Mexican surveillance company Grupo Seguritech watches the U.S. border
restofworld.org
restofworld.org
Virtually all the technology used by this Mexican company, Grupo Seguritech, is imported from other countries. As a university student, I completed a Master's thesis about export manufacturing industries in Mexico. Then as now, the vast majority of manufacturing exports were (and still are) produced by foreign capital. Today Mexican capital contributes relatively little to the total value of manufactured exports. This is an important consideration: even in Mexican firms like Grupo Seguritech that are operating in other countries, such firms are not really in control of this technology, they are only licensing it from abroad. Foreign capital owns and controls the tech, and foreign capital reaps a substantial share of the profits.
I don't think this is a good thing. The crime is detrimental to innocent people, and although mass surveillance should not be the answer, it can only be fought through democratic processes.
I am curious what Mexico should do long term to reduce crime. The U.S. used to have a bigger problem with organized crime, but it has been subdued before mass surveillance was an option.
Mass surveillance is detrimental to innocent people and to democratic processes.
Anyone deliberately facilitating that certainly deserves the worst fate imaginable. These are tools tailor-made to destroy democracies, we should treat people behind them like we treat ISIS.
> There is active participation by the citizenry, where they connect their private security devices to the command centers run by the state
You don’t really believe anybody using a “public panic button” or hooking up their own alarm system to law enforcement deserves the worst fate imaginable. That’s a little extreme.
What are we even trying to accomplish here? It sounds like individuals in parts of Mexico are trying to protect themselves.
There has to be some compromise between ideals and reality. If you reflexively tell people “you can’t help the cops for the sake of democracy,” they’re gonna throw out the democracy part and keep the cops part.
Maybe a short stint in jail in the case of misconduct, but the worst fate imaginable? Chopped up in a suitcase?
You went from "license plate readers, stationary cameras, and panic buttons abound" in the article to "panic buttons", feels a bit dishonest.
Just so you know, I and many people like me will automatically align with whoever opposes you due to this rhetoric. Whatever it takes to ensure you and those who agree with you never, ever get any foothold in the discourse, let alone power. You are writing extremist and very dangerous things. It’s vile rhetoric and in a just world would be flagged to oblivion.
And there it is - this is why fascists coach their language in a veneer of politeness. After all, they didn't say it out loud, so whatever they're doing must certainly be the right thing to support. Why is the other side so eagerly opposed to them? Well, that doesn't matter, because they weren't polite about it.
It's important to look at what organizations/corporations/groups are actually doing, not just what they're saying.
Weird take.
> Anyone deliberately facilitating that certainly deserves the worst fate imaginable.
That came in a thread started with a now (justly) removed
> might wake up to their family chopped to pieces
This sets the tone I (and possibly others) interpret that message.
I know we are supposed to charitably interpret what people write on here, but a thread like this makes it really hard, given the tone.
But it's also worth considering exactly what the mass surveillance state we've got is directly leading to - deaths of many people. How many people have been disappeared or killed by ICE because of technology like this? That's just one group actively targeted by surveillance tech, and the government intends to go after millions more, as they've publicly stated. That's not to mention how many millions of people have had their lives worsened or ruined directly or indirectly because of tech like this.
These sorts of things aren't an innocent startup consisting of a few nerds in a garage, they're shaping the world and setting the stage for the expansion of horrible atrocities. This is ultimately what I mean - you have to look at the effects of what they're doing and the actual consequences. Once you see that and know people who are more directly affected/targeted by these technologies, it becomes a lot more clear why people are so angry at them.
So, I'm gonna go ahead and side with the people who aren't openly homicidal.
But also, homicidal is doing some heavy lifting here, isn't it? It may be accurate in this case, but someone saying we should go kill all the Nazis in WW2 because they're actively genociding their people would also fall under that umbrella.
Yeah, wishing someone's family to be chopped to pieces isn't actually homicidal.
While saying no such thing and not acting in such a way that suggests as much is deeply suspicious because that's just being "polite and closeted about it". And thus the totally not homicidal brutal-murder-liking-people who are absolutely not wishing death and destruction on people not sharing their ideology are the ones to support. because the others are fascists, because they don't say they want the families of others murdered.
I have no doubt that the positions you paint as more acceptable than mine are an existential threat.
>Whatever it takes to ensure you and those who agree with you never, ever get any foothold in the discourse, let alone power
Luckily the likes of you lost already. Trumps idiocy pretty much ensured that we'll get a real fight rather than a polite march into the dystopian surveillance nightmare you wish for.
There's no-one seriously trying to turn down the temperature, the fight is going to happen. I'm armed to the teeth (in the EU!) and ready to do my best to ensure that the good guys win.
I would imagine that the #1 priority might be to shut down the "Iron River."
The Iron River is the limitless supply of firearms from the USA to Mexican cartels. It is very well documented, and yet we rarely hear about it.
These cartels can:
- effectuate mass synthesis of illicit substances in commercial laboratories
- handle massive intercontinental logistics
- build semi-submersible boats
- hire and kidnap radio engineers to help with communications and electronic warfare
but gee, they just can't figure out how to buy a machine shop and hire or kidnap talent to make 100-year-old firearm designs - that's just too much for them?
And yes the solution to things like organized crime is always just a continuous chipping away and adding friction where you can.
Not giving them massive amounts of cheap, high quality firearms seems like a meaningful goal.
Where are they buying firearms in America at an "industrial scale?" An AR-15 receiver can be turned out in tens of minutes on a fast VMC - good luck stopping this.
I grew up hunting. Like any other redneck, I fired a .308 at 13yrs old, and yes it knocked me to the ground, lol. Skinned a dear that same year. I just didn't choose to make guns my entire identity.
All I am stating is the obvious. The USA is a major firearms manufacturer and exporter.
I challenge you to explain to the exact relative differences.
Also, why did you bring up fentanyl? How is that related to the very well documented Iron River? Well, I suppose it actually is, as the USA's very well documented supply of guns to Mexican cartels helps them bring up fent into the USA. Yay! Sorry to interrupt your previous narrative. Please, go on king.
Seriously, you have no idea what you are talking about. I can have a receiver milled from billet in the time we've spent discussing this.
Even the data you linked explains:
Privately Made Firearms Law enforcement agencies recovered and submitted 37,980 suspected privately made firearms4 (PMFs) to ATF for tracing between 2017 and 2021. It is probable that current trace data significantly underrepresents the number of PMFs recovered in crimes by LEAs due to a variety of challenges presented by PMFs, to include: • PMFs involvement in crime is an emerging issue and LEAs are just beginning to institute uniform training on the recognition, identification, and reporting of PMFs that can lead to more accurate PMF data being collected. • PMFs by their nature may have no markings at all, duplicative markings, counterfeit markings, or markings that appear to be serial numbers on parts of the firearm other than the frame or receiver. These duplicative, counterfeit, or erroneous markings can be mistaken for authentic serial numbers and markings causing law enforcement to not recognize the firearm as a PMF and/or potentially follow false leads based on these markings. As Figure OFT-04 reflects, the number of suspected PMFs recovered by law enforcement agencies and submitted to ATF for tracing increased by 1,083% from 2017 (1,629) to 2021 (19,273).
So, just domestically, home private firearms manufacturing totaled more units than all guns traced into Mexico in every given year.
I wish for you a happy rest of your day.
From readily available precursors, you can make fentanyl in less than one day.
The Gupta method (from readily available precursors) takes three steps, all at room temperature, and no specialized equipment at all.
That’s why it’s everywhere.
Versus non-professionally manufactured guns which… statistically pretty much don’t exist. Rounding error on any statistic you could come up with on firearms.
Non-professionally-manufactured firearms do exist, the aforementioned ATF traces indicate that they are far more prolific than Mexican imports. VICE produced a documentary almost 15 years ago on cartels in the Philippines manufacturing completely viable firearms without issue - in the woods.
Does that mean cartels aren't sophisticated manufacturers? No, of course they are.
Second straw-man: no one said homemade firearms literally don't exist. The claim is that they are a rounding error.
The answer is that it is in fact easier to just buy them in the US.
The more likely effect is it disproportionately stops normal Mexico citizens from obtaining "illegal" guns to protect themselves but the cartels still have them, making things even worse for the Mexican people.
they can also easily replace labs, guess we shouldn't raid them ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
they can also easily replace ... guess we shouldn't ...
You've just explained why the drug war failed and ultimately hurt us more than helped us while doing nothing to destroy the profits of the cartels.
Mexico, 10 years ago: https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-cartel-gunsmiths/
Philippines, 13 years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67PYuGQM9Fg
Statistics?
Believing your implication that homemade firearms or widespread and just don't show up in the seizure data is a little silly unless you can explain why this would be the case.
If it’s so easy, then why aren’t they doing that today and instead we just encounter thousands of guns bought in the US? Must be because that’s easier, correct?
I get the sense you’re a bit pre-committed to your position here though and perceive this as a bit of an identity question.
Would it cost them more? yes. would it be the "number 1 priority" because it's so impactful? no, obviously not.
Mass synthesis of the drugs that cartels produce is trivial (that's why they produce them)
Putting drugs on trucks is trivial (that's why they do that)
Rudimentary semi-submersible vessels are impressive but you only need a few and they're not that hard to make (again, that's why they make em)
The telecom stuff they do is legitimately pretty impressive, but this too is just significant capex for long term benefit -- not so with self-made guns which are significant capex and you get out the other side a low volume of low-quality, non-dependable, often-breaking guns.
Maybe I'm overestimating the difficulty of making guns. But I'm aware of zero conflicts in which small arms were manufactured in situ. Even in e.g. Myanmar/Burma. The fact that even remote conflicts go through the trouble of importing arms suggests this might be more difficult than you suggest.
Evidence against the point above that it's trivial to replace professionally manufactured small arms.
I wasn’t aware of this. Do you have a good source where I might learn more?
These are centuries-old objects. Manufacturing technology and materials science have advanced nearly 100 years since Ma Deuce first rolled off the line. Society didn't get dumber, and manufacturing has only gotten more accessible.
Just look at the current state of 3D printed firearms: they're completely useful and viable. CNC machining has never been cheaper or easier to do.
It's similar to services: you can your own email server, but it's much more efficient to use some vendor and let them do it for you. But if all vendors cut you off, it won't be impossible for you to host your down email, it'll just be less efficient.
I did not use to be this way, before the revolution it was the opposite.
History wise, started changing in the 1930s as far as illegal drug trafficking groups wrestling local gov, state gov, and fed gov away from law and order missions.
Invade and, this time, provide a way for the population to earn a honest living. "Let them eat cake" just doesn't work out.
And morally, why should we provide some other country? Are we the world government? Shouldn't we stop messing with others and keep to our business, as long as they don't mess with us (bomb and export heroin). Why are we suddenly responsible for them?
PS: nevertheless, one country (USA) tried to build democracy in Afghanistan, but failed. And only got scoldings for that.
Afghanistan has a lot of natural resources.
> And morally, why should we provide some other country? Are we the world government? Shouldn't we stop messing with others and keep to our business, as long as they don't mess with us (bomb and export heroin). Why are we suddenly responsible for them?
Development aid is always a good thing. Soft power is incredibly powerful on the global stage - just look at UN votes. A lot of countries that firmly voted with the Western nations for decades now votes with Russia/China or abstains, corresponding with us scaling back foreign aid and other similar investments. And there's an economic side as well... China used to be a bunch of piss poor farmers, now they're among the world's strongest economies.
And well, either we are the ones who decide where the world is going, we are the top dogs - or we have to submit to China, Russia and the likes, and there is no way this is a good way forward.
> PS: nevertheless, one country (USA) tried to build democracy in Afghanistan, but failed. And only got scoldings for that.
That's because we (I'm German, we were in this mess as well) didn't actually do nation building. Yes, we got rid of the Taliban and we built schools for girls, but that's it. The "army" was to at least 50% only existing on paper, corruption and sexual abuse (bacha bazi, DO NOT google that one if you're not ready for vivid descriptions of child abuse) ran rampant across all of society.
We completely and utterly failed in auditing and oversight. And not just of the Afghani side, but our own as well, see Bagram.
USA did, at least tried, but it's just not feasible. Sarah Paine described it way better than I can do: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/6d_mQwwiPjM
Enlightened self interest. If we want less heroin in our country, it's in our interest to provide something better for people in other countries to do than grow than heroin poppies. There's a lot of stuff to grow, I'm pretty sure something can be found that doesn't violate the sacred texts.
Otoh, Synthentic opiods may be cheaper and easier than harvesting heroin poppy, so maybe the specific problem of heroin export is solved, but not in the intended way.
Mexico is very much in it's New York mafioso days of the 80s. Still endemic, entrenched, and powerful, but losing ground and slowly legitimizing. The reason it's so slow is more to due with high rates of corruption in the government (local to federal) and justice system and the cultural effect it's had on the general populace.
US can afford to have militarized police with armoured cars. But the combination of drugs, poverty and weapons is very dangerous
They look bad, their boss looks bad, the paperwork for each individual crime begets a massive, impossible to hide conspiracy, and even nations struggle to execute on multi-year plans - individuals aren't going to be better at controlling multiple lower levels to hit each step of their plan, year after year
Which particular expert you listen to might emphasize different things to focus on to enable the trend to continue.
Listening to the people who ignore the facts because they find scaring people with lies more effective for their putposes is almost certainly a worse idea.
I thought it was credit cards and electronic payments that subdued organized crime (or at least moved it into the realm of the white collar, lawyer-facilitated “legal” crimes through official channels), which greatly reduces the violence component.
> Grupo Seguritech was founded in Mexico City in 1995 by father-son duo Shimon and Ariel Picker as a small company selling alarm systems for homes.
It's remarkable that even in a country where Jewish people make up no more than 0.05% of the population, they excel in this cybersecurity/surveillance arena. The talented ability of Jewish moms to always know the gossip of the community seems to pass down to their entrepreneurial kids!