Spend a week, build a wall !

Status
Not open for further replies.
Have you ever been at or close to any important federal or private installation like a nuclear power station? If you try to cut the fence, get inside, and disobey the guards you will get shot. Why can't we do the same on a narrow strip of land adjacent to Mexican border?
 
If I lived down there Id gladly do it. But he still have to be able to get the illegals out.
 
I'm fascinated with one of the aspects of this discussion. Most of this forum's members are supporters of the 2nd amendment. I would also assume that if any of you had an intruder and a robber in your house you would not hesitate to use lethal force to protect your house. This country is our house, our domain. Why shouldn't we protect it from uninvited intruders who steal from us?
 
700 miles of rasor wire, 10 rows deep
would be a good start, backed up by
retired snipers with nothing to do.
 
Oleg, the problem is that we HAVE this welfare system. It exists and won't go away. "Woulda, coulda, shoulda" just doesn't help. There is thus a negative cost picture for taxpayers in those states with large numbers of illegals. For California, the published number is around six billion dollars per year; for Arizona, some one billion dollars per year. One wonders at the value of goods and services produced by illegals. While wondering at the dollars, give some thought to the reported datum that 90% of the outstanding felony warrants in the LA basin is for illegals.

I don't know if anybody pays attention to "esoteric" economic data, but a couple of things: Illeglas make up some 30% of the workforce in construction of new houses. Over the last three months, new housing starts have been in steady decline.

If they're out of work, will they go back? Or, will they stay here and increase the burden on social services?

Art
 
Have you ever been at or close to any important federal or private installation like a nuclear power station? If you try to cut the fence, get inside, and disobey the guards you will get shot. Why can't we do the same on a narrow strip of land adjacent to Mexican border?
Click to expand...

What imminent threat and potential danger are they?

"Hey, if I don't shoot him, he might lower our wages 4c an hour average! He could MOVE INTO PUBLIC HOUSING! IT WAS HIM OR ME!"

Sorry, but when I hear well-intentioned but heinous logic like this, it makes me glad this is, in fact, a REPUBLIC with a CONSTITUTION and COURTS and not a lynch-mob democracy.:cuss:

To become a citizen, I had to prove I was literate, had not been a subversive, and had a working knowledge of the US system of government.

Sadly, we don't require that of people born here.
 
Actually, Art, that statistic said that 90% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

And when did you start calling illegal Mexican immigrants "illegals"?

Are you really changing your vocabulary?

I, for one, appreciate your efforts! :cool:
 
What imminent threat and potential danger are they?
Click to expand...

To name a few: terrorism, narcotics, tax evasion, effect on electoral system, currency export, etc.

Deadly force on the border is not an end point in itself. It is a deterrent. The same holds true for the secure installations. You have no business being there despite of your intend or ability to do harm. Moreover, as an intruder you clearly undertook an effort to enter a restricted area. That is why the guards can use deadly force.
 
Jammer Six, illegals is illegals is illegals. Wetbacks is illegals that come across the Rio Grande. Right now, with Mexico repaying some of its water debt to the U.S. via releases from San Martin Reservoir on the Rio Conchos, El Rio Bravo is more for swimming than walking. :)

Last I heard, the Rio Grande sorta quits being a border at El Paso. Hard to get wet, crossing into New Mexico, Arizona or California. Ergo, those illegals ain't wetbacks. Or "moja'os', as they style themselves. ¿Comprendes tu?

Art
 
To name a few: terrorism, narcotics, tax evasion, effect on electoral system, currency export, etc.
Click to expand...

In order:

Terrorism: The boogieman of any argument.

Narcotics: Yes, because laws against that are working so well. ONLY illegal Mexican immigrants smuggle drugs and there's no way to stop it.

Tax evasion: An amnesty solves this by making them part of the system and paying taxes. Problem solved.

Effect on electoral system: federal law requiring ID to vote. Most of it goes away. Cross check with SS# and INS to eliminate most fakes.

Currency export: yes, because there aren't any Chinese investors buying dollars by the truckload. Has to be those pesky, illiterate wetbacks sending money home. (PS: removing money from OUR supply IMPROVES the value of the remaining dollars.)

Etc: undefined.

Sorry, but a lot of these scary arguments remind me of the arguments against CCW and legalizing drugs. Won't somebody think of the children?

But hey, we've only had TWO huge, bloated, ineffective bureaucracies created by this administration. Why not try for three?
 
They're right in saying that everyone who has ever come to the United States has at some point migrated...whether it was 40,000 years ago across the Bering Strait or 5 years ago on a plane from Luxumberg. And for the majority of the history of the North American continent and the US in particular, immigration has been vital to the development of the industrial era.

But industrialization is over. In fact, in many ways it's reversing. We have less and less manufacturing jobs. The jobs that remain are becoming more technical and require more education. That or food service, gardening etc. The middle class is shrinking because the middle jobs are lost.

Meanwhile, old people aren't dying like they should. (Not that I'm an age bigot =)

For the first time we're starting to reach the carrying capacity of the land. More people = more poverty, not a new wealth of labor for industrialization like it used to.

If you get enough angry poor people, you can forget freedom as a lifestyle. At least...so says the history of bolsheviks
 
We need to build the wall because not having the wall moots any possible regulation we could possibly impose upon border travel. Mexican immigration is the big issue, NOT because anyone hates mexicans for racial or cultural reasons, but because mexicans happen to live within walking distance of our country and are abusing this arrangement to our detriment. A wall allows us to control who passes back and forth across the border. It allows us to put malfeasors on the other side of the wall and have them stay on the other side for the most part.

That being said, I dont really see any reason why we should devote special effort towards expelling any mexicans that we find on this side of the wall. Most of them want to be here and want to work. Obviously Americans want to employ them, so why not make everyone happy by continuing to do nothing about them? I expect some of them want to go back to their families in mexico- let them. I expect a small percentage will get caught committing crimes- put them on the other side of the wall and make them Mexico's problem. Everyone else stays and gets defacto citizenship by virtue of having kids and assimilating.

Examine the plan I just laid out. It has practically zero costs beyond building the wall and it should satisfy EVERYONE in the country- immigrants, employers and citizens alike. And there wont even be any social upheaval beacuse there wont be any real changes in the short term.

But for this simple and mutually satisfying plan to succeed....

We need the wall to be built.
 
Set the billion dollars on fire.

It'll save the hassle, the waste of resources, and the ten thousand more jackbooted thugs who can demand you bow before them.

Funny. I remember a day when conservatives and Americans didn't demand the government protect them or do things for their own good.

May as well dump our guns, too. The government will protect us.:rolleyes:

Hey, government stupidity got us into this mess. Why can't it get us out?

You build that wall. I'm going to try to defend our Republic. What's left of it.:banghead:
 
Mike, you know I am one of the most diehard libetarians on here. I have to ask if you are mentally handicapped or just a troll. Your argument is somewhere between insultingly flawed and just plain insulting.

There are some things that only governments can do. Like building a giant multistate wall that crosses thousands of people's private property lines. This is EXACTLY the type of scenario that the founders envisioned using eminent domain for.

Yes, some people will have to give up a few feet of land from their property to make room for the wall. But the land that they dont give up will go up in value because they wont have to fight off armed bandits and smugglers 24/7. I would bet you 90 percent of the people living on land that would be occupied by the wall would approve of the change.
 
In order:

Terrorism: The boogieman of any argument.

Narcotics: Yes, because laws against that are working so well. ONLY illegal Mexican immigrants smuggle drugs and there's no way to stop it.

Tax evasion: An amnesty solves this by making them part of the system and paying taxes. Problem solved.

Effect on electoral system: federal law requiring ID to vote. Most of it goes away. Cross check with SS# and INS to eliminate most fakes.

Currency export: yes, because there aren't any Chinese investors buying dollars by the truckload. Has to be those pesky, illiterate wetbacks sending money home. (PS: removing money from OUR supply IMPROVES the value of the remaining dollars.)

Etc: undefined.

Sorry, but a lot of these scary arguments remind me of the arguments against CCW and legalizing drugs. Won't somebody think of the children?
Click to expand...


I'm thinking of the children. The "children" who are illegal alien gangstas in L.A. That would be SIXTY PER CENT of gangbangers, according to the L.A. PD. Or maybe you're interested in the older children who populate our Federal prisons? Thirty per cent, nearly, are illegal aliens. Three thousand Mexican felons have fled back to Mexico, leaving their victims behind.

Let's cut the sentimental crap about illegal immigration. (That goes for you too, Mr. El Presidente with your "hard-working moms and dads!")
 
mzmadmike: May as well dump our guns, too. The government will protect us.
Hey, government stupidity got us into this mess. Why can't it get us out?
You build that wall. I'm going to try to defend our Republic. What's left of it.
Click to expand...

It's an issue created by government that people want government to solve or use a solution that's guaranteed to get the public to get involved.

As you'd stated previously most of the problems go away with very simple solutions.

Someone called themselves xenophobic, bigotted and racist. There may be some that fit that but I'm more inclinded to cry out 'myopic'.
 
Thanks, Art.

We've been talking about THR, you, and your language on a another board.

They didn't believe me. Now they do. :cool:
 
Longeyes, what I just PROPOSED was the SOLUTION to STOP illegals from voting. Why don't you read a little more carefully.

Slurpy: Are you mentally handicapped or just mentally handicapped?

If you think a WALL, wire or landmines will stop illegals, I want what you're smoking.

I suppose the millions of illegal Chinese and SE Asians came here through Mexico? The wall will stop them?

Are you actually suggesting HSA should have MORE officers, MORE power, and MORE ability to harass people, or just shoot them and claim they were hopping the border?:scrutiny:

I thought I left the UK to get AWAY from fascism.:fire:
 
Welcome to the US, Senor Locomike. I'm with you in all that you say here. We have enough hopeless, endless, futile wars already. We don't need any more of them. We already have enough huge armed federal bureaucracies. We don't need any more.
 
Someone called themselves xenophobic, bigotted and racist. There may be some that fit that but I'm more inclinded to cry out 'myopic'.
Click to expand...
It was me and NO I'm not any of the above. My point is it just doesn’t matter anymore, people believe what they want to believe. The way I see it the problem is larger than just being artificially labeled. Its time for people to speak their peace and stand for what they believe in.

We can and watch our country crumble or we can take control and reclaim our heritage......the choice is ours.
 
To become a citizen, I had to prove I was literate, had not been a subversive, and had a working knowledge of the US system of government.
Click to expand...

Double citizenship is not allowed by our naturalization laws. Previously you mentioned you are still a British citizen. Then you did not take your oath in good faith. You broke the law. Where does your allegiance lie?

Also, while some of your points are technically valid, you still offer no solution to the two biggest problems:

1) a large number refuse to assimilate into America, but form enclaves while trying to apply political pressure and drain resources through social services.

2) if the ones here are given amnesty, that would make millions of others to sneak in even more doggedly. How many do you propose we can absorb?

My solutions:
a) throw employers in jail and apply heavy fines
b) fine illegals heavily and deport them at their expense
c) give drug traffickers and coyotes the death penalty
d) control labor supply by legal admittance according to adjustable quotas through temporary work visas with no connection to path to citizenship
e) abolish the anchor baby rule
f) continue legal immigration as before
 
Mike--i'm with ya too. Walls seem to keep nothing out.

There's two ways to get rid of ants. The first involves driving to the market, spending a bunch of money on toxic chemicals, spraying them to death and feeling slightly sorry for them
-- OR --
clean up that big glob of cake I left out overnight and within hours they're all gone off to find some other sucker who left cake out...

Let's stop employing them. Then you wouldn't need a wall or the shooting of people which in general makes people feel slightly sorry for them.
And also "NO IRISH NEED APPLY!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top