Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here was the misleading part "Boarder Patrol Sheriff in Texas who supports Trump that doesn't want or need the wall. He wan'ts the technology and more border patrol's". It makes it appear that he doesn't want a wall anywhere.
All I am saying is that the technology that was used a few years back failed and it was scrapped. Only boots on the ground and an actual barrier will stop illegal entry. There needs to be a combination of both.
The point is that with a good physical barrier fewer will try and fewer will succeed. I'm not understanding what you mean by the human traffickers will love the wall and make a fortune from it.
This topic is about the wall to deter new illegal entrants not those already here. However, we can remove all of the incentives for them to remain here and many will self-deport or get caught and deported.
I'm not understanding your last paragraph either.
"There needs to be a combination of both." That statement was all I was trying to get you to agree too.
"the human traffickers will love the wall and make a fortune from it" The traffickers will charge more to get them into the US by air or ocean.
"This topic is about the wall to deter new illegal entrants not those already here. However, we can remove all of the incentives for them to remain here and many will self-deport or get caught and deported." Didn't you see the 100's of illegals tunneling under the wall and willingly got arrested?
They will never stop coming until there is no reason to leave their homeland. Until Trump and his like stop hiring them.
You mock CNN as Fake News and you post a NYT article from 2011.
Technology has come a long way since then.
The video and the article from CNN were both misleading and two of us in here explained why. I never said anything about Fake News. 2006 was when technology was introduced on the border and it's just a fact that it didn't work regardless of the source. As I mentioned to another poster technology does not negate our need for a good physical barrier on the border either. Did you read the article from Homeland Security that I provided?
"There needs to be a combination of both." That statement was all I was trying to get you to agree too.
"the human traffickers will love the wall and make a fortune from it" The traffickers will charge more to get them into the US by air or ocean.
"This topic is about the wall to deter new illegal entrants not those already here. However, we can remove all of the incentives for them to remain here and many will self-deport or get caught and deported." Didn't you see the 100's of illegals tunneling under the wall and willingly got arrested?
They will never stop coming until there is no reason to leave their homeland. Until Trump and his like stop hiring them.
I've never had a problem with more Border Patrol it's just that they need the physical barriers to do their jobs more effectively and to protect themselves. However, it appears to me that you oppose a wall/barrier, period.
We guard our air space and waterways. You have to have a visa to come those ways. Let the human traffickers charge more. Fewer will be able to afford it so another good reason to build the wall. The walls that were tunneled under weren't the good barriers they were the old ones that were breacheable and that Trump wants to correct. They didn't tunnel successfully as they were caught so not getting your point here. Have you ever heard of tunnel sensors?
You're right, we can't stop illegal immigration 100% but should that be a realistic goal anyway? Deterring 80-90% isn't good enough? Even our homes have doors, locks, walls, etc. Should we just tear them all down because there might be a one or two, etc. that just might be able to breach them? That makes no sense at all.
There is no proof that Trump "knowingly" had any illegals working for him. Rich people don't hire manual laborers themselves those under them do. You want to trust them but with many managers below them there is a likelihood that they aren't all honest. And finally not all illegals are coming here to work. Certainly criminals, drug runners and those from known terrorist countries aren't looking for work, thus the wall.
I've never had a problem with more Border Patrol it's just that they need the physical barriers to do their jobs more effectively and to protect themselves. However, it appears to me that you oppose a wall/barrier, period.
We guard our air space and waterways. You have to have a visa to come those ways. Let the human traffickers charge more. Fewer will be able to afford it so another good reason to build the wall. The walls that were tunneled under weren't the good barriers they were the old ones that were breacheable and that Trump wants to correct. They didn't tunnel successfully as they were caught so not getting your point here. Have you ever heard of tunnel sensors?
You're right, we can't stop illegal immigration 100% but should that be a realistic goal anyway? Deterring 80-90% isn't good enough? Even our homes have doors, locks, walls, etc. Should we just tear them all down because there might be a one or two, etc. that just might be able to breach them? That makes no sense at all.
There is no proof that Trump "knowingly" had any illegals working for him. Rich people don't hire manual laborers themselves those under them do. You want to trust them but with many managers below them there is a likelihood that they aren't all honest. And finally not all illegals are coming here to work. Certainly criminals, drug runners and those from known terrorist countries aren't looking for work, thus the wall.
I'm not against the wall. I think we should put more emphasis in technology, border patrols and enforce the immigration laws in place to deal with the ones that are already here.
Even our homes have doors, locks, walls, etc. Should we just tear them all down because there might be a one or two, etc. that just might be able to breach them? That makes no sense at all.
Poor analogy. Homes are (1) already built, and (2) paid for primarily with private funds. Nobody is suggesting that we should tear down structures that are already built. We’re saying that we don’t want to throw billions of tax dollars at a partial border wall, particularly when there is no real plan or cost estimate. The wall is like Trump’s Taj Mahal, and I predict a similar fate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory
There is no proof that Trump "knowingly" had any illegals working for him. Rich people don't hire manual laborers themselves those under them do. You want to trust them but with many managers below them there is a likelihood that they aren't all honest. And finally not all illegals are coming here to work. Certainly criminals, drug runners and those from known terrorist countries aren't looking for work, thus the wall.
This is a double-edged sword. If Trump is going to take credit for the successes of his companies (the ones that didn’t go bankrupt), then he has to accept accountability for the details. If he’s not aware of his own operations, then what exactly is he contributing to their success? Signing papers and mugging for cameras?
I got paid a fair wage for the work I did. That is legal and fair. No greed involved.
Employers who hire illegals, and underpay them, and in the process not paying taxes due, are doing so illegally. They are taking advantage of the lax enforcement to increase their profits. That is greed.
So, you think breaking the law and turning the US into a third world nation is the only way to do business?
"So, you think"
You DON'T KNOW what I think so stop with the mind reading and attempting to distort what I say on things about me you know nothing about!
The wall/fence in el paso reduced illegal immigration here by 95 percent.
Drones, and high tech sensors only alert you AFTER they have already gotten in.
If someone is legitimately seekung asylum, they can apply at any US embassy in their own country, or even in one in mexico. The fact is, they are not actually seeking asylum. They are counting on getting into the country and being released to await a court date. Then they disappear. Over 80 percent do not show up for court.
"Drones, and high tech sensors only alert you AFTER they have already gotten in."
When your boat springs leak, the FIRST thing you is NOT start bailing BUT PLUG THE LEAK THEN BAIL!
I'm not against the wall. I think we should put more emphasis in technology, border patrols and enforce the immigration laws in place to deal with the ones that are already here.
We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I think there should be more emphasis on good barriers than technology that doesn't actually stop illegal entry but detect those who are trying to enter. More Border Patrol costs more than a barrier because they have to be paid a wage and benefits. I think a good barrier would eliminate the need for a lot more Border Patrol agents. Not only have I provided several links proving that the good barriers have been very effective but one from Homeland Security itself. I think they know best what is needed.
The best way to control illegal entry is with good physical barriers. That's already proven to work and the Border Patrol and Homeland Security want them where they are feasible. Who knows better than them? Funny, how the Democrats were all for it back in 2006 but now they are balking at it? Hmm.
No one is being whipped into a rage or frenzy just because they want border security that works, not methods that don't. It's not fear mongering to want that either.
There is no evidence that Trump "knowingly" had any illegals working on his properties. Rich people do not hire manual laborers themselves so it makes no sense to make accusations without any proof.
There have been some employers caught "knowingly" having illegals working for them under Trump and they have paid the price. Trump has reinstated the work place raids that were discontinued under Obama. Trump has e-verify in his 2019 budget so it's not true that no one wants the employers held accountable or that there is no attempt to do so.
The American Dream is open to over 1 million legal immigrants a year. It's just that we cannot allow in everyone in the world that wants that dream. It would negatively impact our own citizens, their jobs and resources. It would be committing national suicide with that much population growth. It's just common sense.
There is no discrimination in our legal immigration numbers except for those from known terrorists countries and those who have no skills or education that would end up being a burden to our country rather than a benefit. Again, it's just common sense.
As for asylum seekers most have bogus claims and you can't come here just because you are escaping violence or poverty. Persecution based on one's gender, race, religious or political beliefs are the only lawful reasons to claim asylum. You can't pass through several safe countries and just pick the USA as your destination either. We need different rules to claim asylum other than just showing up at our border and demanding it. We already have a backlog of several hundred thousand asylum cases to hear and we have no more room to house and feed any more demanding asylum or assigning them a court date while they disappear into our country never to be seen again as that doesn't work either.
I couldn't Rep you again but STOP making so much sense!
What you write should be basic common sense and what is really scary for the future of America is that the Dems just don't get it and they won't until it is too late.
Trump is trying to prevent a problem before it gets out of hand while the Dems are content to play politics and they will deal with the problem later by throwing our tax dollars at it. What happens when the welfare dries up and America goes bankrupt? We are almost there now with our debt load and the answer is not to let in more poor people.
I don't think the Dems will be happy until our high standard of living which is like an embarrassment to them is reduced to resemble what the recent crop of "asylum" seekers are fleeing.
Agreed, but separating little children from their parents is a really bad idea. It just creates people who have mental issues when they grow up. And if they end up staying in the US, we will be the ones paying for their mental issues. Wise up!
It is a really bad situation, most of us agree but it is the fault of the parents who try to bring the kids over the border, not the fault of the border patrol or our country in any way and remember a large number of these kids are sent here without their parents or they are kids that are older and know exactly what is happening. They are being trafficted (spelling) by the cartel.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
