Drug Prevention Resources - Ohio Crime Prevention Association: Fill & Download for Free

This answer may contain sensitive images. Click on an image to unblur it.Many have already answered very similar questions, without the political slant.The following is from: Fred Lead's answer to What should be done about school shootings?How can we stop the school shootings?There isn’t anything that will make mass shootings and school shootings end completely, but there are ways we can decrease the frequency and deadliness of such attacks.Learn from Serial Killings and SuicidesWe have been experiencing a massive drop in the number of serial killings in the US for the past three decades and a drop in the number of serial killers. Much like with “gun deaths”, the US has and still does outpace the rest of the world in serial killings. In some decades the US had about 500 more cases than the rest of the world. In every decade since the 1970s and 1980s the US has cut serial killer activity dramatically.http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/S...As serial killings have decline have mass shootings filled the gap?But this perception [that mass shootings are increasing] isn’t because of some unprecedented rise in the rate of mass public shootings—far from it. They’re roughly as common now as they were in the 1980s and ’90s. And the data offer a stark finding: Over the past decade, mass public shootings haven’t become particularly more prevalent, they’ve simply become deadlier.Mass Shootings Are Getting Deadlier, Not More FrequentWhat we see, thanks to a variety of variables, is (mostly) young disturbed men prefer to become mass shooters and not serial killers. The only difference is fewer are successful in acting out their plans. The general profile of serial killers and mass shooters are remarkably similar as well.Then there is this factor,The media's growing obsession with serial killers in the 1970s and '80s may have created a minor snowball effect, offering a short path to celebrity.The decline of the serial killer.The public eye has long moved on from the serial killer shows and news series of the past, placing mass shooters as the surest road to fame. The news reports have become more detailed, more graphic, and often focus on every aspect of the attacker’s life for weeks to months later. This kind of attention is appealing to those that feel nameless, faceless, and voiceless.This has been a phenomenon the FBI identified after a mass shootings in the 1990s,Ever since Columbine, the FBI has been studying what drives people to commit mass shootings. Last fall it issued a report on 160 active-shooter cases, and what Simons could disclose from its continuing analysis was chilling: To a much greater degree than is generally understood, there’s strong evidence of a copycat effect rippling through many cases, both among mass shooters and those aspiring to kill. Perpetrators and plotters look to past attacks for not only inspiration but operational details, in hopes of causing even greater carnage. Emerging research—including our own analysis of the “Columbine effect“—could have major implications for both threat assessment and how the media should cover mass shootings.Inside the race to stop the next mass shooterFrom a recently foiled shooting we can see pretty clearly the media attention is a pretty big deal, shooters are motivated by fame, and that they do learn from past shooters. From the journal of a foiled shooter,“I’ve been thinking a lot,” he added, according to the court records. “I need to make this shooting/bombing at Kamiak infamous. I need to get the biggest fatality number I possibly can. I need to make this count.“I’ve been reviewing many mass shootings/bombings (and attempted bombings) I’m learning from past shooters/bombers mistakes, so I don’t make the same ones.”https://www.washingtonpost.com/n...In addition to a shift in media attention we have also been experiencing a shift in general culture. We know with the advent of social media people have become more isolated and lonely, as well as instilling a preference for instant gratification. It would make sense that deranged people would gravitate toward instant results, but this is a topic I have not seen much research on.Just like with serial killings suicides decreased after media attention was severely curbed. Suicide research provides a pretty clear model of “behavioral contagion”, which may be at play with mass shootings as it most likely was with serial killings, emphasis mine,The media affords the opportunity for indirect transmission of suicide contagion, the process by which one suicide becomes a compelling model for successive suicides.1,2 This means of influence is potentially more far reaching than direct person-to-person propagation. Suicide contagion can be viewed within the larger context of behavioral contagion, which has been described as the situation in which the same behavior spreads quickly and spontaneously through a group.3 Behavioral contagion has also been conjectured to influence the transmission of conduct disorder, drug abuse, and teenage pregnancy.4,5 According to behavioral contagion theory, an individual has a preexisting motivation to perform a particular behavior, which is offset by an avoidance gradient, such that an approach-avoidance conflict exists.6 The occurrence of suicides in the media may serve to reduce the avoidance gradient—the observer’s internal restraints against performing the behavior. Social learning theory also provides a foundation on which aspects of suicide contagion may build. According to this theory, most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling.7 Imitative learning is influenced by a number of factors, including the characteristics of the model and the consequences or rewards associated with the observed behavior.8 Consequences or rewards, such as public attention, may lower behavior restraints and lead to the disinhibition of otherwise “frowned upon” behavior.9http://www.columbia.edu/itc/hs/medical/bioethics/nyspi/material/SuicideAndTheMedia.pdfTo me the case looks pretty clear; some troubled people turn into monsters but now have shifted from serial killings to mass shootings in step with the shift in media attention and society in general. Media coverage is an important motivator for most shooters; it allows them to address a perceived wrong in front of the entire world, immortalize their name, and ensure the entire world knows all about their life. Past trends in serial killings and suicide show media restrictions can save lives.Dr. O'Toole, who is Editor-in-Chief of Violence and Gender, calls on the media to stop using the names of mass murders, which only fuels their desire for fame and is "a very powerful motivator," Targeted mass killings can be preventedMental Health ReformMental illness is often cited as the primary motivator in a shooting, but that is a flawed sentiment as there are obviously other motivators. If it were truly due to mental health issues alone mass shootings most likely would be completely random and not planned. Mental health issues are a contributing factor, but not the factor as many make it out to be,In an analysis of 235 mass killings, many of which were carried out with firearms, 22 percent of the perpetrators could be considered mentally ill. Checking Facts and Falsehoods About Gun Violence and Mental Illness After Parkland ShootingIf a minority of mass killings the attacker was found to have some sort of mental illness. Why does it seem mental health is such a big deal? We need to understand the motivations of the attackers in order to find any kind of predictable factors. Experts have researched this topic extensively,Although some mass shooters are found to have a history of psychiatric illness, no reliable research has suggested that a majority of perpetrators are primarily influenced by serious mental illness as opposed to, for example, psychological turmoil flowing from other sources. https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/pdf/10.5555/appi.books.9781615371099The major issue with mental health reform as a primary mechanism against mass shootings is that mental health is completely voluntary.Even if mental health services are free that does not mean individuals who need them most, from society's perspective, will seek the services out. In fact, the mental health disorders that are most prevalent in violent individuals typically push those individuals away from help if left on their own. Anecdotally, someone in my extended family has some mental health issues that clearly damage the well-being of themselves and their children, but not to the point where Child Protective Services or law enforcement can intervene. This individual refuses to accept help, even though others have offered referrals and to pay for the services. No one can force mental health services on anyone until there is a breech large enough for the legal system to intervene. Oftentimes in the case of a mass shooter the individual is a loner and has no one to advocate for them and do not have any breeches that warrant investigation or intervention by the legal system.When these individuals are forced to use mental health services in many cases it is not like a medical procedure that operates separate of the will of the individual, and prescription drugs alone are not a solution. Psychotropic drugs have actually been shown to increase destructive behavior and the severity of the destructive behavior in many cases. The individual must necessarily want to be better in order for any treatment to be effective. Mental health is also a process, it is not a silver-bullet instant fix. Even if an individual is getting help they may still be a risk to themselves or others at any point during the process; once someone begins to get help that doesn't mean they are immediately fixed and peaceful. In fact, in many cases people become more irate and agitated by facing their issues and giving up destructive coping mechanisms throughout the process. I think many people have a deep misunderstanding of mental health; it isn't like yoga where you go for an hour and feel peaceful and relaxed afterward. Sometimes it works out like yoga, but in some cases it can be deeply unsettling and uncomfortable, but it is required to get to real long-term healing. For severe cases that justify the use of prescription drugs it's as simple as not taking the medication and you now have an individual that is on par with someone that has never had any help.We do need to increase mental health care in the United States and that may decrease the number of cases of violent crime, including mass shootings, but that is a difficult argument to make at this point. I do not believe better funded mental health services will end mass shootings completely, especially if it is viewed as the singular silver bullet fix, but I do believe it will benefit society as a whole. Mental health access in conjunction with other points here can help through a multi-layered approach to help reform people and shift them to a better path, but even that is not foolproof.InterventionWhat we find in the past profiles of mass shooters are preexisting motivations, consistent with the behavioral contagion theory in a previous section, that are obvious “warning signs” after the fact. The problem is there are too many people that have these warning signs that are adequately deterred by a number of conditions for these “warning signs” to have any predictive value. In addition, the actions law enforcement can take against the individuals that display such “warning signs” is quite limited until a breech that is serious enough is committed. In some cases this breech is simple assault, theft, or other petty crimes that could be called “cries for help” or otherwise emotional outlets, in the most rare of cases it is a mass shooting attempt.What can we do about this? We need to be involved as a community with our youth and those in our lives. Parents, family, friends, we are all the first line of defense for a safe society. We know the troubled people in our lives more than anyone else, and we are in positions to not only monitor them but intervene in their lives. We can help them find the help they need to keep their issues from escalating, if they will accept help and want to face their issues. The profile of mass shooters usually includes isolation and estrangement from family, lack of friends, and so on so this isn’t always possible, but it does help us as a society and may reduce the escalation of issues that lead to mass shootings.This idea has been tested and it has worked to a degree, but it is a constant effort,The threat assessment team had to decide just how dangerous Ayala might be and whether they could help turn his life around. As soon as they determined he didn’t have any weapons, they launched a “wraparound intervention”—in his case, counseling, in-home tutoring, and help pursuing his interests in music and computers.“He was a very gifted, bright young man,” recalls John Van Dreal, a psychologist and threat assessment expert involved in the case. “A lot of what was done for him was to move him away from thinking about terrible acts.”As the year went on, the team kept close tabs on Ayala. The school cops would strike up casual conversations with him and his buddies Kyle and Mike so they could gauge his progress and stability. A teacher Ayala admired would also do “check and connects” with him and pass on information to the team. Over the next year and a half, the high schooler’s outlook improved and the warning signs dissipated.When Ayala graduated in 2002, the school-based team handed off his case to the local adult threat assessment team, which included members of the Salem Police Department and the county health agency. Ayala lived with his parents and got an IT job at a Fry’s Electronics. He grew frustrated that his computer skills were being underutilized and occasionally still vented to his buddies, but with continued counseling and a network of support, he seemed back on track.The two teams “successfully interrupted Ayala’s process of planning to harm people,” Van Dreal says. “We moved in front of him and nudged him onto a path of success and safety.”But then that path took him to another city 60 miles away, where he barely knew anyone.Inside the race to stop the next mass shooterIntervention works until you stop working at it. Combined with mental health services and the coping skills they can provide intervention and social engagement goes a long way. Sometimes that intervention goes beyond logical discourse, referring to mental health services, and caring. At that point law enforcement must step in,[A]uthorities say that Cathi O’Connor contacted police after reading entries in 18-year-old Joshua Alexander O’Connor’s journal.Grandmother Stops Teen Who Was Allegedly Planning a School Shooting“This is a case where the adage ‘see something, say something’ potentially saved many lives,” Everett Police Chief Dan Templeman said late Thursday in the statement. “It is critically important for community members, to include students and parents, to remain observant and immediately report odd or suspicious behaviors with our children or with fellow students. We were fortunate that a family member believed there were credible threats and contacted law enforcement for further investigation. I’m sure the decision was difficult to make, but fortunately, it was the correct one.”https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2018/02/15/a-would-be-shooter-tossed-a-coin-to-pick-a-school-police-say-his-grandmother-foiled-his-plan/?utm_term=.c4f8a8bf1ab5Law EnforcementIn recent shootings many have placed the blame squarely on failures in law enforcement. Multiple tips were not followed up on, but that doesn’t mean we should stop reporting suspicious activity. To make our communities safer from all kinds of crimes community policing is the answer, as shown in New York City, which has experienced a steady drop in crime to all-time lows,The NYPD credited the stark reduction to its new precision policing approach to fighting crime, in which investigators focus on people who have shown a pattern of committing crimes.In March, several NYPD units, including the department’s detective squads and vice, narcotics, gangs and organized crime investigation divisions, were given new bosses — an “investigative chief” in each patrol borough. The chiefs, in turn, report to Chief of Detectives Robert Boyce, officials said.The overhaul — which dismantled the department’s Organized Crime Control Bureau, placing its units under Boyce’s umbrella — has been credited with reducing the number of shootings across the city, officials said.NYC saw historically low number of shootings in 2016Who could have guessed targeting career criminals would decrease crime? Oh yeah, criminologists,In an email, Pfaff pointed out that Monday’s data matched what scholars already knew. “Crime has always been highly localized,” Pfaff said. “Studies in several cities have shown that about half of all reported crime occurs in under 10 percent of all city blocks, and almost all crime in under half. And those ‘at risk’ blocks remain fairly constant over time. So talking about crime in ‘the U.S.,’ or ‘Illinois,’ or even ‘Chicago’ has always been somewhat misleading.” What the FBI's Latest Crime Report Really ShowsBut New Yorkers knew this already,It’s a very small percentage of the population in New York City that’s involved in crime,” O’Neill said in an interview with the Daily News in September. “If the same cops are there every day, they know who the good people are — which is the vast majority of them. ... It’s going to have a real effect on what goes on. NYC saw historically low number of shootings in 2016The move to effective policing not only results in lower crime and more lives saved it also frees up resources to conduct more on-the-ground investigations, the lack of which led to the failures by law enforcement in recent shootings. Generally, the community knows who the problem people are and can point police in the right direction. Why don’t all areas use community policing? Many can’t because a career in law enforcement is not appealing, so getting local applicants isn’t really an option. In some areas the local populace feels victimized and abused by law enforcement and so they have a deep level of distrust. This decreases the effectiveness of police and builds up an attitude of “us vs them”, also called police militarization.When people in authority abuse power, trust and connectedness to a community erode. "It leads to a breakdown of that which holds society together," Teresa Cordova, director of the Great Cities Institute at the University of Illinois at Chicago, told us. "It's that sense of connectedness that has always been such a powerful part of Chicago neighborhoods."When Chicagoans don't trust police, the city suffersJustice officials make the case that building trust and combating crime will be intertwined. "For Chicago to find solutions — short- and long-term — for making those neighborhoods safe, it is imperative that the City rebuild trust between CPD and the people it serves, particularly in these communities," the report says.Chicago police use excessive force, scathing Justice Department report findsSo what does all this have to do with mass shootings? The more connected a community is with police and the more trust that exists the easier it is for police to do their job and the more likely they will do a better job of it as well. As we saw in the example of the grandmother calling on her grandson, the ability to pick up the phone to call the police, and feel safe doing so, goes a long way. If you suspect something call on it; see something, say something.We certainly don’t make it easy for law enforcement to do their job in many cases. The background check system is our most important law enforcement tool in terms of controlling access to guns. Federal gun control legislation in the context of mental health relies on this question on the background check form: “Have you ever been declared incompetent or involuntarily committed to a mental institution?”. That would leave out quite a few mass shooters of the past, and did not stop others. Here’s the real problem, though. Even with the laws in place they cannot be effectively enforced,There are an estimated 3 million living Americans who have been involuntarily committed to mental institutions. The NICS database only contains the names of about 90,000 of these individuals. There are only 17 states that provide information on involuntary commitment for inclusion in the NICS database. Many of the noncompliant states simply have not computerized their records on involuntary commitment. However, a large number of the noncompliant states are also grappling with serious health-information privacy issues and are reluctant to provide the required data to NICS before these issues are resolved.Under the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, mental health records may only be released to medical professionals, health insurance workers and quality-control personnel. Ohio’s attorney general has not yet determined how to gain access to the medical records needed to process CCW applications. Because Ohio has a relatively new CCW law, sheriffs are being asked to assist temporarily in checking courthouse records for involuntary-commitment orders. This exercise is both time-consuming and labor-intensive. It’s also unlikely to produce all of the information needed to verify the accuracy of answers provided on Ohio CCW permit applications.Although federal and state laws establish involuntary commitment as a prohibiting factor for gun purchases, mental health professionals contend that there is no scientific basis for this prohibition.According to Dr. Paul Applebaum, vice president of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), “checking for involuntary commitments…doesn’t make sense because past mental illness does not predict future violence.”Mental Illness And Gun Ownership - Guns & AmmoWe could take recent events and use it as a rallying cry against law enforcement, but we really need to stand by our law enforcement officers and find ways to help them do their jobs better because our safety is not their job, it’s everyone’s job. We also need to look at some of the gaps and ineffective policies in the current laws we have to make them more easily enforceable and more effective at getting the results we want.ResistanceMetal detectors, harsh punishments for infractions, and general education are all great, but will not stop attacks. These measures all have flaws that can allow an individual to slip through the cracks and do not matter to a motivated monster. The only measure that will save lives when all the preventative measures have failed or been completely skipped over is immediate overwhelming force. Overwhelmingly mass shootings have taken place in gun-free zones. Whether it is the gun-free zone policy that impacts the location picked is up for debate; there is usually a primary motivator beyond just the gun-free zone status, such as some kind of injustice, but with the recently foiled shooting plot we do see a clear case that the location was picked for “maximum damage”. Regardless, making it easier to kill doesn’t help the people in those situations. Armed resistance is a simple way to save lives.This can take many forms. There is the idea of arming school teachers (or simply allowing them to be armed) that are willing or have already become licensed and trained to carry a firearm. Some teachers have already taken the necessary training and licensing to carry a concealed firearm in public, but cannot carry inside the school building. What makes them fundamentally unfit to carry a firearm in a school building when they are deemed fit to carry a firearm in public, sometimes around the same children that are in the school? If the concern is due to a firearm on the teacher’s person there is the idea of securing a gun safe in the room with access to the teacher and an administrator. In the case of a shooting accessing the firearm does not change the lockdown procedure.Since some deem teachers inept and fundamentally too incompetent to carry a firearm upon entering a school building there is the idea of external security, such as security guards. The idea of employing veterans to do this has been tossed around as well. School Resource Officers can be found in some schools but not all, so some argue we should apply the same protection to each school, employing a SRO for security and general order in the school.Each of these ideas have backlash, but the idea is sound. Responding police have the luxury of waiting in safety for backup (and have in many cases in the past), despite going against protocol. When you are faced with an attacker you have to respond, being armed gives you one more tool to respond with, otherwise you are limited to running and hiding and cannot help anyone but yourself.There are many instances where armed resistance has stopped a shooting. Most of the stories are not as well-publicized as the “successful” mass shootings, most likely because they don’t have the same ability to keep viewers (and sell ads).How an Assistant Principal With a Gun Stopped a School ShooterOpinion | Do citizens (not police officers) with guns ever stop mass shootings?These examples are often ignored or even worse said not to exist in the first place. The arguments against immediate armed resistance are head-scratchingly fuzzy, such as Mother Jones arguing because an individual may be wounded or killed by the attacker they should not have the ability to shoot back at the attacker and instead it would be better to be wounded or killed while unarmed or that in some cases the responding individual was a security official or ex-military/LEO. These cases clearly show armed resistance acting immediately can save lives, it doesn’t matter who makes up that resistance. There is also the argument individuals should not be armed because in one case,it was “not clear at all” whether the kid had intended to do any further shooting after he’d left the building.I don’t believe “the kid only killed the people he wanted to and left” is a good reason to keep people that are licensed, trained, and willing to carry firearms from being able to do so.Armed resistance also presents a deterrent effect, although we can’t really measure this effectively for any topic. One of the interesting shifts in programming around serial killers was a move from “we’ll never catch them”, “cold cases”, “mystery murder” shows and news programs to “how we caught them” shows. The messaging changed from “serial killers can’t be caught” to “serial killers will be caught”, changing the way people feel about serial killers, including those that may have considered doing it themselves. This created a deterrent effect that we really can’t quantify. The issue with mass shootings is the attacker is usually motivated enough to not care about dying or actually wants to die, but we also know mass shooters are cowards. We can’t quantify and compare the “coward quotient” compared to the motivation to conduct a shooting, but the potential benefit from armed resistance remains: lives saved.The SolutionThere is no single silver-bullet fix to end mass shootings or school shootings. We need to do the hard work of building up and maintaining a stable and peaceful society. That means being active in our communities (especially with youth), improving access to mental health, supporting our police, calling for effective evidence-backed legislative policies and not “feel good” legislation, and protecting what matters to us all along the way. I wish there were a way to pass a law and end all bad things, but that is not the way it works. Evil will always exist, but we can work in the lives of those around us to integrate people into society and create a sense of belonging. One pattern seems to emerge from the past; whether it be serial killings, suicides, or mass shootings, the people that commit these acts overwhelmingly feel disintegrated from society, isolated, alone, and “other” from those around them. With the prevalence of social media in place of social interaction the main factors that cause negative patterns to develop are only exacerbated. We all need to do the work to keep us all safe, including those that on their own would develop into monsters we could one day hear about on the news.

1. Use and expand drug courts. Drug courts, which combine judicial supervision with substance abuse treatment, are rapidly gaining popularity as a tool to combat crime and drug use. Based on a five-year study, we found that people who took part in drug courts had lower relapse rates and committed fewer additional crimes, such as selling drugs and driving while intoxicated. Forty-nine percent of drug court participants reported committing new crimes, compared with 64 percent of non-participants.2. Make use of DNA evidence. By vastly improving our ability to identify and arrest suspects, DNA evidence has the potential to be a powerful crime-fighting resource. Our research shows that the use of DNA evidence in burglary cases leads to the identification and arrest of twice as many suspects as traditional investigation tactics. DNA also helps serve justice: we found that DNA testing can provide evidence to support the exoneration of as many as 15 percent of convicted sex offenders.3. Help ex-offenders find secure living-wage employment. Securing a well-paying job can help returning prisoners remain crime-free once they go back to their communities. Our studies found that the more they earned during the first two months following their release, the lower their chances of returning to prison. Those who earned over $10 an hour, for example, were half as likely to return to prison as those whose hourly wages were less than $7.4. Monitor public surveillance cameras. The recent events in Boston have demonstrated the crucial role public cameras can play in investigations of high-profile criminal acts. Our research found that cameras can also be a cost-effective means of preventing crime. In Chicago, every dollar spent on cameras yielded over $4 in savings in court costs, incarceration, and pain and suffering associated with prevented crimes. Cameras are most effective when there are a sufficient number of them and they are monitored by trained staff.5. Connect returning prisoners to stable housing. Access to stable housing can dramatically reduce crime committed by former prisoners. Our evaluation of the Returning Home-Ohio (RHO) program found that released prisoners who were connected to housing services were 60 percent less likely to return to prison. These individuals also spent more time in the community before being re-arrested.Some of these strategies, like drug courts and public surveillance cameras, are in widespread usage and have already helped reduce crime. Others have not yet been widely implemented. However, empirical evidence shows that they all effectively lower crime and reduce the costs associated with it.

Trump hasn’t even been inaugurated yet and already things are unsettling.Now that I live south of the border, it’s amazing (and by amazing I mean terrifying) just how much the U.S.A. can actually affect the daily lives of normal citizens here.A Trump presidency can mean many things for Mexico - being forced to pay for a wall they don’t want, a decrease in Mexicans immigrating legally or illegally, and increased economic and political instability - but I’m going to base my answer off my area of experience - the automotive industry and manufacturing jobs.ECONOMIC IMPACTAs the probability of Trump winning the election became more evident, the value of the Mexican Peso began to decline at a notable rate. Back in 2014 when I first arrived to Mexico, 1 US dollar was around 13 pesos, but as of the moment of writing this answer, January 18th, 2017 it is at 21.92 pesos.This is apparently the highest it’s been in the past 40 years. [1]Of course Trump isn’t single-handedly responsible as various other factors are involved, but he did play a significant role by taking a tough stance all throughout his campaign, proposing “slapping tariffs on goods made in Mexico, ending the free trade agreement NAFTA, taxing cash remittances from America to Mexico, and building a wall along the border [2]”, effectively scaring off investors.Meaning when Clinton lost, I lost too. My entire savings lost 10% of its value overnight and continues to slowly decline to this day.Personally, this sorta sucks, but it’s the least of my worries.What I’m more concerned about is the fact that this terrible USD-MXN exchange rate will make Mexico significantly less attractive for foreign investors as well as companies considering branching out here.This leads me to my main point -THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRYTrump has been on a roll attacking automakers, starting with Ford, then GM, then as of this year even targeting a non-American automaker, Toyota.I feel very strongly about this as I work in Mexico, in the automotive industry, in a Japanese company that could have directly benefited from Ford’s now cancelled plant and could benefit from Toyota.So forgive me since this is going to be long, but I feel it crucial to explain the details for me to be able to provide a clearer picture of the kind of impact Trump could potentially have here.I work in a plant that makes auto-parts for major American, Japanese, and European automakers. Our headquarters is in Japan, and I joined the “Mexico Project” from even before construction here started. So, while not by any means perfect, I have a pretty good grasp of how a new company is started overseas.And let me tell you, it takes a lot of friggin’ work.It involves months, sometimes years of planning and research, feasibility studies, market analysis, long discussions with existing customers, dozens of visits to potential construction sites, numerous tedious negotiations with local governmental officials and suppliers, months of engineering, testing, and finally a whole bunch of hiring and training before a new plant can be up and running.And that’s only part of it.Which means, by the time normal citizens hear about a company’s decision to open a new plant in another country, a large number of people have already been involved and have already made additional plans on the assumption that the company would follow through.So when a company like Ford suddenly cancels a $1.6 billion dollar investment, it leaves behind a long trail of broken promises. It throws everyone off balance.In the case of Toyota, they already started construction last November, which means they are even further along than Ford was, and even more people would be impacted should they pull out. My friend already works there so he would lose his job.When news broke on the 5th of Trump now targeting Toyota, Akio Toyoda, CEO of Toyota, said he has no plans to reconsider as of the moment, stating Toyota “has a responsibility to hire and serve the local community, now that things have already been decided”. [3]Toyota USA also issued a statement, making clear no plans for reversal.Nonetheless, my colleagues and bosses are concerned that Toyota may end up modifying or reversing their plans.One of my colleagues was especially worried, saying, “I really hope they don’t cancel, since Toyota would benefit my hometown in all aspects, especially since there aren’t many companies there. It would also contribute to Mexico’s economy, since a lot of sub-suppliers would come to Mexico for Toyota”.There is an informal saying among Japanese in the auto-industry that “Where Toyota comes, a village follows”, describing how dozens of new companies and businesses pop up when Toyota arrives.Toyota’s withdrawal would mean billions lost in investment not only by Toyota but also by their sub-suppliers, relevant businesses, and in the shattered dreams of hundreds of Mexicans who are or were eagerly awaiting to be hired.The attack on Toyota also puts Nissan, Mazda, and Honda in danger, all which export a greater percentage of vehicles to the U.S. from Mexico than Toyota does.Vehicles made in Mexico comprise roughly one-quarter of Nissan's total U.S. vehicle sales […] compared with around 30 percent for smaller rival Mazda, but less than 10 percent for Toyota and Honda.Japanese automakers together produced around 1.4 million vehicles in Mexico in the year ended March, nearly 40 percent of the country's total output. […] [T]hey plan to ramp up production to 1.9 million by 2019.Carlos Ghosn, Nissan and Renault SA CEO commented regarding the matter:"What we need to explain more clearly (to Trump) is that most automakers are not cutting production capacity or jobs in the United States to make Mexico an additional production hub." [4]Even so, it is reasonable to assume Trump will also target Nissan and Daimler, which “have signed a joint venture agreement and are investing over $1 billion in a new plant that is expected to begin production in 2017 with an initial capacity of 230,000 units.”Former Mazda Motor Mexico CEO Keishi Egawa has been quoted as saying:"Mexico is one of the most attractive manufacturing locations. The potential for growth in Mexico is still tremendous." [5]And so it is.Mexico is the fourth-largest exporter for the automotive industry, only after Germany, Japan and South Korea. Mexico is almost reaching Japan to become the number 2 supplier of vehicles to the U.S. market.To support this information, in 2014, Mexico manufactured four out of every 100 cars in the world. With this speed of growth in the industry and attraction of investments, Mexico could reach the 4th position in automobile producers after China, USA and Japan. [6]However, Trump can effectively halt the momentum of Mexico’s growing auto sector depending on how he plays his cards, as America undeniably holds the upper hand.According to the Mexican Automobile Industry Association, in the first quarter of 2015 the U.S. received 70% of all cars exported from Mexico. [7]As vehicle exports account for “18.3 percent of Mexico’s manufacturing sector and 3.2 percent of national GDP”, if Trump succeeds in negotiating with OEMs like GM, Toyota, and the other dozen that have settled or plan to expand in Mexico, Mexico will fall into the shadows of the auto industry. And that’s not even taking into consideration the heavy duty vehicle production here of trucks and trailers. [8]On Sunday Trump continued his consistent tirade against automakers in Mexico, this time singling out German automaker BMW:“I would tell BMW, if they want to build a factory in Mexico and sell the cars in the U.S. without paying a 35 percent tax, then they can forget about it”BMW has so far taken the strongest stance against Trump, expressing clear skepticism that this would ever be possible.“We take the comments seriously, but it remains to be seen if and how the announcements will be implemented by the U.S. administration. The U.S. Congress will probably show “substantial resistance” against the duty proposals.” [9]Trump has proved he will not only hold American automakers accountable for manufacturing in Mexico; he will target any automaker that exports cars to the U.S.He has gotten a start with Japan and Germany - it is only a matter of time before he covers all the rest.I haven’t been able to confirm this with a valid news source, but on Sunday my Korean student told me that Kia was cancelling plans of expanding their plant in Mexico for fear of what Trump may do.While Mexico offers benefits incomparable to the U.S. (which I will explain in the next point), with the mere threat of a “35% border tax”, numerous automakers may bail without Trump ever having to take direct action.OTHER MANUFACTURING SECTORSIt’s not only the auto-industry in Mexico that Trump has a qualm about.Trump has also declared numerous times during campaign rallies that he is boycotting Oreos.Trump in Virginia, Oct. 14: “Nabisco. Oreos. Right, Nabisco? Right? Oreos! They’re closing their big plant in Chicago. They’re moving it to Mexico. I’ll never eat another Oreo again. Ever. Ever! So I’m going to talk to them. I don’t want their cookies made and sold there. I just don’t want it. It’s unfair to us. Chicago is losing this large plant. It’s going to another country.” [10]Here’s some other American corporations with plants in Mexico that he could decide to boycott in the future:[Image edited from: Global Companies Succeeding with Mexico Manufacturing]I should supplement it’s highly unlikely as of now that any American corporation would just pack up and leave Mexico simply because they were targeted by Trump. American companies move plants to Mexico because of the low labor costs, longer work hours, and numerous free trade agreements that make it all possible.An average line operator here works around 9.5 hours a day and earns about 100 pesos, which is less than 5 USD. The current minimum daily wage is actually even lower at 80.4, although prior to January 2017 it was at 76.4 pesos.When I visited manufacturing plants in Ohio and Kentucky, I was told the minimum wage for operators was 15 USD an hour, which would be 120 USD a day for 8 hours. That means for every operator you hire in the U.S. you could hire 60 in Mexico.Let’s compare.If we assume both plants hired 100 operators and worked 20 days per month, by the end of the month the plant in Mexico would have saved 230,000 USD in comparison. As you can imagine, it really adds up after an year.If Trump can modify or repeal NAFTA and impose high tariffs that make this difference virtually zero, American companies will find less benefit in moving plants to Mexico or may even possibly move back.However, another issue, perhaps even harder to solve still exists, which is the “high” minimum wage in America.In the two manufacturing plants I visited, I noticed there were fewer operators than we have in Mexico for the same production lines. Some areas even looked deserted. The supervisor told me that more and more processes are becoming automated because on the long run they cannot afford to be paying high minimum wages to the operators. He even showed me a new line to be installed that would be completely automated.Therefore, I struggle to see how Trump can realistically offer enough incentive (or deterrent) to companies abroad, but if he does, Mexico will take a huge hit as the U.S. receives 80% of their exports.They include, in addition to oil and cars, flat-screen televisions, mobile phones, computers and airplane components. Total Mexican exports added up to $397.5 billion in 2014 -- 85 percent of them from manufacturing. [11]POSSIBLE REPERCUSSIONS FOR THE U.S.So now onto the more relatable stuff - how has Trump affected the average Mexican, and what does this mean for the U.S.?As you can most likely imagine, Mexicans are not pleased. It’s not fun hearing your country sends rapists and criminals, that you have to pay for a wall, and that you’re stealing jobs from well-deserving people.Trump’s unpopularity (at least where I live) has gotten to the point where I could go buy some street tacos and the next moment find myself listening to criticism and complaints from the vendors regarding Donald Trump.During the campaign I saw images such as this:Being circulated on Facebook, urging Mexicans to boycott Home Depot since the founder Bernie Marcus supports Donald Trump and will be responsible for the construction of the wall.Now that Trump has won the election, I’ve seen Mexicans take it a step further, with messages shared not only on Facebook by the average citizen but also on radios and podcasts by slightly more influential figures, urging citizens to boycott not only Home Depot but all American corporations, such as Starbucks, Walmart, Office Depot and McDonald’s, to send a clear message that they will not support America while Trump is president.Personally I have not seen much unity in these boycotts, since when I went to Walmart at the beginning of this year there were 20 minute lines for every cashier, but more people may get behind these boycotts should Trump follow through with his campaign promises.This wouldn’t really affect the average American citizen living in America, but major American corporations may be forced to pull out of Mexico as a result, weakening their global presence.However, an even more severe possible repercussion for the U.S., I believe, is increased insecurity as a direct result of Mexico’s safety.Remember that photo I posted at the very beginning?That’s one of the many gas stations across various states in Mexico that have been set on fire to protest the nationwide 20% gas price increase as of January 1st.While many peaceful protests occurred nationwide (such as this 360 video shows), there have also been many that have selfishly taken advantage of the public’s discontent, further stirring chaos and using that as an excuse to break into stores and steal goods. This has mainly occurred in locations such as Mexico City, Chiapas, Hidalgo, and Veracruz.Things have finally started settling down, but it was rather hectic at the beginning of this year, with public hysteria and mounting fear that supermarkets in your neighborhood could be targeted next too.Everyday with more news pouring in of more incidents, people around me began to grow increasingly uncomfortable as well. “But there’s no way such a thing would happen in a safe city like Queretaro!” was the common phrase I heard.And then on January 12th it happened. News quickly spread within our company that a nearby supermarket had been raided by a group of armed men, and that simultaneously there was a violent riot going on downtown. This led to a direct order from our president to go straight home with no overtime and to avoid leaving our house. I cancelled dinner plans I had that day - worried, really worried for the first time since moving here about the future of Mexico.The next day government officials of Queretaro announced that the “raids” and “riots” reported the day before were fake news started on Facebook and shared by paranoid people who did not bother to check the source. Yet on the other hand there are people that say they saw it. It’s a frightful feeling when you don’t know who you can trust - the ordinary people, or the state government?Now you might be thinking, “If gas price raises aren’t a direct result of Trump, why are you even mentioning this?”I mentioned it to illustrate a point.To illustrate how quickly things can boil over and get violent and chaotic in a country with a fragile economy, visible corruption on every level, and a high distrust for the government and the president himself.To illustrate how something like a “20% gas price increase” that most likely wouldn’t wreak major havoc in the U.S. can and does cause nationwide disruption in a country where many people only fill their gas tanks 3 dollars at a time because otherwise they cannot afford it; in a country where there is an astonishing gap between the rich and the poor.Meaning, even a decision considered “harmless” can have unforeseen effects.Trump has the power to directly improve or worsen the situation in Mexico, and in the case that the economy goes down the drain as a direct or indirect result of his actions, the turmoil and high unemployment may lead to increased drug trafficking, crime, violence, and illegal immigration.Whether one likes it or not, as long as the U.S. is directly connected to Mexico by land, the U.S. will always face some sort of repercussion from the state that Mexico finds itself in.It doesn’t matter how great or how high of a wall is built - if things really do get bad here; if drug-related crimes do go soaring up once again despite having been on the decline from 2011 [12], Mexicans will find a way to seek refuge illegally in America, running contrary to what Trump wanted to prevent in the first place.CONCLUDING THOUGHTSThat being said, I do see a possibility, albeit small, in which Mexico could ultimately benefit from the Trump presidency.More independence.Based strictly on social media trends, I believe Mexicans can be largely divided into two groups when it comes to Donald Trump:Those that believe that the corrupt government should be blamed for Mexico being so susceptible to TrumpThose that believe that Mexicans themselves should be blamed for Mexico being so susceptible to TrumpThis widely shared image says:Mexico’s problem IS YOU ….Who doesn’t like to read.Who doesn’t like to work.Who lives waiting for Friday.Who only thinks about parties and booze.Who only talks about soccer and soap operas.Who wants everything free from the government.Who thinks you’ll make a change yelling “We want them alive” or “Out with Peña”Who doesn’t study and wants an executive level job with the salary of a politicianMexico is a country with vast beauty, abundant natural resources, and millions of hard-working people.Mexico actually has the potential to become a strong economic power without depending on the U.S. - all that is lacking is the burning urgency, motivation and passion from the majority of the population including top politicians to succeed, something that may be ignited by Trump’s emergence.On the other hand, Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders do address valid concerns when they argue that better deals need to be negotiated to bring back manufacturing jobs to America and revitalize the working class.Last year when I visited Kentucky I saw with my eyes for the first time the situation in certain rural areas of America. Houses were old, streets were deserted. According to locals the younger generation moved to larger cities to get jobs. A significant percentage of operators working the lines were elderly - some have even been working in the same plant for decades since there simply were no other options available. And despite minimum wages considered “high” from an administrative perspective, many of these operators leave their shift only to go home to work on their farm in order to make a decent living.I gave a presentation of our plant in Mexico to a group of supervisors and managers from various departments. Upon finishing I received an unexpected question:“Will you be taking away any of our production lines?”I realized I had been naive to have not even considered the fact that this was a major concern even for people working in the same company.Just because a certain trade agreement has been in place for over 20 years doesn’t necessarily mean it should be left untouched, and Trump for sure is within his right to demand changes as he sees fit for the people of the country he’ll serve.[See: NAFTA: What it is, and why Trump hates it]However, if painstakingly meticulous consideration is not given to any changes to be made in current trade agreements and policies, the results could be disastrous - both for Mexico and the USA.Footnotes:[1] TradingView: Mexican Peso vs. US Dollar (1972 to 2017)[2] CNN Money: Mexican peso plunges to all-time low[3] Japan Financial Times: Mr. Trump criticizes Toyota’s construction of Mexican plant “NO WAY!” [JP][4] Reuters: As Trump targets Toyota over Mexico, Nissan faces bigger risk[5] Automotive News: Mexico auto exports forecast to hit record in 2015[6] Mexico as a New Capital of the Automotive Industries[7] OEC: Mexico (MEX) Exports, Imports, and Trade Partners[8] 2016 Top Markets Report Automotive Parts Country Case Study[9] German Automakers Push Back Trump’s Warning Over Mexican Plants[10] Inquisitr: Trump Is Going To Regret His Oreo Boycott Once He Hears About These Brand New Oreo Flavors[11] Bloomberg: Cars Drive Mexico Economy as Companies Invest $20 Billion[12] Mexico Peace Index 2016 [SP]Footnotes[1] Mexican Peso | 1972-2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast | News[2] Mexican peso plunges to all-time low [3] トランプ氏、トヨタのメキシコ工場建設を批判　「ありえない」[4] As Trump targets Toyota over Mexico, Nissan faces bigger risk[5] Mexico auto exports forecast to hit record in 2015[6] Mexico as a New Capital of the Automotive Industries - Thomson Reuters Tax & Accounting[7] Mexico as a New Capital of the Automotive Industries - Thomson Reuters Tax & Accounting[8] http://trade.gov/topmarkets/pdf/Autoparts_Mexico.pdf[9] German Automakers Push Back Trump’s Warning Over Mexican Plants[10] Trump Is Going To Regret His Oreo Boycott Once He Hears About These Brand New Oreo Flavors[11] Cars Drive Mexico Economy as Companies Invest $20 Billion[12] http://economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/%C3%8Dndice-de-Paz-M%C3%A9xico-2016_ES.pdf