Trump's border wall prototypes virtually impassable, pass rigorous testing

a reply to: RadioRobert

True. It isn't an either/or. That I can agree with. But... in times of terrible US debt, if your goal is the stop the influx of immigrants, it would seem that the higher impact action that comes at considerably less cost (going after businesses hiring illegally) would be a no-brainer. The corporations have ridiculous amounts of money, and they owe the American people for their illegal actions. Less immigrants, plus hefty fines from the corporate nightmare that believes they are above the law = win/win.

The success of the wall is not dependent on putting a 100% stop on illegals crossing the border - obviously. But by making it significantly harder/more expensive to cross - there will inevitably be a significant decrease in illegal crossings (again, read the article in the OP).

Any significant reduction in illegals simply walking over (which accounts for the bulk of illegals) makes the wall a success. Those who refuse to see that are simply in denial or are incapable of looking at this logically.

I'm pretty certain they'll be tackling the other issues involving illegal immigration as well. By having the wall, they will be able to allocate more man power/resources (drones, censors, etc) into detecting/stopping ladders, tunneling, flying, as well as the incentive/hiring issues back on home soil.

There is simply no way in hell the wall, if done effectively, will not lead to a pretty dramatic decrease in illegals crossing over.

originally posted by: roadgravel

Is it really fair to ruin someone's Biz that hires an illegal?

If it is an on going situation.

What about other criminal acts by a business, overlook those also?

Law enforcement is key.

It's the govt's job to dry up the illegal flow of economic border jumpers.

You can't complain someone keeps stealing the booze when the liquor room door is wide open.

When a Biz gets caught breaking the law, hit em. I have no problem with that.

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied
a reply to: burgerbuddy

Oh, so breaking the law by hiring an illegal should be overlooked?

No, who said that?

I didn't. I said the boss can be fooled with phony papers.

Unless you really want to profile people.

Then again, not speaking english is no big deal now a day.

Most farm workers come in legally. The illegals don't get screwed by the farmer they get screwed by their leader that's supposed to pay them but keeps a good portion because there's nothing they can do about it.

originally posted by: roadgravel

Is it really fair to ruin someone's Biz that hires an illegal?

If it is an on going situation.

What about other criminal acts by a business, overlook those also?

Ummm...why the hell not...you've already overlooked the...ILLEGAL...in the illegal alien...

Might as well give a pass to all the company's that are merely taking advantage of the situation that lax border security and immigration laws...not...followed brings to the table...

Any smart business person would seek to maximize profits any way they can...just ask the cartels and human traffickers...




YouSir

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: face23785

I still don't like the wall as a deterrent.
I would much rather see immigration reform to allow these people a better path to become Americans.
Just seems like a lot of money better used elsewhere.

Go to South Texas and see how long you don’t want a wall...
In fact, you can live blog a night on the town in Brownsville and, if your iPad isn’t stolen, congrats...

I am a sixth generation Texan with relatives all over the state...
Every single relative of mine who lived in south Texas has slowly migrated north the last half century…
The mass exodus occurred due to the insane amount of immigrants slowly over-whelming each and every previously peaceful and safe town…
Not to mention their tax burden due to exploitation of the medical system..

If you’re not from a border state, you truly have no idea how bad it is...

-Chris

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: RadioRobert

That really has nothing to do with the fact that they are used and the subject of the thread, a wall, isn't going to stop them.

ETA:

It's also akin to saying broken windows have been observed, so car door locks are good for thieves businesses.

Not really.

Ummm...no...they wont...but ground penetrating radar "Wall-E" bots trundling the length...in the company of ICE/border patrols that use seismic sensors...infrared...and every other type sensor you can hang off of them will certainly go a long way to finding these tunnels...

Bam...whenever you find a tunnel...fill it with concrete...you'd be plugging the tunnel...and...adding support to the foundation of that section of wall...

Win...win...




YouSir

originally posted by: Navieko
But by making it significantly harder/more expensive to cross - there will inevitably be a significant decrease in illegal crossings (again, read the article in the OP).

The significantly part is what seems to be missing and the article states that someone was able to climb the wall but couldn't get down so a rope or ladder would make a difference.

a reply to: YouSir

Why not lead with tech instead?

I'm not sure you can say win...win... at that price and then still have to pay for tech anyway.

a reply to: YouSir

The fact this has gone on for so long states much about which side business and the politicians they control is on.

No need for the illegal side to defeat the wall, our own citizens (see above) will do it.

originally posted by: daskakik
The significantly part is what seems to be missing and the article states that someone was able to climb the wall but couldn't get down so a rope or ladder would make a difference.

No that part is just common sense. What percentage of illegals that cross the border - in your estimate - do so because they know there is next to no obstacle in their way once the desert has been crossed, and it's a *relatively* safe bet they won't run into any major issues?

Add a big wall into the equation, along with all the additional defenses that will inevitably come with having a big wall in place (drones, sensors, cameras, etc) - and all the sudden it's not such a safe bet anymore. I think you'd be disingenuous to assume there would be no significant drop in illegals crossing the border.

a reply to: Bluntone22

"Too many dreams, not enough hope"

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Navieko
But by making it significantly harder/more expensive to cross - there will inevitably be a significant decrease in illegal crossings (again, read the article in the OP).

The significantly part is what seems to be missing and the article states that someone was able to climb the wall but couldn't get down so a rope or ladder would make a difference.

Yes and it tells us that was a bad design and not to use that one. We need to use common sense a wall will stop most people but as in all things there will be someone that gets around it. Problem is with no wall everyone gets around it don't they? I was stationed in Korea we had fences walls and minefields and yet people still managed to cross. So why did we bother to have them simple without them everyone could cross.

a reply to: YouSir

So you support human exploitation?

I am not saying that the system is not good, infact it is failing. The reality is that a large percentage of the illegal immigrants coming into the country, by most conservative estimates, around 40% are people who fly in on an airplane and then never go home after their VISA's expire.

And I have lived on one of the most patrolled border in the country, and lets just say, there were problems there. Now if those bringing in the illegals in, were not shooting at the border patrol, whose hands are tied and unable to return fire or do anything proactive, they were also dealing with the fact that those bringing in illegal drugs and people were getting creative. They would go around the border, and come in via the water, or they would tunnel under, doing some very impressive and elaborate work, where people would not know, until after they got tipped off, and then would find the exits to these tunnels. And for every one they shut down, it was estimated, that there were 3 to 4 more that were either established or in the process of being dug.

Perhaps the solution is not to build more walls, or seem so cruel to the plight of others, perhaps maybe a novel approach would be starting with the federal government taking a different approach. It starts with a message, thanking those who have helped out since World War II, and telling them that we no longer have need of their services. And then slowly work on the laws. No public announcements, or making this political, but a review of the laws. Then when they are done, and would survive any and all court challenges, make an announcement.

Course taking the cuffs off of the Border Patrol would help. Funding the Immigration and Naturalization department would also help, and getting more staff to that understaffed, underworked department to start getting things on track.

a reply to: 3daysgone

This is going to only get worse, and people, if they are desperate enough will figure out a way to do such. Here is how it is going to go down:

They start building a wall at one point, those seeing to get in will go to areas, where the wall is not there or as easy for the Border Patrol to patrol and then go in. Now as they are working on the next section, those more enterprising will already have contacts in the USA, money will flow and then they will start checking and watching and seeing how deep, then tunnel under the wall, going a bit deeper and bracing it. So that opens up another way in. The water ways will become very popular, especially if it is say a river or near the coastal regions, and those going around the wall.

And there will be parts of the boarder that the wall won't go through due to terrain, and the mass fighting that will happen, even in some of the heavy republican states.

And just when you think it is going to get better, the Cartels will then move, probing and finding ways to either take it down or breach parts of the wall.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Your not making sense to me at all. You claim fences and walls don't stop drugs. OK yes they will try to find ways around it that's why we have border officers. Your logic is funny you think a prison shouldn't have walls because the prisoners given an opertunities will find ways around it?

This is why prisons have two things the wall and the guards that make sure people don't climb the wall. For thousands of years walls have shown to be effective on stopping people that's why we still use them. Ever go to Hollywood and seen the stars their houses have walls and gates. Odd thing to spend money on if it doesn't keep people out no?

originally posted by: Navieko
No that part is just common sense. What percentage of illegals that cross the border - in your estimate - do so because they know there is next to no obstacle in their way once the desert has been crossed, and it's a *relatively* safe bet they won't run into any major issues?

None. Being guatemalan, I can tell you that crossing mexico is scarier to immigrants than any wall.

Add a big wall into the equation, along with all the additional defenses that will inevitably come with having a big wall in place (drones, sensors, cameras, etc) - and all the sudden it's not such a safe bet anymore. I think you'd be disingenuous to assume there would be no significant drop in illegals crossing the border.

You have no idea what actually happens. Most people don't go without having a coyote, even though you are instructed to not point him out if caught and say that he either left you stranded or that you are all on your own. I'm willing to bet that there wouldn't be a significant drop if all you need is a ladder. The coyotes will provide.

originally posted by: dragonridr
Yes and it tells us that was a bad design and not to use that one.

It's the one being raved about.

a reply to: Christosterone

Fair enough.
I will definitely take your word for it.
This is the kind of info that is never on the news.