a similar relationship w the kid as he did w the Hmong boy in Torino.
It was painful watching Yoakam, though.
It is a frequent tactic of the cartels to force people who might float under-the-radar to smuggle their drugs or whatever and murder them as an example if they refuse.
The only foreign vacation destination on my agenda these days is Japan, because the Japanese are smart enough to shun “diversity”, “wokeness”, and the “wonders” of multiculturalism. In fact, Japan is so safe and tranquil it’s a much-needed respite from the horror show that the U.S. has become.
It also has an optics mount. To me that says later production. Perhaps Warsaw pact country production?
CC
And the holes in the gas tube hint at Bulgaria. Rivet pattern on the front (bulged) trunnion looks wrong for a Yugo. The receiver cover appears unribbed. Old style gas block....
MEHICO is not our friend. I don’t know why Americans insist on going there to spend their money.
Just looking at pics, all I’ve found with that trunnion and rivet pattern are Century Arms, and I doubt that they’re sending 3 hole guns to the cartels.
Dual citizenship is the most cowardly thing a jackass can do, IMHO. They have no allegiance to any country. The only reason the lowlifes want to have U.S. Citzenship so they can be a ward of the U.S. government and get the taxpayers to pay for their worthless little cowardly Mexican lives and anything they desire.
Dual citizenship
History
Up until the late 19th century, nations often decided whom they claimed as their citizens or subjects and did not recognize any other nationalities they held. Many states did not recognize the right of their citizens to renounce their citizenship without permission due to policies that originated with the feudal theory of perpetual allegiance to the sovereign. This meant that people could hold multiple citizenships, with none of their nations recognizing any other of their citizenships. Until the early modern era, when levels of migration were insignificant, this was not a serious issue. However, when non-trivial levels of migration began, this state of affairs sometimes led to international incidents, with countries of origin refusing to recognize the new nationalities of natives who had migrated, and, when possible, conscripting natives who had naturalized as citizens of another country into military service. The most notable example was the War of 1812, triggered by UK impressment into naval service of US sailors who were alleged to be British subjects.[2][3]
In the aftermath of the 1867 Fenian Rising, Irish-Americans who had gone to Ireland to participate in the uprising and were caught were charged with treason, as the UK authorities considered them to be British subjects. This outraged many Irish-Americans, to which the UK responded by pointing out that, just like UK law, US law also recognized perpetual allegiance.[2] As a result, Congress passed the Expatriation Act of 1868, which granted Americans the right to freely renounce their US citizenship. The UK followed suit with a similar law and, years later, signed a treaty agreeing to treat British subjects who had become US citizens as no longer holding UK nationality. During this time, diplomatic incidents had also arisen between the US and several other European countries over their tendency to conscript naturalized US citizens visiting their former homelands. In response, the US government negotiated agreements with various European states known as the Bancroft Treaties, under which the signatories pledged to treat the voluntary naturalization of a former citizen or national with another sovereign nation as a renunciation of their citizenship.[2]
As a result, the theory of perpetual allegiance largely fell out of favor with governments during the late 19th century. With the consensus of the time being that dual citizenship would only lead to diplomatic problems, more governments began prohibiting it and revoking the nationality of citizens holding another nationality. By the mid-20th century, dual nationality was largely prohibited worldwide, although there were exceptions. For example, a series of US Supreme Court rulings permitted Americans born with citizenship in another country to keep it without losing their US citizenship.[2][4]
At the League of Nations Codification Conference, 1930, an attempt was made to codify nationality rules into a universal worldwide treaty, the 1930 Hague Convention, whose chief aims would be to completely abolish both statelessness and dual citizenship. The 1930 Convention on Certain Questions Relating to the Conflict of Nationality Laws proposed laws that would have reduced both but, in the end, were ratified by only 20 nations.[2]
However, the consensus against dual nationality began to erode due to changes in social mores and attitudes. By the late 20th century, it was becoming gradually accepted again.[2] Many states were lifting restrictions on dual citizenship. For example, the British Nationality Act 1948 removed restrictions on dual citizenship in the UK, the 1967 Afroyim v. Rusk ruling by the US Supreme Court prohibited the US government from stripping citizenship from Americans who had dual citizenship without their consent, and the Canadian Citizenship Act, 1976, removed restrictions on dual citizenship in Canada. The number of states allowing multiple citizenships further increased after a treaty in Europe requiring signatories to limit dual citizenship lapsed in the 1990s, and countries with high emigration rates began permitting it to maintain links with their respective diasporas.[5]
I get that, but why leave all of those weapons behind?
Was the overturned truck and the abandoned Ford F-150 pickup truck in the town of Quitovac, the same truck?
It doesn’t sound like it.
Were there guns in the grannies truck? Did the truck they were found in belong to the grannies?
Urinalism today on display.
“”Two trucks....one overturned, with victims, a second, abandoned, with weapons, ammo, vests.””
THAT makes more sense to me....thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.