A border discussion outside PARF?

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

...1) Get the border sealed now, no more "we'll do it later": I don't care how, btw, more boots on the ground, fences in high crossing areas, no catch and release, etc....

Without real immigration reform it makes the problem worse.

The spike in resident illegal aliens happened right after Ronnie got tough on the border without addressing all of the challenge.

Used to be a time that seasonal workers came over the border, picked the crops, then went back home.

When it became more difficult for them to get here they stopped going home.

Then they started bringing their families across.

Then we got anchor babies.

Then they needed something to do outside of harvest season so they got into landscaping and construction.

They set down roots.

Call it Cobra Effect, policy surprises, whatever we want but it's the result of linear thought without regard for reaction to initiatives.

This is why I'm against the wall.

I don't see that anyone has thought past "build it" or has considered the potential unintended consequences.

[Tervuren]

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

This is part of the problem with the wall.

Unless resources to deal with detected breaches are close by it'd be ineffective.

This makes the eminent domain issue a bigger deal because you still need to supply those camps with infrastructure for the agents to monitor / operate from and to live during their shifts.

You're going to need to build roads, deal with water / sewage, power, trash, refueling depots, maintenance sheds for vehicles, communications.

It's all doable but not as trivial as simply building a wall.

I really do not understand how anti-wall proponents try to make it seem like pro-wall proponents are in a build a wall and leave it category.

The wall is used as a force multiplier for your border patrol.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

Used to be a time that seasonal workers came over the border, picked the crops, then went back home.

When it became more difficult for them to get here they stopped going home.

A lot has changed in this regard. I did a lot of commercial US flying in Washington State and the large growers there have to recruit workers...drive them up in air conditioned buses, house them properly, etc.

It was a real eye-opener.

The reason why they were interested in UAS was because labor, once a small part of their value equation, is now a large part.

This is all good news for the workers. I learned a lot over two summers.

On one large farm I met the Chief Technology Officer and the Head Grower in one of six new dormitories they had built to house the workers.

[rfuerst911sc]

Originally Posted by URY914

Hiring more border agents sounds easy but it's not. Who in their right mind wants to go down in the middle of nowhere and patrol the border? Any cops in your local department want to move to a **** hole town in the middle of nowhere and raise their family? Ride around all day in jeep looking for people?

Paul you make a valid point but I find it hard to believe that a pool of candidates couldn't quickly be assembled via retired military and police . They have a knowledge base right out of the gate . A mix of older/wiser/retired training some younger folks would work .

I think part of this is coming up with the right number of people ..... do we need 250 or 500 or 2000 ? I think current border patrol officers would be the ones to ask they know roughly what is needed based on real world experience . Patrolling and monitoring the border can be solved.

[cstreit]

Originally Posted by flatbutt

Maybe we should dig a new ditch along the border instead of a wall.

So... A moat?

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by Tervuren

I really do not understand how anti-wall proponents try to make it seem like pro-wall proponents are in a build a wall and leave it category.

The wall is used as a force multiplier for your border patrol.

Because I have not heard any proponents address those issues.

Every wall proponent I speak to about it personally seems to glass over when you bring those things up.

And a force multiplier? How about getting the force in place and see where and how and even if it needs the multiplier. Because without the force, the multiplier is ineffective.

[Racerbvd]

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

Because I have not heard any proponents address those issues.

Every wall proponent I speak to about it personally seems to glass over when you bring those things up.

And a force multiplier? How about getting the force in place and see where and how and even if it needs the multiplier. Because without the force, the multiplier is ineffective.

Easy, you do away with the anchor baby BS, you punish the businesses that hire and enable them, you punish those that aid them and no more catch and release. One you start enforcing the laws already on the books, round em up and microchip them so they show up if they try and sneak back in. Don't tie the hands of the officers, let them protect themselves and America from this invasion.

[rfuerst911sc]

Originally Posted by 996AE

So why does the border patrol boots on the ground agents ask for more wall? Clearly stats support DHS request.

Please tell us why you "feel" the walls dont help? Clearly feelings outweigh the facts from DHS and ICE in your mind.

Where did I state a wall won't help ? I stated I didn't think it was needed based on my boots on the ground statement . I also stated law suit and imminent domain would hold the build up for a long time . Boots on the ground could happen immediately if the desire to do so was a priority .

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by Racerbvd

Easy, you do away with the anchor baby BS,

That one is a non starter. Virtually no one on either side has the appetite for that **** storm.

Originally Posted by Racerbvd

you punish the businesses that hire and enable them,

This I agree with. Seems pretty simple. So why does it not happen? Follow the money I would assume?

Originally Posted by Racerbvd

.... round em up and microchip them so they show up if they try and sneak back in.

Pretty sure forced micro chipping would be considered assault and certainly be challenged. At least a half dozen states have already outlawed forced chipping going back more than a decade.

Besides, if it can be placed, it can be removed. So what have you accomplished besides wasting money for no gain and creating a cottage industry of microchip removal shops in Tijuana.

That last part would be the unintended consequences of not thinking it through.

Oh, and what'd any of that have to do with walls as force multipliers for as yet non existent forces?

[group911@aol.co]

Raise your hand if you actually read the attached article this discussion was supposed to be about.

[Racerbvd]

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

That one is a non starter. Virtually no one on either side has the appetite for that **** storm.




This I agree with. Seems pretty simple. So why does it not happen? Follow the money I would assume?



Pretty sure forced micro chipping would be considered assault and certainly be challenged. At least a half dozen states have already outlawed forced chipping going back more than a decade.

Besides, if it can be placed, it can be removed. So what have you accomplished besides wasting money for no gain and creating a cottage industry of microchip removal shops in Tijuana.

That last part would be the unintended consequences of not thinking it through.

Oh, and what'd any of that have to do with walls as force multipliers for as yet non existent forces?

As my father use to say

Locks only keep an honest man honest,

Anything to make it more difficult to cross is needed. The fence in my yard keeps people from cutting through, but is easily climbed on one side of the yard, but let me catch you back there in my shop and it is an all new ball game.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by cstreit

So... A moat?

Tom Brady has a moat. Don't know if he got the alligators and piranhas yet.
I figure if it's good enough for him …

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by group911@aol.co

Raise your hand if you actually read the attached article this discussion was supposed to be about.

I did.

But you really expected this to stay on topic?

In a forum named "Off Topic Discussions"?

I admire your optimism.

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by cstreit

So... A moat?

Sure, why not. It would be as effective as any of the other options being floated.

The problem isn't at our border. The problem is what makes people from Central America risk their lives to get here. Why would they risk the assaults, rapes, trafficing, extortion, murders like the San Fernando massacre and so many other mass murders of immigrants, in order to get here - but then let a moat, a fence, machine gun nests every 50 yards, or a 30 foot concrete wall from sea to sea, make them decide to stay home? It is laughable that our leadership cites the abuse of immigrants on their journey north as a reason for a wall, as if the presence of a wall will stop desperate people from putting themselves at risk, when assaults, rapes, trafficing, extortion, murders, and the prospect of dying in the desert don't stop them.

Why do we not have millions of Canadians streaming across our northern border when there are millions coming from the south? Answer that question and you will have the answer to our southern border problem. We don't need a southern wall any more than we need a northern wall.

Does Jesus tell us to build a wall to keep the poor, the sick, the hungry from visiting our doctors, doing our work, or sharing our abundant food? Sorry - that was PARFy. I apologize.

[996AE]

Originally Posted by rfuerst911sc

Where did I state a wall won't help ? I stated I didn't think it was needed based on my boots on the ground statement . I also stated law suit and imminent domain would hold the build up for a long time . Boots on the ground could happen immediately if the desire to do so was a priority .

Cant argue with your brilliant logic.

Walls.

I dont think its needed.

Followed by I didnt state it wouldnt help.

Makes AOC look like a Rhodes Scholar.

Donnie is doing walls, border agents, military, tech, dogs, all while liberals fight him at every turn.

Walls work and will continue to be build as they have for the past 30 years along our southern border.

[scottmandue]

As said fences only keep honest people out, I can see guys on the other side with battery powered angle grinders chopping holes weeks after the wall is done.

And then there are tunnels...

As far as manpower for the boots on the ground (though I still like my high tech idea, drones, robots, IR sensors).
"who would want to be out in the middle of nowhere?"
Thousands of 4x4 folks are out in the desert every weekend.

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by wdfifteen

The problem isn't at our border. The problem is what makes people from Central America risk their lives to get here. Why would they risk the assaults, rapes, trafficing, extortion, murders like the San Fernando massacre and so many other mass murders of immigrants, in order to get here - but then let a moat, a fence, machine gun nests every 50 yards, or a 30 foot concrete wall from sea to sea, make them decide to stay home? It is laughable that our leadership cites the abuse of immigrants on their journey north as a reason for a wall, as if the presence of a wall will stop desperate people from putting themselves at risk, when assaults, rapes, trafficing, extortion, murders, and the prospect of dying in the desert don't stop them.

Stop making sense.

[scottmandue]

I still think we should reconsider the casinos idea, look how well it worked for Vegas!

[rfuerst911sc]

Originally Posted by 996AE

Cant argue with your brilliant logic.

Walls.

I dont think its needed.

Followed by I didnt state it wouldnt help.

Makes AOC look like a Rhodes Scholar.

Donnie is doing walls, border agents, military, tech, dogs, all while liberals fight him at every turn.

Walls work and will continue to be build as they have for the past 30 years along our southern border.

Not sure what your issue is with me ? I am suggesting due to what will be the endless lawsuits being threatened , the eminent domain issues to work through it could be years for a wall or walls to be built . Getting people on the ground as a deterrent can happen quickly or at least quicker than a wall . Why is that an issue in this discussion ? Aren't we better on this forum and better as a nation if we have discussion and share ideas ?

[URY914]

Originally Posted by rfuerst911sc

Paul you make a valid point but I find it hard to believe that a pool of candidates couldn't quickly be assembled via retired military and police . They have a knowledge base right out of the gate . A mix of older/wiser/retired training some younger folks would work .

I think part of this is coming up with the right number of people ..... do we need 250 or 500 or 2000 ? I think current border patrol officers would be the ones to ask they know roughly what is needed based on real world experience . Patrolling and monitoring the border can be solved.

Beg to differ. I'd think the pool of retired cops wanting to go back to work in the blazing sun and heat is really small. Most retired cops are on the golf course, fishing, riding HD's, and hunting. Southern border agent positions must be the hardest to fill.