Build a fence on the Mexican border!

[burrow_owl]

f you know that your actions will result in your performing manual labor, and you willfully engage in those actions, then you volunteered to perform the manual labor.

That's not how it works. I'm not an expert in immigration law, but I seriously doubt that a manual labor program would be upheld. For one thing, illegals aren't felons, and I don't think manual labor would be an acceptable punishment under the 8th amendment (contra your assertion, one doesn't automatically lose one's rights in prison).

More seriously, for punishments to be doled out, the immigrants would have to be convicted by an article III court, not an article II administrative court as they are now.

I'm not averse to making illegals labor as a matter of policy, but I'm 99% sure it wouldn't fly as a matter of law.

 

[Blackguard_]

Well, I have no idea what that means.

An atempt to paint those in favor of a walll as racist.

And it should look like Hadrian's wall, that is it should have mile forts.

 

[SummerMadness]

An atempt to paint those in favor of a walll as racist.

And it should look like Hadrian's wall, that is it should have mile forts.

There's an attempt to make people who favor a wall look racist? Where did you get that from?

 

[LaLaRu]

Then they should have come here legally

That's a red herring, and not relavent to the original point at all.

The costs could be reduced if we gained the benefit of their manual labor while they are being detained. there's nothing wrong with that. Responsibility doesn't mean allowing others to take advantage of us

Which part of "Criminal punishment for people who were not convicted in a court of law as criminals" don't you understand?

They used to be forced, and they should now

Yes. I know, there used to be a situation where people were detained and forced to work against their will without being convicted of a crime.

Ironically enough, wasn't it a Republician president that passed the 13th Amendment?

No, because the penalty for littering is a fine usually. So if you litter, you are volunteering to pay the fine.

Please don't deliberately misinterpert me like that. You know that your argument can be re-tooled to justify ANY punishment for ANY crime.

The right to break the law is not in the Bill of Rights. When you break the law, you lose rights.

No, even convicted criminals have rights, rights specifically protected BY the Bill of Rights. Moreover, these are not convicted criminals.

 

[Ampoliros]

We need it to be secured now... if they want to come across... they can do it legally!

http://www.weneedafence.com/ (sign the petition!)

Okay. *You* can pay for it. Meanwhile, the rest of us will be pursuing sane and reasonable reform that fixes the problem rather than wasting few billion dollars on a big wall that will do little to nothing to fix it.

 

[MachZer0]

That's a red herring, and not relavent to the original point at all.

It's central to the issuesince we're discussing border control

Which part of "Criminal punishment for people who were not convicted in a court of law as criminals" don't you understand?

As I said, it's not punishment. It's earning their keep. They want food, they can earn it. they want a bed, they can earn it, etc.

Please don't deliberately misinterpert me like that. You know that your argument can be re-tooled to justify ANY punishment for ANY crime.

You were not misrepresented. I merely deflated the hyperbole in your scenario

No, even convicted criminals have rights, rights specifically protected BY the Bill of Rights. Moreover, these are not convicted criminals.

Convicted criminals do not retain all of their rights. That's obvious

 

[LaLaRu]

It's central to the issuesince we're discussing border control

No, we were discussing the appropriateness of forced labor for illegal immagrents.

As I said, it's not punishment. It's earning their keep. They want food, they can earn it. they want a bed, they can earn it, etc.

If you're going to look at this as a business transaction, then the government is unfairly competing with other businesses for their labor, and paying less than minimum wage to boot. Therefore, this is not a business transaction, but punishment.

You were not misrepresented. I merely deflated the hyperbole in your scenario

No, your argument was "If I designate punishment A for crime B, then anyone who does crime B is voulentering for punishment A." I just demonstrated that by placing no limits on A or B, the argument quickly becomes absurd. Reducto ad absurdium.

Convicted criminals do not retain all of their rights. That's obvious

But these people haven't been CONVICTED.

 

[Billnew]

If you really want to stop illegals, then start going after the companies that hire them. Without them, there would be no reason for illegals to cross in the first place.

A fence slows illegal entry, cracking down on hose hiring them will stop the benefit of getting across.
Both are needed.

We have open borders, which means that anyone can walk across, with anything they want. Drugs, bombs,
bio-weapons, radioactive weapons, etc.
This is why we need a patrolled fence.

A fence won't do nything unless someone is there to prevent its destruction.

 

[JustOneWay]

A fence slows illegal entry, cracking down on hose hiring them will stop the benefit of getting across.
Both are needed.

We have open borders, which means that anyone can walk across, with anything they want. Drugs, bombs,
bio-weapons, radioactive weapons, etc.
This is why we need a patrolled fence.

A fence won't do nything unless someone is there to prevent its destruction.

LaLaRue is correct. When the government cracks down on American companies hiring illegals, you will see a drop in migrant workers and illegal border-crossers.

Building a giant fence or wall along the border is impractical....and wont solve anything. Virtual fences - like cameras or motion sensors would do a better job while causing no damage to the wildlife and landscape.

 

[Penny_Lane]

Building a giant fence or wall along the border is impractical....and wont solve anything

agreed!

Virtual fences - like cameras or motion sensors would do a better job while causing no damage to the wildlife and landscape.

but do you have any idea how much that would cost?

 

[JustOneWay]

agreed!



but do you have any idea how much that would cost?

No, I dont. The reason I mentioned these types of technologies is because they are already being utilized in some capacity.

Fort Huachuca in Arizona borders Mexico, and as you drive into town one cant help but notice one of the security blimps (aerostat) floating just south of the base.
Last year the minutemen were accused of tripping sensors laid by the border partol who monitor heavy traffic corridors.

The price of these tools may be high but I cant imagine the price will be as high as building a fence or wall that runs the entire length of the America/Mexico border, and maintaining it

The use of UAVs on the northern and southern borders could potentially act as an
important force multiplier by covering previously unpatrolled areas or more effectively
surveilling areas already patrolled. The benefit of increased coverage, however, may not
be so significant when terrorists, like the September 11 hijackers, can and have entered the
country through more easily accessible official ports of entry. Another consideration is
how well the CBP could respond to UAV imagery. Are there enough border patrol
resources to investigate all UAV identified targets? Would the lack of human resources
render high technology like UAVs less effective?
The technical capabilities of the UAVs have been tested in a military context, but
serious safety and technical issues need to be addressed if the program is to be expanded
domestically. Perhaps most important, a clearly defined role and action plan for the
application of UAV technology to homeland security needs would need to be created.
Another set of questions pertains to the schedule for implementing UAVs in border
security. Currently, the regular use of UAVs in U.S. airspace appears to be slated for the
year 2008. 22 If UAVs are deemed to be useful for border security, some may ask why it
will take so long implement this technology. Other countries, such as Japan and South
Korea have, for many years, used UAVs in a variety of civil roles.23 Italy could fly civil
UAVs by the end of 2002. 24 Could U.S. aviation authorities pursue a more aggressive
implementation plan?
UAVs are likely to be fielded as part of a larger system of border surveillance, not as
a solution in and of themselves. Are there potential alternatives to using UAVs in this
surveillance system? Aerostats may offer one alternative. Aerostats are helium-filled
blimps that don’t fly horizontally but are instead tethered to the ground with a cable that
provides power. Like UAVs, Aerostats are unmanned and can loiter for long periods of
time. Aerostats are already fielded by the Customs Service and by the Army for both civil
and military applications. If UAVs are deemed attractive because of low cost, elevated
sensor capabilities, and long loiter times, Aerostats may be studied as a platform that
might offer advantages in all three of these areas.
link

 

[ACougar]

I live about 10 miles from the Arizona / Mexican border and while I have no problem with Mexicans comming over to compete for our jobs I do have a problem with millions crossing dangerous desert and mountanus areas in order to get here.

Mixed in among that majority who are just looking for a better life are criminals of the worst sort, drug trafficers, human trafficers, criminals of all type who make the border region of Arizona a very dangerous place.

Create a wide enough legal avenue for workers to get to the U.S. and they will stop risking thier lives to cross the border illegally. They won't need to tear up private property, they won't need to fill our emergancy rooms, they won't need to run from the police causing traffic fatalities, and the border patrol can then focus on the real threat crossing our border. Drug and human trafficers, possibly terrorists, who knows what all is able to hide in the current massive wave of illegal immigration. Throw up a fence and we should be able to deter even further those who would enter, or even exit this country illegally.

 

[HouseApe]

Create a wide enough legal avenue for workers to get to the U.S. and they will stop risking thier lives to cross the border illegally. They won't need to tear up private property, they won't need to fill our emergancy rooms, they won't need to run from the police causing traffic fatalities, and the border patrol can then focus on the real threat crossing our border. Drug and human trafficers, possibly terrorists, who knows what all is able to hide in the current massive wave of illegal immigration. Throw up a fence and we should be able to deter even further those who would enter, or even exit this country illegally.

The problem is that no one wants to hire large number of legal immigrants. Legal immigrants have an expectation of getting decent pay for a decent days work. Legal immigrants will want decent housing, health care, education and all of the other goodies Americans tend to expect. That costs a lot of money, and if the folks who hired illegals wanted to spend this, they would just hire Americans.

Corporate America does not want a "guest worker program". They want large numbers of illegals that they can exploit as cheap labor, and cast off their costs to taxpayers.

That is why you will hear a lot of tough talk from Republican politicians about ending illegal immigration, but absolutely no action. Corporate America controls the Republican Party, and the Reps control America.

Unfortunately, Christian conservatives are stuck in a party that just pays lip service to their desires. They have become to the reps what blacks are to the dems. A solid vote to be exploited for someone else's gain.

 

[ACougar]

These are my mountains, I hike them, I meditate in them, I all but live in them. They are beautiful and rugged, the range starts pretty much on the border with Mexico. When I hike the mountains these days I find mountains of trash everywhere, which offends me greatly but that's not the worst part. The worst part is the trash I find up there, diapers, little childrens knapsacks, candy wrappers, it quickly becomes obvious that it's not just adults who are sneaking through here but whole families with little children. I can not express how outraged I feel, not at the parents who are seeking a better life but at the two governments (Mexico and the United States) which allow such a situation to exist without doing anything meaningful about it. Every year people die in the deserts and in the mountains along the border region seeking a better life and it's not just adult males.

http://images.google.com/imgres?img...=100&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=lgtech-kb&sa=N

 

[ACougar]

I hate to say this, but what really needs to be reformed is Mexico. Unfortunately, that is not within our power. So instead we need to manage the problem from this end.

The first step is controling our border, and a physical fence that is patroled and equiped with all the electronic gear would be a huge step in the right direction toward gaining control of our border.

The second step is to slam any bussiness that knowingly hires illegal aliens. If they have false IDs they have a false SSN, if they have a fake SSN after a month or two of paying Social Security tax someone should be able to figure out that the person is not who they say they are.. Check the bussiness to insure there are no more illegal workers, fine the bussiness 100K per illegal and ship then illegals back to thier home country.

The third step is to make sure there is enough legal immigration to meet demand, anyone without a criminal record should be allowed to enter the US legally and seek work.

Okay. *You* can pay for it. Meanwhile, the rest of us will be pursuing sane and reasonable reform that fixes the problem rather than wasting few billion dollars on a big wall that will do little to nothing to fix it.

 

[LaLaRu]

The first step is controling our border, and a physical fence that is patroled and equiped with all the electronic gear would be a huge step in the right direction toward gaining control of our border.

The second step is to slam any bussiness that knowingly hires illegal aliens. If they have false IDs they have a false SSN, if they have a fake SSN after a month or two of paying Social Security tax someone should be able to figure out that the person is not who they say they are.. Check the bussiness to insure there are no more illegal workers, fine the bussiness 100K per illegal and ship then illegals back to thier home country.

The third step is to make sure there is enough legal immigration to meet demand, anyone without a criminal record should be allowed to enter the US legally and seek work.

While I agree with your ideas, I think that the order should be reversed. One should try the simple methods first, before moving on to the vastly complex ones. Opening legal immigration would be the easiest thing to do, followed by fining the companies. Besides costing a lot, the fence idea would require a lot of construction work and heavy machines going into the wilderness, which should make it a last resort.

 

[arnegrim]

No... they need to be all done at the same time.

You can't change immigration laws (and they do need to be changed) to make it easier and expect that to stop those who want to just ignore it altogether.

Businesses need to stop rewarding those here illegally. And any businesses who do so willingly and/or knowledgably... need to be swatted... HARD.

As to the fence... again... those who want to ignore our immigration laws won't care if it's easier... because walking across the border is still the easiest route... and shouldn't be.

 

[nvxplorer]

The second step is to slam any bussiness that knowingly hires illegal aliens. If they have false IDs they have a false SSN, if they have a fake SSN after a month or two of paying Social Security tax someone should be able to figure out that the person is not who they say they are.

What’s infuriating is that the IRS and SS Administration already know which numbers are bogus. They have refused to give this information to law enforcement under the claim of privacy.

 

[JustOneWay]

I hate to say this, but what really needs to be reformed is Mexico. Unfortunately, that is not within our power.

Why? What is stopping us? We are doing a wiz-bang job over in Iraq. I think Mexico has WMD's it is as easy as that!

the uniter

the decider

the reformer

think of it as another state

 

[ACougar]

I should have emphasised that all three must be done at the same time, they should be one package. I beleive the border should be secure even once we've resolved the immigration problem. Drugs, human trafficing, terrorism, these will always exist.

While I agree with your ideas, I think that the order should be reversed. One should try the simple methods first, before moving on to the vastly complex ones. Opening legal immigration would be the easiest thing to do, followed by fining the companies. Besides costing a lot, the fence idea would require a lot of construction work and heavy machines going into the wilderness, which should make it a last resort.