Previous Post
Next Post

Journalist Francisco Pacheco Beltrán (courtesy

Considering the violence and lawlessness south of the border, Donald Trump’s plan to build a wall between Mexico and the United States is looking more and more like a scaled-up version of Escape from New York. How long before we simply escort criminals to the other side of The Donald’s wall and let them fend for themselves? Meanwhile, Mexico is an excellent/horrific example of what happens to a disarmed populace. This story — republished from — goes out to the U.S. journalists who love them some gun control. When gun rights advocates say the Second Amendment protects the First, they ain’t just whistling Dixie. It’s your neck that’s on the line boyo. You have been warned . . .

Journalist Francisco Pacheco Beltrán (above) was assassinated Monday morning in the city of Taxco, in the northern part of the state of Guerrero. The violent incident occurred around 06:30 hours on Monday, when Pacheco Beltrán left his home, located on Tlalchichilpa Street in the neighborhood 20 de Noviembre, and was attacked by gunmen, according to an official report.

The 55-year-old journalist and brother of Eric Pacheco, a correspondent for Proceso in Querétaro, died by the severity of his injuries while being treated by emergency workers in the place where the attack occurred.

Francisco Pacheco was a longtime journalist and had a legacy in the state, he was currently the editor for the newspaper El foro de Taxco and worked as a correspondent for a newspaper that is published in Acapulco as well as a radio station in the capital.

During the early hours of Monday, he was very active in social networks documenting and disseminating the violent events that occurred this weekend in the port of Acapulco, as part of his journalistic work.

The crime of the Taxco journalist registers in a context of extreme violence in the state that has been minimized by the authorities, among them PRI governor Héctor Astudillo Flores, who recently asked reporters to take a pact of silence and not spread news about the reality that Guerrero is suffering through.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Meanwhile the people who created this society are illegally immigrating here as fast as they can swim and our government is basically ok with that.

    One wonders how much drug money changes hands to make that little oversight possible.

    One wonders indeed.

  2. Well, I guess Leghorn should be grateful Freedom Group didn’t put a contract on his ass for his R51 review and be happy they only threw him out of their booth at the convention last time…


      • “Nick Leghorn is well-armed. Journalist Francisco Pacheco Beltrán was not, by law. Point taken?”

        You are correct on that. I was using an absurd notion to make a *point*, a somewhat common literary device.

        That doesn’t change the fact that ‘Freedom Group’ *probably* would have liked to put a contract on TTAG’s Nick Leghorn for the review Nick gave to a ‘Freedom Group’ product.

        For those new TTAG readers who may wonder why ‘Freedom Group’ (and Remington *specifically*) isn’t well thought of around these parts, this TTAG article illustrates the point:

        Also click on the “kicked me out of the Remington booth at SHOT Show.”, to give a bit of perspective…

  3. Viva la raza. But not here, m’kay?

    We have enough trouble already. We don’t need to import more.

    • Anarchy is what societies Ascend into. If they’re sufficiently prescient. No government will ever be as good as No Government.

      If Guerreo was genuinely anarchic, it would take all of 5 minutes before every civilian was armed to the teeth, and anyone even remotely as much of a nuisance as these Cartel assassins seem to be, would be exterminated like vermin.

      • There is no government in large parts of Mexico. That is anarchy. There is no tradition of arms in Mexican society for the ordinary citizen. That is why violence is so high there.
        There is only one legal gun store in all of Mexico. Perhaps Obama and his fast and furious program can provide guns to more Mexicans.
        I hope Donald Trump does build a wall to protect America from a society that is not ready for freedom and responsibility.

        • “There is no government in large parts of Mexico. That is anarchy.”

          “There is only one legal gun store in all of Mexico.”

          A bit of a contradiction, not?

          The reason there are no firearms in civilian possession in Mexico, is because of government. Mexicans LOVE guns. Gun men, gun battles, gun porn etc…. Aside from the small Mexico CIty elite which run the show nationally and still believe (or pretend to) that they descend directly from the Spanish Crown and have bluer blood than the rest of the country, Mexico’s traditions are almost as Wild West as the US’. It’s not like the home land of Pancho Villa, Zapata and more recently Chalino Sanchez and his millions of fans, wouldn’t arm up, if the means to do so weren’t restricted.

          The reason every two bit powermad hack on the planet enacts gun laws to begin with, is precisely because everyone, everywhere, will quickly come around to see guns’ potential usefulness in the absence of such laws.

          Anarchic societies may well be violent. Afghanistan isn’t exactly a place devoid of all violence, either. And nether was the US, prior to European settlement. But what anarchies don’t have, is a small minority preying on a defenseless rest of the country. Hormone fueled young guys trying to steal each others sisters may show up in statistics as more violent than the peaceful life on an Antebellum cotton plantation, but that hardly makes the latter superior.

          Free men are free to attack others. Definitionally. Otherwise they wouldn’t be very free. But simultaneously, other free men are free to defend themselves. And the military truism of defense requiring much fewer resources than offense, will keep total violence down to background din. Once only some men are free to attack others, while the rest are barred from defending themselves (even if only because they are gullible enough to believe the former won’t attack them but instead protect them from eachother); that’s when things get pearshaped.

      • So long as there are human beings in close proximity to each other there never “no government.” The differences are matters of formality and legitimacy. Put another way, if you are near me and the government disappears, then I’m the government. Unless you’re the government. The matter is resolved via an assertion of power.

        • Because of the American constitution we have equality. We can have military grade weapons as civilians. Cannons, bomber planes, tanks and other fighting vehicles, attack helicopters. Of course you pay out of your own pocket.
          And now drones are the next step.

        • Correct.

          Just as, no matter how totalitarian, no government can ever control absolutely every action or thought of it’s subjects.

          In reality, it comes down to the reach of government. In anarchies, allegiance to a government can be withdrawn, if said government don’t live up to expectation. Rendering what government is there, much closer to a genuine “of the people” than one in which you are stuck being governed by Obama or some Kim, whether you like to or not.

      • What Moi, said, 100% Thank you.

        Anarchy would mean what little crime remained after drugs were legal and marketed freely would be easily defended against by citizens freely carry arms for self defense.

  4. Wow. A journalist risking his life to actually report news. Meanwhile, the ‘journalists’ on this side of the border go out of their way to avoid anything that looks like news in order to tell us what ever is on the list of talking points of the left.

    • Journalists here won’t even risk disinvititation to the cocktail party circuit to report the news.

  5. “escort criminals to the other side of The Donald’s wall” ESCORT? Trebuchet

    • The Donald’s Wall. That’s funny. And to think, just four years ago, Trump was calling Romney’s meager, pablum plan of self-deportation of illegals “mean spirited.” I guess Trump’s views on illegal immigration have evolved over four years, huh? How about that? 180 degrees of evolution, on a bedrock, core principles issue, there in just four years.

      How do you suppose, Trumpkins, this man’s 2016 “pro-2A” views will evolve over the next four years?

      • I don’t know if Trump’s views will change or not, but I can be reasonably sure Hillary’s won’t.

        • Exactly. That’s why I’m voting for her. She’s a pinko through and through. So I expect Republicans to oppose her. Yes, it’ll be in that pathetic, milquetoast, quisling kind of way that they semi-oppose Obama. That’s still bettter than the falling over themselves love affair they’ll have with Trump. Trump will exhibit the same statist ambitions as Hillary, obviously, but the GOP would go right along with him enthusiastically just because he’s on their team. They’re all big government socialists, both parties. The only differences are the jerseys.

  6. They could probably make a lot money for the construction of the wall if they televised that on pay per view. Tuesday Night Trebuchet, sponsored by Donbald Trump and hosted by Ted Nugent and Ann Coulter.

  7. “How long before we simply escort criminals to the other side of The Donald’s wall and let them fend for themselves? Meanwhile, Mexico is an excellent/horrific example of what happens to a disarmed populace.”

    I don’t know about anyone else, but I am not worried about the criminals. We can’t take care of the good people of the world when we can’t take care of ourselves, but we sure as heck shouldn’t be worried about the criminals. We have vets that can’t get the help they need, we have massive unemployment that isn’t accounted for, we have more children living in poverty than any first world nation, and we have already taken 25% of Mexico’s population. I say build the wall. Our government has proven it can’t deal with the situation without one.

    I’m sorry Robert, but being against Trump’s wall is worse than the advice you gave when you said carrying a backup firearm is impractical, unnecessary, and dangerous. I think at this point you should rethink giving advice. That’s my opinion anyway.

  8. “How long before we simply escort criminals to the other side of The Donald’s wall and let them fend for themselves? Meanwhile, Mexico is an excellent/horrific example of what happens to a disarmed populace.”
    Hopefully not too much longer.

  9. A fun game to play with antis: Whenever they claim that other “industrialized/first-world” nations don’t have gun problems with their gun control (IE Australia, UK, Germany, etc) ask them why they’re only referencing white European nations and not “brown” countries like Mexico and Brazil. Sit back and enjoy the squirm as you catch them at their own racism.

  10. He lives in the November 20th neighborhood? I think something was lost in translation there.

Comments are closed.