CNN:Hundreds of migrants cross Arizona border after 'several busloads' dropped off in Mexico

(CNN)In the early morning hours Thursday, several busloads of migrants were dropped off on Highway 2 in Mexico, just south of the Arizona border. "They walked about 100 yards, climbed under and over the vehicle barrier that is the only infrastructure in that area and agents were called in to make the arrest," said acting Tucson Border Patrol Chief Jeffrey Self. In total, 242 people -- mostly families from Guatemala -- were arrested when Border Patrol agents arrived at the scene after the migrants were detected by a mobile surveillance system.

So the existing Barrier didn't stop them and the Mobile Surveillance System failed to stop them from entering. Doesn't the Democratic side say all we need is more sensors to stop migrants from crossing? Now they are are all going to claim Asylum and be let go into our country for a couple years before their case is heard.......if they even show up for the hearing.

In December, Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan raised concerns that a new trend was emerging of very large groups of migrants arriving at the southern border by bus and unloading in remote areas. "So far in this fiscal year, and this has been a brand-new phenomenon this fiscal year, we have started to see extremely large groups arrive together several times, usually once or twice a week since about mid-October," said McAleenan in December.

CNN article

So my question to the opponents of having a Barrier on our Southern border to stop such crossings is this:

Obviously the systems we had in place didn't work to stop them. Drones or Cameras wouldn't stop them from crossing, what in your opinion, would have prevented them from crossing en masse like they did?

Give me you ideas of how we stop people from trying to enter our country illegally like mentioned in the article.

Why wouldn't a Wall/Barrier, with manpower and sensors have stopped them from entering? The Barrier would have stopped them long enough for the sensors to notice to call forces to stop the entry in the first place. Letting people cross then stopping them once they have entered, just gets them claiming (falsely in most cases) Asylum and allows them to stay unmonitored till they case is heard.


The kicker for me is that this is CNN reporting this, where was Jim Acosta when this happened?

On top of that:

Of that group, 130 were children and 11 of those children arrived unaccompanied, without legal guardians.

No..no..no...

The democrats never said the tech measures would STOP them from coming. It would just allow them to track their crossing and have agents be able to intercept them sooner and get them registered to vote.

So, surveillance didnt work, but they were all actually arrested after surveillance triggered an alert?

What?

Looks like it worked to me.

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied
So, surveillance didnt work, but they were all actually arrested after surveillance triggered an alert?

What?

Looks like it worked to me.

Kind of, I mean they were caught, on our soil and now will probably just disappear and leach off the system.

A nice tall fence would have kept them on the other side(or they never would have shown up, as they obviously chose a weak entry point).

Not crossing over is the ultimate goal, not "catching them" when it's frankly to late. The damage is done.

Per the spam posters on ATS, CNN is fake news, so thankfully none of this is happening. Carry on.

a reply to: MisterSpock

Yes, so actually the solution is in deterring them from coming, which a wall will not.

Making it impossible for them to get hired is a good place to start, followed by scrutiny of the current welfare programs.

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied
a reply to: MisterSpock

Yes, so actually the solution is in deterring them from coming, which a wall will not.

Making it impossible for them to get hired is a good place to start, followed by scrutiny of the current welfare programs.

One part at a time.

If people are crossing because there are places that are easy to cross.

Then it's logical to assume that eliminating the ease of crossing would deter people from trying. That's really not even debatable.

I agree though that in conjunction with the above, we should seek to add other incentives to not attempt to circumvent our borders.

Fine employers that hire them, immediate detainment to DHS whenever someone with illegal status is arrested, deportation withing 48 hours of anyone caught crossing(if fenced, most likely at entry points) illegally. Etc.

Build a wall they said.

Stop people it would they said.

originally posted by: grey580
Build a wall they said.

Stop people it would they said.

Is there a giant pillow on the other side to catch them when they jump?

Seems to me that as long as it is legal to cross the border anywhere and claim asylum then people will do that even if they have to bring a ladder or a shovel. I also get the feeling that most in the usa will continue to be ignorant of that fact and keep up the hate by ignoring that fact.

a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

Making it impossible for them to get hired is a good place to start

Someone's never heard of under the table work.

Even employers who use E-Verify can only do so much because illegals commit so much ID theft that it is sometimes impossible to know who you're actually dealing with.

Build a wall to slow the influx.

Add technology to aid the officers in responding.

a reply to: UncleTomahawk

I also get the feeling that most in the usa will continue to be ignorant of that fact and keep up the hate by ignoring that fact.

Cool.

Got anything to add that isn't a child's contribution?

Hate?

We're trying to protect our sovereignty.

‘Stop them’???

The dems and their seriously-uninformed voter base do not want to ‘stop them’.

They need criminals. They need leeches. They need welfare dependent, uneducated masses.

If the entire country was made up of employed, law abiding citizens who wanted to uphold American values, there would be no democrat party.

‘Stopping them’ is the absolute LAST thing the ‘left’ wants to do. Hence, they don’t want a wall.

You’ll find that those ‘intellectuals’ who say “walls don’t work” are the same bright sparks who think ‘democratic socialism’ Is a viable system of governance.

You know, thick people.

If I had to scale a 40 ft wall, I’d cross somewhere else instead. And when more wall sections are built, that ‘somewhere else’ will be more heavily guarded.

originally posted by: grey580
Build a wall they said.

Stop people it would they said.

How long does it take to set that up, and then you have a line of 1000 people waiting their turn to climb up and over. If a drone past that spot every 30 mins do you think we could stop the most of it before it even happened compared to 1000 people crossing randomly along 700 miles of open border.

Its like you suggest you will no long lock your doors because I can one foot it open...The truth is the locked door still keeps out 99%+...

originally posted by: grey580
Build a wall they said.

Stop people it would they said.

This is what people really believe will happen.

No wonder the left is in such dire straits. All the smart ones have abandoned them for the ‘other side’.

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied
So, surveillance didnt work, but they were all actually arrested after surveillance triggered an alert?

What?

Looks like it worked to me.

You don't understand I guess.
Now they are on American Soil and will claim Asylum. Since there is a backlog in the courts, they will be released and asked to show up for their hearing probably 1 1/2 to 2 years from now. They won't be able to work during this time so how will they be supported. What about the 11 unaccompanied minors?

The system is supposed to be: Stop them from entering Illegally.

a reply to: pavil

Once they are here on our soil they have to be processed and released into the country to do whatever they want to do... and then show up for their future court date. Only four out of 10 show up. Those are the nice federal law Breakers.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: pavil

Once they are here on our soil they have to be processed and released into the country to do whatever they want to do... and then show up for their future court date. Only four out of 10 show up. Those are the nice federal law Breakers.

And they know this, getting here and getting caught is just as good as not getting caught. They can't lose.....

Unless we have a policy that deports people with 48 hours, dare to dream..I know.

Sovereignty you should check that definition and weigh it against the current shape of the usa.


I suppose if yuns just deploy the military inside the usa a few more times and then further destabilize countries like Venezuela some more then you can exercise your authoritarian sovereignty over the whole world. merica toats sovern state

No amount of border dispute can trump the legal ability to cross legally. Until the law is dealt with then they will continue to come.

originally posted by: grey580
Build a wall they said.

Stop people it would they said.

You're right. A wall wouldn't work.

Most illegals travel illegally with 3-story escalators in their pockets.


They have big pockets.

/sarc just because some would believe that illegals actually do carry giant 3-story escalators in their big pockets.