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.
Who said "all" drugs come through legal ports of entry?
No one.
However, the majority of drugs come into this country through legal points of entry, including through those many thousands of miles from the southern border.
Might want to take the blinders off and deal with that particular reality.
"TUCSON — As President Donald Trump pushes Congress to set aside more money to build additional barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border, he frequently, and falsely, claims that his promised wall would help stem the flow of illegal narcotics into the country.
But data from his own administration repeatedly show that a rising number of smuggled drugs, especially more potent ones like heroin and cocaine, are increasingly seized at legal ports of entry, which are not impacted by a wall."
"Generally, the DEA says, fentanyl is shipped to the U.S. in packages directly from China or from China through Canada. Fentanyl is also smuggled across the southern border’s ports of entry."
"Transnational criminal organizations “generally route larger drug shipments destined for the Northeast through the Bahamas and/or South Florida by using a variety of maritime conveyance methods, to include speedboats, fishing vessels, sailboats, yachts, and containerized sea cargo,” the reports reads. “In some cases, Dominican Republic-based traffickers will also transport cocaine into Haiti for subsequent shipment to the United States via the Bahamas and/or South Florida corridor using maritime and air transport.”
... The DEA report does not address the wall but details how drugs enter the country, and many of the examples illustrate that it is not through land routes. “According to DEA reporting, the majority of the heroin available in New Jersey originates in Colombia and is primarily smuggled into the United States by Colombian and Dominican groups via human couriers on commercial flights to the Newark International Airport,” the document states."
""[Now] well over 95% of the drugs are moving on the water via container ships, non-commercial vessels, pleasure boats, sail boats, fishing boats. They also have fast boats which try to outrun our law enforcement assets.
"We've seen growing use of self-propelled semi-submersibles (SPSSs) - low-profile vessels made out of marine-grade plywood [and] fibreglass with commercial engines. The smugglers spend up to a $1m (£665,000) to build one of these SPSSs for what is often just a one-way voyage."
...
"The cartels are always looking for a guaranteed way to cross narcotics into the US, and a sophisticated tunnel can allow them to cross large-scale loads. Last month we interdicted a tunnel in San Diego and seized more than 10 tonnes of marijuana.
"Compare that to sending four guys across with 30 pounds of marijuana on their backs, who have to navigate the mountains, evade Border Patrols and arrange delivery, and you can see the difference in profit."
Sure there are still poor people forced into being low level drug mules, but these highly sophisticated organizations are way past risking millions of dollars in goods on individuals more likely to die alone in the desert than to make it across the border successfully.
Time to accept that we are now in the 21st century.
This is part of the reason why it's hard to take the Emergency! Wall! Need! as the main focus right now seriously.
-Most drugs come through legal ports, airplanes, etc.
-Majority these days coming in are a result of visa overstays
-It will not do anything about those already here, except perhaps make it harder for them to leave.
-and so on.
Instead of trying to truly tackle any of the aforementioned first, they're honed in on a costly solution to only a minor part of the problem.
Trump said what he said and I provided you with a reliable source, and there are others out there if you don't like NBC news. But why do you want to carry water for Trump and try to twist this in order to make it sound like he said or meant something else?
If Trump is not basing his request for money on a prototype, what is he basing it on? How many presidents have everbeen handed billions of dollars to spend on something that they actually didn't even know what they wanted or what it would cost? How exactly does that work, does he get 5 billion and come back next week and say "oh I didn't reallyknow how much this would cost, give me another 5 billion"
It's as if Trumpies never had a torch.....they are dirt cheap and effective against any steel. A plasma cutter can be as low as $300. When Dump gave up on the Concrete and Glass/Solar he pretty much accepted that it will do nothing.
Of course, there is a reason that he doesn't point out to his "base" in FL and TX that those states should do e-verify tomorrow. That wouldn't look good.
And to think.....that Coyotes who make 40K for a "batch" aren't going to have basic equipment and much more??? - Heck, a crane or a lift can put a LOT of people over quickly. AND, any proposals for "fencing or steel slats" have timelines of a decade or more...to get PART of the job done.
Crazy talk. Remember, once they cross they can ask for asylum. So if they don't stay out you've already lost.
None of this seems to even slightly concern wall types.
You just don't deal in reality at all. A plasma cutter also requires a generator to power it. The common illegal alien attempting to violate our border doesn't have $300 to spend on a plasma cutter nor $700 for the generator to power it. Maybe you think they'll get the mini micro backpack version, eh?
Please entertain us with more of your crazy talk....
This article is from 2017...so those stating that trumps want the entire border walled off is listening to what they want to listen to, the lame stream media:
Quote:
In July, President Trump told reporters, "It’s a 2,000-mile border, but you don’t need 2,000 miles of wall because you have a lot of natural barriers.” News outlets reported that as if they were hearing it for the first time.
“President Donald Trump doesn't see the need for a proposed border wall to stretch the length of the roughly 2,000-mile frontier with Mexico,” the Associated Press reported.
“Trump says wall may not need to cover entire U.S. Mexico border,” echoed Reuters.
“No need for a full border wall, Trump says,” wrote the Los Angeles Times.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee
Hey, I'm all for e-verify....it's not mandatory though.......why did the previous president's make it mandatory?
WHY doesn't the current POTUS make it mandatory? It should certainly be easier to accomplish than a wall and all it would entail like eminent domain battles. And may prove more cost effective as well.
Yes, as soon as Obama became president there were suddenly vast areas along the border where is was not feasible. I wonder why.
It is to the discretion of the head of DHS apparently she feels more is needed. Btw, it was supposed to be a double fence.
Here is the history of that to address your concern:
Congress acknowledged that additional physical barriers are not necessary.
Quote:
-The Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Pub.L. 109-367), a law that passed with bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, required the construction of about 850 miles of double-layer fencing along five segments of the border.
-A few years after passage, Congress recognized that 850 miles of additional border fencing was not feasible or necessary. In 2008, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 amended the 2006 law to reduce the required mileage of reinforced fencing to “not less than 700 miles of the southwest border where fencing would be most practical and effective . . . .” In addition, DHS is not required to install fencing “in a particular location along the international border of the United States if the Secretary determines that the use or placement of such resources is not the most appropriate means to achieve and maintain operational control over the international border at such location.”
=Even Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), a long-time opponent of immigration reform, said in early January 2017, “We’ve already appropriated money for walls. We’ve got walls right now.”
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by stiffnecked
You just don't deal in reality at all. A plasma cutter also requires a generator to power it. The common illegal alien attempting to violate our border doesn't have $300 to spend on a plasma cutter nor $700 for the generator to power it. Maybe you think they'll get the mini micro backpack version, eh?
Please entertain us with more of your crazy talk....
Do you? A few sticks of dynamite are easily carried in a backpack.
Trump said what he said and I provided you with a reliable source, and there are others out there if you don't like NBC news. But why do you want to carry water for Trump and try to twist this in order to make it sound like he said or meant something else?
And I'm saying that from your own "reliable source" that these prototypes are nothing like the original prototypes.....
And your reliable source even says it was a design from the last administration? You did read that, yes? Because it was built during trumps administration, does not it was his design.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy
If Trump is not basing his request for money on a prototype, what is he basing it on? How many presidents have ever been handed billions of dollars to spend on something that they actually didn't even know what they wanted or what it would cost? How exactly does that work, does he get 5 billion and come back next week and say "oh I didn't really know how much this would cost, give me another 5 billion"
How much money did president Obama give solyndra? It was not billions but a lot of money that he did not even know what he was getting or how much it would cost...and here they are, bankrupt....along with 4 other companies...
“When during the campaign, I would say 'Mexico is going to pay for it.' Obviously, I never said this and I never meant they are going to write out a check,” Trump said.
"When during the campaign, I would say 'Mexico is going to pay for it,' obviously, I never said this, and I never meant they're gonna write out a check, I said they're going to pay for it. They are," he said as he prepared to depart the White House for the southern border.
What a bold faced lie he promised his 'base' as he ginned up support for his campaign.
Allow me provide another perspective to your argument.
Who in they're right mind would put forth the narrative that gun control laws have to be 100% effective in order to be worthwhile?
Only mindless idiots with a pre-existing bias against gun control measures would be so stupid.
And the AR-15 used in that shooting or a bump stock... neither of which are exactly"common firearms."
Sorry but the AR-15 is very much a common firearm.
And there is no Constructional right for a citizen of another country to cross the border illegaly.
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.
