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.
The wall is a waste of money IMHO. Too much cost, and absolutely no guarantee it will keep the illegals away. You can impose penalties to those who take in illegals (rent, work, etc), but if those dealings are off the books and by cash, who is going to find them (unless somebody blows the whistle).
There is no simple solution. What sanctions can be imposed to Mexico to have them pay their "fair share" of the cost to the U.S. economy from illegals? Should the U.S. strengthen incentives for foreigners to move/work here, maybe trying to play the theory of marijuana that by having it legal the black market will shrink because there will be less demand for it?
Would it be cheaper in the long run to have 24/7 flyover border patrol in helicopters (obviously with high technology ie> nightvision, heat sensors, etc)? Maybe one copter per "x" miles back and forth, 3 shifts per day?
Sure the wall seems like the best blockade on the surface, but I'm not buying into the cost/benefit.
I think the objection you mention -- the cost/benefit ratio -- is what many people (including me) question.
Not true, and yes, my suggestions were somewhat tongue in cheek, but the majority of illegals are neither overstays or asylum seekers. I don't call 10 million a 'tiny number' either. So, what do you have against a wall?
That is of course true of those who are already here. So obviously you must believe the wall is being built to keep the illegal aliens in?
However for those who are now coming in the vast majority are over stayers. And lots of the remainder are asylum seekers.
I wish to have the immigration system brought to the point at which all illegal aliens are gone within months of becoming illegal. That means we need to legalize most of the present illegal aliens and deport the remainder.
Sillinss Tucson and Phoenix are well removed from the border.
Huachuca is closer but is spooks not regular military.
Border guarding is not a reasonable military mission. End up with bad soldiers and bad border guards.[/quote]
and you know that how?
Standard discussion of the role of the military versus the role of the border guard. Lots of discussions if you want to wade into it. Military are trained to destroy threats. Border guards are cops enforcing laws. If you wish to use the military on the border you end up having to retrain them as police officers. They will then no longer behave as soldiers. And at that point they can no longer be sent to do military things around the world.
You might want to look up Enrique Hernandez.
Note that hiring border guards has been very difficult for decades such that the Border Patrol has difficulty even maintaining its existing strength any more growing.
That is of course true of those who are already here. So obviously you must believe the wall is being built to keep the illegal aliens in?
However for those who are now coming in the vast majority are over stayers. And lots of the remainder are asylum seekers.
I wish to have the immigration system brought to the point at which all illegal aliens are gone within months of becoming illegal. That means we need to legalize most of the present illegal aliens and deport the remainder.
No, that is not 'obviously' what I believe. A properly built wall will keep a majority of the interlopers OUT. We can deal with the rest as we encounter them either at ports of entry or in the interior. And, for the record, I do think we should try to do something with the people who have been here for 25 years, etc. I don't like the idea of 'legalizing' them, because then we have rewarded the lawless behavior. However, we cannot in all likelihood deport 8-10 million people so Congress needs to get off its collective DUFF and come up with something, because this is not the President's purview. It is theirs. Immigration LAW. The president does not make LAW.
Standard discussion of the role of the military versus the role of the border guard. Lots of discussions if you want to wade into it. Military are trained to destroy threats. Border guards are cops enforcing laws. If you wish to use the military on the border you end up having to retrain them as police officers. They will then no longer behave as soldiers. And at that point they can no longer be sent to do military things around the world.
You might want to look up Enrique Hernandez.
Note that hiring border guards has been very difficult for decades such that the Border Patrol has difficulty even maintaining its existing strength any more growing.
I saw that name somewhere very recently and will check that out. I guess this makes a certain amount of sense. Soldiers will lose their 'edge' and just want to sit around and drink coffee and eat donuts! just kidding. My husband is a retired cop and he said in 20 years, both times he actually went somewhere to get a coffee (no donuts for him) an emergency call came out and he never even got the Joe.
No, that is not 'obviously' what I believe. A properly built wall will keep a majority of the interlopers OUT. We can deal with the rest as we encounter them either at ports of entry or in the interior. And, for the record, I do think we should try to do something with the people who have been here for 25 years, etc. I don't like the idea of 'legalizing' them, because then we have rewarded the lawless behavior. However, we cannot in all likelihood deport 8-10 million people so Congress needs to get off its collective DUFF and come up with something, because this is not the President's purview. It is theirs. Immigration LAW. The president does not make LAW.
Again at this time and in recent years the majority of the new illegal aliens are over stayers. Fact of life. So the wall cannot affect the majority of the new arrivals.
It matters not what you call it. You simply need to deal with the 11 million and, as you agree, there is no way to deport them. I prefer legalization to prevent it from becoming a citizenship issue. Eventually many will end up citizens...but it can be 15 years from now.
It's not a crisis. That's the real issue here. I lived and worked in viewing distance of the nation's busiest border crossing, never once was myself or anyone I knew ever in danger as a result of that border proximity. The funny thing is that the further you get from a border, the more gung-ho people get about building a wall. People in Iowa and Kentucky and West Virginia love to get on board the "build the wall" statements, but the majority of those on the border simply do not see the need because the most likely crossing points ALREADY HAVE HEAVILY SECURED BORDERS!!!!!
Ever try to cross back to the US from Tijuana? It takes hours, and that's as a WHITE AMERICAN CITIZEN...imagine how hard it is when you're brown and don't speak English.
San Diego has one of the lowest crime rates in the country (America's 11 most dangerous cities, all are very far from borders, closest one in the top 11 is about 500 miles from Mexico...while the 11 safest contain several cities less than 2 hours drive from the border, including Chula Vista and El Paso, both cities that sit right on Mexico) and yet less than half of the city supports a border wall. Even 22% of San Diego Republicans do not support a border wall.
WHY WOULD 22% OF REPUBLICANS IN AMERICA'S MOST POPULATED BORDER WITH MEXICO BE AGAINST A BORDER WALL???
That's the real question here. If a border wall is so necessary and it's clearly a partisan issue, how come the support isn't more universal in the city where you'd expect people to be most concerned about an issue that clearly matters to Republicans in places without Mexican people?
In the future please refrain from dragging facts and personal experience into the debate. Restrict yourself to the use of scare tactics, emotional hyperbole, and a sneer and a condescending attitude toward those who disagree with you.
I would say that since there are 11 million plus illegal aliens in our country most of whom have crossed our border illegally that indeed that is a crisis. You would be wrong about there being a heavily secured border along the most porous areas. In 2006 congress passed the Secure Fence Act and that was to build the double wall along those areas because most of it was merely flimsy fencing. Only a few short miles were built and in those areas it cut back illegal immigration dramatically. Trump is seeking financing for the balance of that 700 miles.
San Diego is one of the places where those good walls have been built so it's not surprising if it has a lower crime rate. The same thing applies to those other areas you mentioned. Well if 22% of San Diego residents do not support the wall then that means that 78% do! Those who don't want the wall whom are mostly Democrats by the way want the flow of illegals to continue based on their own personal agendas. I'm sure many of the residents in border towns have relatives here illegally already or are sympathizers to them. Not too surprising. However, no links were provided proving who approves of it and who doesn't anyway.
Not sure what you are implying about the Republicans as most mainstream Republicans do want the wall and our southern border with Mexico is where most illegals are getting through. This is not a race or skin issue it's a law issue and it's not just about increased crime rates it's the other negative factors that illegal immigration brings to mainstream Americans. I am a Republican and I don't live that far from the border and I know the good walls work. If we had a border with China or any other country and it was mostly the Chinese, etc. coming here illegally I would still feel the same way. The race card doesn't work anymore.
Here's a link for you. Illegal aliens are still crashing our southern border so yes we do need the wall.
Anybody who uses the term race card loses a certain degree of credibility with me. Racism has been a dominant theme of our history and is still going strong today. the use of the term race card is often intended to poo poo that fact. You may not believe they way you do about the wall due to racist reasons...and there are plenty of very valid non racist reasons to support the wall...but lets not pretend for one moment that racism doesn't underlie a lot of the anti-immigrant sentiment in this country as well asa lot of the support for the wall. People who point this out aren't playing the mythical race card.
Standard discussion of the role of the military versus the role of the border guard. Lots of discussions if you want to wade into it. Military are trained to destroy threats. Border guards are cops enforcing laws. If you wish to use the military on the border you end up having to retrain them as police officers. They will then no longer behave as soldiers. And at that point they can no longer be sent to do military things around the world.
You might want to look up Enrique Hernandez.
Note that hiring border guards has been very difficult for decades such that the Border Patrol has difficulty even maintaining its existing strength any more growing.
Yes, I even think some of our issues with police stem from the ties between them and the military growing too strong...too much of an over reliance on hiring ex-military, acquisition of military equipment, etc.
Of course here in Ohio we had one of the classic instances of over reliance on the military for law enforcement purposes...the firing on a crowd of studentsby our National Guard at Kent State in 1970 killing four students, none of whom were involved in the protests. There were at least two other similar incidents at other college campuses around the country that troops had been sent into during that time period.
Ohio is one of the most populous states in the country, and Kent is in the most populous quadrant of the state. We had plenty of extra cops in the state and region that could have been sent to Kent State to deal with the college kids in lieu of sending in the troops.
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.
just kidding. My husband is a retired cop and he said in 20 years, both times he actually went somewhere to get a coffee (no donuts for him) an emergency call came out and he never even got the Joe.
