Hey dope
I love the fear of the ignorant, go and change your knickers.
Actually, we can’t afford not to build the Wall
Posts
Total:
163
-->
@secularmerlin
Not necessarily, border patrol agents are expanding their use of biometric scanners to shift the flow of illegal overstays. If visa holders are in the system, you can be caught nearly anywhere that has government cameras, from airports to DMVs. The question that remains is, if illegals are at a higher risk of of being deported from visa overstays, where will the next point of entry be?
In any case, security is not one faceted, but the wall is an important puzzle piece.
Hey dope
Is it your contention that the Slump wont be able to build anymore hotels because he won't have illegal immigrants that he's paying half wages to, if he pays them?
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
People do not as a rule sneak into the country on foot or by camel back. They come in internal combustion vehicles. Seagoing vessels and aircraft will not be hindered by a wall in any way and the vast majority of land vehicles are commercial grade automotive vehicles (and therefore restricted to relatively well maintained roads) a which must go through the customs checkpoints located on all thoroughfares into the country. A (mostly) unmanned wall stands virtually no chance of changing the immigrant population (legal or otherwise) to a significant percentage. 5% is in my opinion a gross overstatement of its probable effect.
-->
@secularmerlin
People do not as a rule sneak into the country on foot or by camelback they come via internal combustion vehicles.
Citation needed.
Seating vessels and aircraft will not be hindered by a wall in any way and the cast majority of land vehicles must go through customs to get into the country. I think 5% is an unrealistically high expectation.
We're already been through the aircraft example. I can readily concede that 50% of illegals overstayed their visas after coming into the U.S. via aircrafts and sea ports, and still have the U.S. saving bucketloads of money on illegals. That leaves us 50% that come in through other methods.
Why can't land vehicles drive over unregulated parts of the U.S. Mexican Border?
Finally, I've already shown that in other countries, wherein a border wall was instated, that illegal immigration reduced DRASTICALLY (The Hungarian Border is a great example. The Israeli border wall demonstrably prevents illegals coming in and committing terrorist attacks). You, on the other hand, haven't provided any evidence or data to show that 5% is too high, nor have you disproven the effectiveness of these examples I've already provided.
Winston Smith would be appalled at Americans welcoming his nemesis.
but the wall is an important puzzle piece.
Not if it has virtually no chance of stopping immigrants (legal or otherwise)
-->
@secularmerlin
The group Border Angels estimates that since 1994, about 10,000 people have died in their attempt to cross border.According to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 7,216 people have died crossing the U.S–Mexico border between 1998 and 2017.[ In 2005, more than 500 died across the entire U.S.–Mexico border. The number of yearly border crossing deaths doubled from 1995 to 2005, before declining. The statistics reflect only known deaths and do not include those who have never been found.
Even if only 10% of the people crossing by foot are dying, that's a substantial amount of foot traffic.
-->
@secularmerlin
Border patrol agents disagree. They cite existing funneling tactics along with measures to delay long enough for a response team to get there along with the clearing of brush to make capture easier.
I don't generally argue with border patrol on their tactics much like I would not argue with a Navy admiral on fleet tactics. Normally these people just get what they ask for and that's the end of the discussion, but this year apparently everyone is an expert on border control tactics...
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
People do not as a rule sneak into the country on foot or by camelback they come via internal combustion vehicles.Citation needed.
Does this require verification? The vast majority of people traveling any significant distance travel by internal combustion vehicles.
-->
@secularmerlin
Lol you've dropped most of my points and cherry-picked arguably the least important one to quibble about.
You've been dunked on. Get out of here.
@Analgesic.Spectre @Greyparrot
I admit that I am neither an immigration specialist nor a border patrol officer but a large expensive wall with dubious efficacy seems a huge waste of money and manpower if we should in fact be trying to stop immigration rather than reforming immigration law.
--> @oromagiI mean sure we can invalidate it due to lack of credentials and authority, I guess.
Agreed. The original premise is invalid. I don’t suppose that’ll check the conversation much at this point.
-->
@secularmerlin
Well yeah i'm no expert on border security either. Did you listen at the press conference this week what the border patrol officials were asking for? Trump has said this week that he isn't going to build a wall if the border patrol thinks something else is more effective like slatted steel beams.
Don't you want people in power like the President and the Congress to listen to the border patrol officials? i think it's in the best interest of the country to listen to these people instead of pretending to know what works and what does not work.
-->
@Greyparrot
Well yeah i'm no expert on border security either. Did you listen at the press conference this week what the border patrol officials were asking for? Trump has said this week that he isn't going to build a wall if the border patrol thinks something else is more effective like slatted steel beams.Don't you want people in power like the President and the Congress to listen to the border patrol officials? i think it's in the best interest of the country to listen to these people instead of pretending to know what works and what does not work.
Listening to those who actually have experience in performing the job of border security does seem sensible if our goal is to prevent illegal border crossing. Do you perchance have a link to the press conference in question?
-->
@secularmerlin
It's really a shame that the only source for the full remarks is from Fox. Every other media outlet only has 5 minute snippets of the remarks interlaced with opinionated commentary, as if the public is just too braindead to listen to a full 28 minutes of remarks from our president and border officials.
-->
@Greyparrot
I will admit that I am rather uninterested in the remarks of the President as he is not the expert in this situation. It is rather a shame if there is only one source of the full 28 minutes but do are minutes from the pressconference really unavailable to the public?
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I mean, I'm sorry, but that was such an incredibly basic mistake. That you were flaunting the "fact" that the source was the New York Times would seem to suggest that you did in fact check to make sure the source was the New York Times before posting.
In any case, try to avoid this same kind of fiasco in the future. New York Times is definitely liberal, peddling in anti-Trump conspiracy theories on a near-daily basis to condition a certain kind of extreme reaction from their target audience, whereas the New York Post is your run-of-the-mill conservative news source that the vast majority of liberals will not consider to be particularly credible or prestigious, because it probably isn't (per Wikipedia it's largely a tabloid paper).
I did not know that the Post was founded by Alexander Hamilton, though. That's crazy.
-->
@Greyparrot
Whatever ends up coming of it thank you for the conversation.
-->
@FaustianJustice
if you recall in the beginning those opposed said how horrible it would look, so the designed have to include pleasing aesthetics, which no doubt is more expensive. No one counter offered with cheaper more effective design which I think was the whole point of it as a negotiation technique. Since no real negotiation took place he's left with no choice but to stick to the plan which well set precedence for future issues. This seems like it was a game of chicken and the democrats blinked. It's quite possible I'm wrong but only Trump knows for sure. Unfortunately this has become and all or nothing issue so here we are. 2 choices a physical barrier or no barrier, I'll go with the barrier.
-->
@secularmerlin
it won't be 100% nothing ever is, but if you can use the limited manpower and resources at points of entry because it's too difficult and too slow to try and over come the wall/barrier then that's useful.
barriers are used all the time to funnel people through check points or other secured area, that's how I see a border barrier working. the other ways people get in illegally or over stay etc needs to be addressed and a much stronger stance should be taken.
-->
@Swagnarok
you over estimate the importance I have for this site LOL 95% I read and post in between things I have to do at work, this is extremely low on my priority list, so yeah mistakes happen.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Perhaps we could consider comprehensive immigration law reform.
-->
@secularmerlin
Perhaps we could consider comprehensive immigration law reform.
we could, and should but that won't happen any time soon. The democrats will oppose everything Trump wants and when they get power they won't address it, otherwise we wouldn't and we shouldn't even be having this conversation. As A.O.C. said the illegals are her constituents, they want to let them vote, heck even they want 16 year old children to vote. These are the last days of the U.S.A. as it has been known. R.I.P. :(
-->
@dustryder
What counts as hate speech?
To stay on topic, I'm in a unique position. As of right now, I don't support the wall, but I support Trump.
-->
@Alec
What counts as hate speech?
In general,
"abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation."
Of course every country does their own thing when it comes to hate speech
-->
@dustryder
So if we were to play this definition out consistently, then me saying we shouldn't allow Muslims into the country in order to reduce terrorism, which is an ideology that many people have, would be hate speech. If sex/gender is a protected group, then would me being pro life be classified as a hate crime? Would being pro choice be a hate crime because it is threatening to the fetus? Would saying something anti gun be hate speech since guns do reduce rape?
Unless you can come to a definition of hate speech that is respectful to everyone who peacefully preaches what they believe, then hate speech should count as free speech.
I think you can preach whatever you want as long as it's peaceful.
This kindof is off topic, so I plan on making a whole new thread to decide what is and isn't hate speech.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
All nations fall. In any case if representative democracy is a superior system then you should support including more people in that system and if representative democracy is not a superior system you should not be troubled one way or the other.