-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
To all those who said a virtual fence is the answer …
- Thread starter BeAChooser
- Start date
MikeMangum
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 1,856
Frank Newgent
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2002
- Messages
- 7,644
Exactly. A fence designed to keep "Fat, out of shape" people out, unfortunately, would hurt Americans more then almost any other country (look up obesity statistics). It will definitely cut down on illegal immigrants pouring into Mexico from the USA....oh wait...lol
TAM
Safe-Keeper
My avatar is not a Drumpf hat
I don't think anyone has proposed the US shuts out all its immigrants.
Is that the Noble Savage nonsense I see coming this way again? Someone build a wall.
Anyone reminded of the Onion episode where the Mexicans built their own wall alongside the existing one to keep out stupid US tourists?Build it wide, high, and long...oh and if you need help, you can ask Germany how to build it...
ones step forward, 2 steps back...the conservative way.
TAM
GreNME
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2007
- Messages
- 8,276
Didn't we pay Mexicans to build the wall sections we already have up? Funny how the Onion imitated life there.
Kthulhut Fhtagn
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2008
- Messages
- 1,956
....I see I went over a few heads
So this Gigantic fence that some are proposing, is is also going to go deep into the ground so they cannot dig a tunnel under it? Is it going to extend to cover all of the sea coast near mexico, so they can't take a quick boat ride across?
When is the American/Canadian Fence coming?
TAM
When is the American/Canadian Fence coming?
TAM
It will be so deep that no man can burrow under it, so wide that no man can go around it, so thick that no man can dig through it, so high that no man can climb over it, and it will be made of magical cotton candy and moonbeams.
KoihimeNakamura
Creativity Murderer
And the password is 'mellon'.
Frank Newgent
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2002
- Messages
- 7,644
Nothing can stop SuperMan(uel)
Dorian Gray
Hypocrisy Detector
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2002
- Messages
- 20,366
Why not install an invisible fence? Then we just do a catch, tag and release with illegals, and the shock when they try to cross keeps them out!
Oh, um, are you planning on putting a fence along our border with Canada? Because if not, then you are for open borders too. I like illegal immigrants. They keep prices low. It's better for them, and better for me. Pretty much every capitalist big business owner likes it too, because the less you have to pay your workers, the more money you get to keep. You know who doesn't like it? People who actually want to build houses, dig ditches, babysit, housekeep, landscape, pick fruit or clean pools, but who won't work for wages as low as the illegals will.
But that would be the unions. Surely you aren't supportive of unions, BAC, big honking conservative like you? But it sounds like you are not only supportive of unions and protectionism for American workers, but against letting the free market decide what wages a job will pay.
Why, it almost sounds like...... OMG, you're a socialist! Gasp!
Newtons Bit
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2007
- Messages
- 10,049
Just as soon as drug-trafficking from Canada to the USA results in more violence than there is in Iraq.
well I guess our immigrants to the US are not drug traffickers like the Mexican Immigrants...lol.
Seriously though, I realize their is a problem with drug trafficking across the border, and I suppose that is a bit of a better reason to suggest a barrier (though I still think it is foolish. Think of the rest of the world, the drug trafficking, and whether they use "big bad walls" to fix the problem) then trying to stop illegal immigration.
For illegal immigration erecting such a wall might slow the immigration down a little, but nothing more.
TAM
Why not install an invisible fence? Then we just do a catch, tag and release with illegals, and the shock when they try to cross keeps them out!
Oh, um, are you planning on putting a fence along our border with Canada? Because if not, then you are for open borders too. I like illegal immigrants. They keep prices low. It's better for them, and better for me. Pretty much every capitalist big business owner likes it too, because the less you have to pay your workers, the more money you get to keep. You know who doesn't like it? People who actually want to build houses, dig ditches, babysit, housekeep, landscape, pick fruit or clean pools, but who won't work for wages as low as the illegals will.
But that would be the unions. Surely you aren't supportive of unions, BAC, big honking conservative like you? But it sounds like you are not only supportive of unions and protectionism for American workers, but against letting the free market decide what wages a job will pay.
Why, it almost sounds like...... OMG, you're a socialist! Gasp!
nice! very nice.
TAM
BeAChooser
Banned
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2007
- Messages
- 11,716
Nice try as mischaracterizing the effectiveness of double fence systems. Just more dishonesty from your side of the political aisle. But then that's expected nowadays. Here's the real story ...
http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA493726
This video has a lot on fence effectiveness:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdvnWmgySrE
It shows that where the fencing is properly done, it clearly works. Two fences in the same sector, one properly done (double layered, no breaks, etc) and one improperly done (we'll call it Obama/democrat fencing) shows that crossings plummet at the properly designed fence and hardly decrease at the Obama fencing.
You want evidence that fences work? Even Napolitano must think they do because she said in November that the building of 600 miles of fence (even though that's actually an untrue figure) had helped make the borders so secure that we could now proceed with immigration reform (meaning turn illegals aliens into democrat voting citizens in time for the next election) (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-13-napolitano-border-security_N.htm).
As to statistics of what happens when properly designed fences are built, look at the experience in San Diego along a 14 miles stretch. In 1993, prior to building a multiple layer fence system they deployed a significant border guard presence to stem the tide. In 1993 they caught over 100,000 illegals in that one small stretch (with hundreds of thousands more making it past the guards). After they built a multiple fence system, the number apprehended dropped to just 5000 a year with very few actually getting past the three fence system (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5326083).
The fact is walls and fences do work. And keep in mind that the goal is to SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE (not totally eliminate) illegal immigration ... just reduce it to manageable levels. Walls have worked in that context in Israel and elsewhere ... even in San Diego.
And it's pretty clear that building a double fence/wall across the entire border would be much less costly over time than the tens of thousands of border guards, soldiers and law enforcement personnel, and all the equipment they will need, and all the detention and hearing facilities that will be required, plus the detention facility staff, lawyers, judges, public relations officers, interpreters, bus drivers, etc etc etc that ANY alternative requires. And I didn't even mention the $15 million per mile cost of the virtual fence promoted by the no real fence crowd. Even a high-side estimate of $5 million a mile (the Israeli's built their 25 foot high concrete wall for well under that) would allow us to block our 2000 mile border for about $10 billion ... peanuts compared to the long term cost of ANY alternatives.
And how can any of the alternatives to a physical barrier be more reliable? How often do we hear about people in the government being bribed or being found incompetent? And the border is 2000 miles long. What are you going to do ... line border guards up shoulder to shoulder that entire stretch? The fact is smugglers will study border guard patterns and outsmart them ... study electronic fences and outsmart it. Without a major physical barrier, it will take only minutes to disappear into the crowd or the wilds. What then?
Would any of the alternatives you folks suggest (and I notice you haven't suggested any so far) be more easily tested? No. A barrier you can build anywhere and test anytime. You can easily put your best and brightest (and leanest) against it and see what they do. Testing humans against humans or electronics is always much more complex. You can improve a barrier. Improving human guards is not all that easy. And improving electronics can be extremely expensive (or difficult).
And would any of your alternatives have less impact on those in the border areas? I doubt it. Since you are not going to stop illegals at the border, you must be going to try and catch them after they may have traveled tens or even scores of miles inside the border. How can putting thousands of armed personnel who will have to operate in America's backyards, on America's highways, in Americas border cities, in Americas wild, many miles inward from the border and in the middle of those very big cities that are near the border ever be less impactful than simply stopping 99% of the flood between two or three fences built right at the border? You are literally talking about militarizing the southwest if you hope to catch a sufficient fraction of those who will violate an unfenced/unwalled or even virtual fenced border.
Will your alternatives be more humane to the illegals? No. You are going to allow illegals to go on risking their lives in the millions because they will think they can beat your armed border guards at their own game. Because they can't see a virtual fence and will try to beat it too. Many will die in American deserts, just as they do now. Many will be killed by smugglers who will take their money and lead them to nowhere, as they do now. Or rape and hold them hostage while demanding more money from relatives. Some may be killed by border agents trying to intercept them. What if the illegals make it to a church? Are you proposing we go in and get them? What if they fire on those trying to enforce your alternative to a fence? Is it humane to allow pregnant women and small children to face the dangers they do now? What if a woman crosses the border and then immediately has a baby? That happens now. A pregnant woman would have a problem scaling a fence. But a few additional guards and some electronic sensors aren't going to stop this scenario. So what will our government do then under your unnamed alterative ... since the child automatically becomes a citizen and an anchor baby? You won't see pregnant women and 3 year olds scaling well designed fences or walls. The humane thing is not to allow these people the hope of beating the system by putting a larger barrier in their path ... one not easily crossed. One that will deter folks from giving thousands of dollars to smugglers but instead spend that money on improving their lot in their own country.
Will your alternatives be less subject to the whims of the current administration? No. There already is a governor and mayors in California who are not enforcing immigration laws ... who are openly hostile to the notion of stopping the flow. Even boycotting any state does try to stem the flow. The governor isn't even a Hispanic or a democRAT (at least on paper). Wait till that governor is both. Look at the whims of the Bush administration ... a republican administration. They promised us 10000 new guards in 2004's budget and gave us 210. Look at Obama. A bill was passed and signed into law requiring the constuction of hundreds of miles of double fence. When he became President he immediately stopped all construction of double fences. The politicos can change or not enforce laws year to year. It will be much harder to unbuild or ignore a REAL fence. A few years back we watched them catch over 1000 illegals in one day ... and promptly release 80 percent of them into our society. If THAT is what we can expect under your alternative, leave me out.
Would your alternative cause less harm to our relationship to Mexico? No. A fence will reduce contacts that may lead to confrontation. A fence will make it less likely that Mexico will see America as a dumping ground for its poor. A fence will return the focus to LEGAL immigration between the two countries. A fence will force Mexico to look to its own solutions to its economic and social problems. A fence will even help fight Mexico's drug cartels which are wrecking that country.
So T.A.M, you are not only wrong but dishonest to characterize the sort of fence systems that are proposed as you have.
Harpyja
Irrepressible Buzzard
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2008
- Messages
- 653
As opposed to any other building?
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Messages
- 11,494
When is the American/Canadian Fence coming?
TAM
If the US border problems were as severe on the northern side as on the south, the yanks would have a better olympic hockey team.
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 24,133
In my opinion trying to get a handle on immigration problems with fences is like trying to hermetically seal your house with screen doors. It won't work and at a certain point you might want to step back and ask yourself, "why am I trying to hermetically seal my house?"