Travel Warning for MX

[JamesBon92007]

It seems to me that I have read about several deaths occurring at Cozumel due to scuba diving. That seems to be the real danger.

No, but it included references to another post that was deleted. When we do a thread clean-up, everything referencing the moderated post gets removed as well. It was out of context without that post and the ones that quoted/referenced it. If you want to take another run at it, feel free.

Does that only apply if the referenced post is actually quoted in the reply, or does it also apply if the deleted post is referred to but is not actually quoted in the post?

 

[MMM]

It seems to me that I have read about several deaths occurring at Cozumel due to scuba diving. That seems to be the real danger.


Does that only apply if the referenced post is actually quoted in the reply, or does it also apply if the deleted post is referred to but is not actually quoted in the post?

It depends on how the thread reads after the other moderation.

 

[TMHeimer]

I've never posted here, but saw this as the most recent MX post. Just thinking back to the summer of '82 when I entered MX at Nogales, drove the whole Pacific Coast down to Oxaca, across the Isthmus to Veracruz, and up the Gulf of Mex. coast to Reynosa/McAllen, TX border. Sleeping by myself in my 1980 Honda Civic (no AC), often in desolate spots in the desert. Imagine that today. I WAS 28, but if I still were 28 I still wouldn't do that today.
In '93 I drove the whole Baja from SD to Los Cabos and back--sleeping again in the car (rented), often alone in the desert. During that trip, I heard on the radio (when close to the U.S.) that Michael Jordan's father was just killed sleeping in his car in a rest area in NC.
Felt very safe on both Mexico trips.

 

[gopbroek]

The intial impact from the warning seems pretty dramatic on the mainland. Hopefully the hysteria will settle down and folks look at the actual wording and calm down a little.

Mexico on defensive as bookings drop after U.S. warning: Travel Weekly

 

[cvchief]

That's true- if no complaint is filed
Nothing is done - isn't that true anywhere? But again, the travel advisory isn't about home Invasions (which happen everywhere) - it's about things that have happened on the mainland that have nothing to do with the island.

Just for point of clarity, don't say 'home invasion.' That is more correctly applied to crimes where a home is entered and the occupants detained during what is actually a robbery. It implies a violence not really happening.

Simple burglaries do occur and sometimes occur while the residents are present, I guess owing to the restrictions on how one can defend oneself under Mexican law. However, all reports I have read are common burglars with no desire to be confronted. They run away if detected like their pants were on fire. Hence they do not represent a physical danger to a victim, just a monetary one.

These sorts of burglaries might be on the rise in Cozumel, but relative to its size, not unexpected. The prosecution of offenders, especially juveniles, appears to be challenging in their legal environment.

No, if someone tries to break into a locked store and the police see them, they will be arrested and charged, with or without the store owner. Even if the victim is afraid to come forward, the crimes are considered a crime against society and the criminal will be prosecuted.

That isn't really true. Sure the police would arrest and detain, even charge and jail an offender if the saw it. It might vary a bit place to place, at some point a victim would be required to be a victim, certainly at a trial. A victim that refused to cooperate will doom a case in the end. They would most likely drop the case and the criminal would be freed.

 

[BRT]

Just for point of clarity, don't say 'home invasion.' That is more correctly applied to crimes where a home is entered and the occupants detained during what is actually a robbery. It implies a violence not really happening.

Simple burglaries do occur and sometimes occur while the residents are present, I guess owing to the restrictions on how one can defend oneself under Mexican law. However, all reports I have read are common burglars with no desire to be confronted. They run away if detected like their pants were on fire. Hence they do not represent a physical danger to a victim, just a monetary one.

These sorts of burglaries might be on the rise in Cozumel, but relative to its size, not unexpected. The prosecution of offenders, especially juveniles, appears to be challenging in their legal environment.



That isn't really true. Sure the police would arrest and detain, even charge and jail an offender if the saw it. It might vary a bit place to place, at some point a victim would be required to be a victim, certainly at a trial. A victim that refused to cooperate will doom a case in the end. They would most likely drop the case and the criminal would be freed.

At what point in the trial is the victim presented?

 

[cvchief]

At what point in the trial is the victim presented?

Well, it would vary. Recently in my state we change the way the preliminary hearings are handled, so officers could testify to what the victim told them, so the victim could avoid appearing. Still they the officer would need to say that the victim told him it was a crime, ie the criminal had no right to what he did. In the final actual trial, the victim would need to testify it was their property, the criminal had no right to enter and the items stolen belonged to him. Simple but needed.

I think in Mexico, you need to go to an office and make a formal complaint there to get the ball rolling. I know in a recent break in of and unoccupied residence, the police responded but then had to call the 'ministerial' police (I think that is the name?) so the those other police officer could enter the residence and check if the actor was still inside. Apparently the regular police are very limited in entering places, even when requested. And then after all that, the owner had to go to an office to make the 'actual' report.

We do have more leeway in say domestic violence cases, but often that means a victim on the stand refusing to speak and then presenting evidence to make the case without their testimony. Difficult but it is done.

 

[ReefHound]

I think those of us that visit Coz regularly and certainly those with homes there understand very well that Cozumel is a relatively safe area and is not Cancun. But to many if not most Americans, Mexico is Mexico is Mexico. The question is how deep should the State Dept drill down for it's advisories.

Should it be a state(estado) level? Listing the states that are safe or dangerous. Or by areas and cities within a state? Listing the geographic areas or select cities within a state that are ok or not. Or maybe which parts within the city or times of day? Perhaps San Miguel is fine west of 65th during daylight but maybe risky east of 65th at night?

It's called the State Department. It is intended to deal with other countries on a state(pais) level not a region or city level. So while I recognize as well as anyone else here that Cozumel is not equivalent to mainland Yucatan in terms of safety, it really isn't the State Dept. obligation to drill down that deeply. That they break advisories down to regions in Mexico is already something they wouldn't do for many other countries.

 

[ggunn]

It depends on how the thread reads after the other moderation.

I know that if I say "Democratic politicians are scum" or "Republican politicians are scum", it would be political, but what if I say "All politicians are scum"?

 

[MMM]

I know that if I say "Democratic politicians are scum" or "Republican politicians are scum", it would be political, but what if I say "All politicians are scum"?

It's probably off-topic. Let's take these comments to personal conversations so we don't drag this thread any more off-topic.