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.
You haven't seen all the photos posted in here showing illegal aliens climbing over the breachable fences? If what we have is 90% effective then why do we still have 18.000 illegals a month pouring over our border and that's only those who have been apprehended. Give up your lies!
Let me guess!
Because they go around the earlier, shorter, flimsy fences that Obama put up? Because they cross at unprotected areas of the border with no fences or only a shallow river?
Are mayors of El Paso and San Diego that are protected with the newer barriers and who like them and say they are effective lying? Was Jim Accosted lying when he stood at the steel barrier and said he didn't see any illegals?
The engineers will come up with the best barriers and the Dems won't be able to argue with them because the public are educated and engaged with the process. They want to know the best solution, not a political argument.
I saw this video played on Fox and Friends the other day. Night-vision video surveillance cameras detected a large number of people climbing over a border wall in Arizona. All were promptly arrested. The Trump-loving show hosts stated that the wall slowed the migrants down, thus "walls work". Talk about spin! What the video clearly shows is that the wall did not stop these people from crossing the border. What did stop them was video surveillance. If we spent $5 billion on advanced monitoring technologies I'm sure we would stop more migrants than a wall costing $25 billion. But what really got me was how Faux News tried to spin the story to support the conclusion they favor.
I would say you are the one spinning. If the wall was not there it would have been much easier for the illegals to cross. The wall slowed them down enough for the BP to respond. I live 13 miles as the crow flies up the beach from International Friendship Park where hundreds of illegals tried to cross the border a month ago. No drone or video camera was going to stop them from entering the U.S. illegally, the wall did.
The Democrap leadership knows the walls work and would greatly reduce the illegals who they believe are potential democrap voters. They tell their base the walls don’t work because they know their base are just NPCs. No sane democrap would support the walls because they work.
Do walls work 100%? No sane person believes that; however, a well designed wall will work in most of the cases. So instead of millions illegals, we would have a few thousand to deal with each year.
Because they go around the earlier, shorter, flimsy fences that Obama put up? Because they cross at unprotected areas of the border with no fences or only a shallow river?
Are mayors of El Paso and San Diego that are protected with the newer barriers and who like them and say they are effective lying? Was Jim Accosted lying when he stood at the steel barrier and said he didn't see any illegals?
The engineers will come up with the best barriers and the Dems won't be able to argue with them because the public are educated and engaged with the process. They want to know the best solution, not a political argument.
Exactly, the 18,000 that are managing to breach our border every month aren't getting through the good barriers but the flimsy fencing instead. The Dems today will still argue that walls don't work no matter how many facts you throw at them. They sure changed their tune from 2006, didn't they?
Night-vision video surveillance cameras detected a large number of people climbing over a border wall in Arizona. All were promptly arrested.
The Trump-loving show hosts stated that the wall slowed the migrants down, thus "walls work". Talk about spin!
What the video clearly shows is that the wall did not stop these people from crossing the border. What did stop them was video surveillance. If we spent $5 billion on advanced monitoring technologies I'm sure we would stop more migrants than a wall costing $25 billion. But what really got me was how Faux News tried to spin the story to support the conclusion they favor.
Walls. coupled with security staff are the solution. Just check out how well this combination works for the wealthy throughout the world - from Beverly Hills, California to London England!
Walls. coupled with security staff are the solution. Just check out how well this combination works for the wealthy throughout the world - from Beverly Hills, California to London England!
Not only that but I'm sure those on the video that was reference here were breaching the less effective barriers aka plain ole fencing. A little honesty would be nice here but I won't hold my breath. We tried high tech stuff years ago and it failed so it was scrapped. Better to have good barriers to stop them in the first place than have to apprehend them after they get in here. Lefty liberals lack common sense though.
This at least is a logical plan, unlike the sea-sea physical barrier proponents.
Your justification though is another straw-man. Most people want border security, across the entire political spectrum. It's just that most people don't view it as a crisis or the most urgent issue of the day.
I never gave it much though myself until illegals nearly killed 4 members of my family....it DOES change your perspective!
The facts are, you are wrong. I want strong enforcement of e-verify, up to and including prison. I'm not interested in the wall.
Why do you want strong enforcement of e-verify? And why are you not interested in the wall? Does everyone on "your side" feel the same way? Why not?
My point is, the arguments in favor of the wall, or against the wall, aren't about the efficacy of the wall itself. They are related to how you feel about immigration.
If your main complaint is about e-verify, we an conclude that you are largely indifferent about immigration itself, but you are annoyed that businesses are exploiting cheap immigrant-labor.
Would e-verify actually stop illegal-immigration? Would it even make a dent in illegal-immigration? Much of the country already uses e-verify. In Georgia, nearly all employees are run through the system. But trust me, e-verify has done almost nothing about illegal-immigration there.
As I said, should we have more immigration, less immigration, or no immigration? That is the only real question, and all the ramblings about walls, e-verify, border-security, or whatever, are merely a reflection of how you feel about immigration.
Arguing facts is a waste of time, because no one is actually listening. They are just spewing their stupidity all over the internet.
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.
Give up your lies!
We tried high tech stuff years ago and it failed so it was scrapped. Better to have good barriers to stop them in the first place than have to apprehend them after they get in here. Lefty liberals lack common sense though.