Jesus. This thread has gone to shit a little bit. People getting all judgey because DS figures there should be stronger deterrents for people entering the country illegally. Ie, harder boarders to smuggle bodies across. Do you weirdos really think there is something wrong with that?? I don't get it. I don't get anyone trying to defend people who are in a country illegally. Why the bleeding hearts for illegals? And why do people care if illegals are dumb enough to run off into the desert and die, for that matter?
my heart does not bleed for illegal immigrants...it bleeds for road blocks on american roads...not border crossings...no matter why you are hear you are afforded the protections of the constitution, which has due process limits. That applies to everyone here in the US...illegally or not...
Stay away from the borders then. Unfortunately until this country takes a dramatic turn in defending the borders a secondary defense has to be taken and is already in place.
Jesus. This thread has gone to shit a little bit. People getting all judgey because DS figures there should be stronger deterrents for people entering the country illegally. Ie, harder boarders to smuggle bodies across. Do you weirdos really think there is something wrong with that?? I don't get it. I don't get anyone trying to defend people who are in a country illegally. Why the bleeding hearts for illegals? And why do people care if illegals are dumb enough to run off into the desert and die, for that matter?
my heart does not bleed for illegal immigrants...it bleeds for road blocks on american roads...not border crossings...no matter why you are hear you are afforded the protections of the constitution, which has due process limits. That applies to everyone here in the US...illegally or not...
Okay
..... I don't understand why the road blocks would bother anyone. I don't actually think anyone has adequately expressed why they are against simple road blocks where they ask if you're a citizen because they are trying to catch and (mainly) deter illegal immigrants in the area. I understand there is some grand principle involved.in this objection, but it still doesn't really make any sense in the face of reality.
PS - holy fucking shit to those photos DS posted. I didn't realize there were enough people doing that to make that big of a mess.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
PS - holy fucking shit to those photos DS posted. I didn't realize there were enough people doing that to make that big of a mess.
It's a huge problem actually. People in the northern part of the country I don't think realize how big it is. All they do is read about "roadblocks" and start waving the Constitution. There are thousands coming into the country illegally everyday. Some carrying illegal weapons. SOme carrying illegal drugs. Some working here illegally...getting paid...and then leaving the country with their untaxed money. Some illegals come here when pregnant knowing that whne they give birth their children will instantkly be given US citizenship and then become "anchor babies".
I've given my solution...and it's harsh...but I bet it would work. The same bleeding hearts that oppose such a dramatic border need to also understand then that some other measures need to be used and if that means roadblocks so be it.
I'm for very strict border control (at the BORDER) and very strict deportation laws for the most part. What I'm not for is infringing on every citizen's rights in order to try to police this. It is ineffective at best and unconstitutional at worst.
As for "illegals" (as you call them) running off into the desert and dying. I don't like it, but they are breaking the law and making a choice. I don't think we should provide water/gatorade stands and tents to help them by any means.
Same here.
And did we ever find any stats on how much time and money it costs to run these checkpoints and how many "illegals" are caught? I'm inclined to think its not a good use of our tax dollars.
And building giant walls is not the answer.
I'm for very strict border control (at the BORDER) and very strict deportation laws for the most part. What I'm not for is infringing on every citizen's rights in order to try to police this. It is ineffective at best and unconstitutional at worst.
As for "illegals" (as you call them) running off into the desert and dying. I don't like it, but they are breaking the law and making a choice. I don't think we should provide water/gatorade stands and tents to help them by any means.
Same here.
And did we ever find any stats on how much time and money it costs to run these checkpoints and how many "illegals" are caught? I'm inclined to think its not a good use of our tax dollars.
And building giant walls is not the answer.
Not many are caught at the checkpoints becasue they are forced into the deserts actually. Exactly what they want to happen. If you have ever been in the Southwest pretty much 20 feet off of the major highways in these regions are not the nicest of conditions. Clog the roads and make it hard for the smugglers and illegals to pass. Put them in the desert where our technology can find them. And as far as cost...how much extra money in the grand scheme of things does it cost to put 4 or 6 officers at these checkpoints in relation to the good they are doing for the country? Simplest and cheapest way in my eyes is a bigger wall (since there is actually a wall already) and more guns.
Jesus. This thread has gone to shit a little bit. People getting all judgey because DS figures there should be stronger deterrents for people entering the country illegally. Ie, harder boarders to smuggle bodies across. Do you weirdos really think there is something wrong with that?? I don't get it. I don't get anyone trying to defend people who are in a country illegally. Why the bleeding hearts for illegals? And why do people care if illegals are dumb enough to run off into the desert and die, for that matter?
I don't mind judging someone who supports shooting or blowing up people for ANY reason. I'm against the death penalty for murder, and you people expect me to support it, without any form of human rights or due process, for a crime as heinous as illegally crossing a border? Honestly, I think anyone who thinks that way suffers from a serious lack of compassion - a sociopathic trait. That even applies to your statement about 'illegals dumb enough to run off into the desert and die'. But what do I know, I'm just a bleeding heart weirdo :roll:
Lets set up lookout towers to shoot people from. Good plan. And a second layer - checkpoints inland from the border, and harass every person we see. Even better!
um....why not set up checkpoints at the lookout towers,and instead of shooting the people you see, send them back or arrest and deport them? Just not as fun, or....?
'Stronger deterrents' and harder to penetrate borders does not equal walls, landmines, and firing squads....unless you're North Korea, or maybe.....nazi Germany?
DS - you want me to take a stab at solving a problem that all the experts in your country haven't been able to solve, but you won't answer the simple yes or no question I've asked you five times in this thread? talk about funny.....
OR we can continue to tank the economy so these folks wont want to come for these jobs . Which I think is the best answer as to why theres been a decline in unauthorized immigration.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I don't mind judging someone who supports shooting or blowing up people for ANY reason. I'm against the death penalty for murder, and you people expect me to support it, without any form of human rights or due process, for a crime as heinous as illegally crossing a border? Honestly, I think anyone who thinks that way suffers from a serious lack of compassion - a sociopathic trait. That even applies to your statement about 'illegals dumb enough to run off into the desert and die'. But what do I know, I'm just a bleeding heart weirdo :roll:
Lets set up lookout towers to shoot people from. Good plan. And a second layer - checkpoints inland from the border, and harass every person we see. Even better!
um....why not set up checkpoints at the lookout towers,and instead of shooting the people you see, send them back or arrest and deport them? Just not as fun, or....?
'Stronger deterrents' and harder to penetrate borders does not equal walls, landmines, and firing squads....unless you're North Korea, or maybe.....nazi Germany?
DS - you want me to take a stab at solving a problem that all the experts in your country haven't been able to solve, but you won't answer the simple yes or no question I've asked you five times in this thread? talk about funny.....
What yes or no question are you asking? I'll answer anything. I don't hide my opinions. And yes, I do think your posts in this thread are funny.
And what's wrong with defending a country's borders even if it's with guns. You don't want to be shot. Don't cross the border illegally. Pretty simple. I suggest you read the article I just posted.
OR we can continue to tank the economy so these folks wont want to come for these jobs . Which I think is the best answer as to why theres been a decline in unauthorized immigration.
It will take a lot more tanking before the US economy gets to Mexican levels. I still go by the saying my Dad used to say even when times were tough. "There's a hell of a lot more people trying to get into this country then there are trying to get out". Always hit home with me.
Jesus. This thread has gone to shit a little bit. People getting all judgey because DS figures there should be stronger deterrents for people entering the country illegally. Ie, harder boarders to smuggle bodies across. Do you weirdos really think there is something wrong with that?? I don't get it. I don't get anyone trying to defend people who are in a country illegally. Why the bleeding hearts for illegals? And why do people care if illegals are dumb enough to run off into the desert and die, for that matter?
I don't mind judging someone who supports shooting or blowing up people for ANY reason. I'm against the death penalty for murder, and you people expect me to support it, without any form of human rights or due process, for a crime as heinous as illegally crossing a border? Honestly, I think anyone who thinks that way suffers from a serious lack of compassion - a sociopathic trait. That even applies to your statement about 'illegals dumb enough to run off into the desert and die'. But what do I know, I'm just a bleeding heart weirdo :roll:
Lets set up lookout towers to shoot people from. Good plan. And a second layer - checkpoints inland from the border, and harass every person we see. Even better!
um....why not set up checkpoints at the lookout towers,and instead of shooting the people you see, send them back or arrest and deport them? Just not as fun, or....?
'Stronger deterrents' and harder to penetrate borders does not equal walls, landmines, and firing squads....unless you're North Korea, or maybe.....nazi Germany?
DS - you want me to take a stab at solving a problem that all the experts in your country haven't been able to solve, but you won't answer the simple yes or no question I've asked you five times in this thread? talk about funny.....
Why did you quote me?? I never said anything about killing anyone. I am totally against that, and despise the death penalty. Please do not attribute those kinds of actions to me. I'm talking about a simple road check. Why are you talking about walls and towers and murder?? People going off in the desert and dying is dumb. I don't know what you are trying to say, but am positive that you're twisting my words... mangling them, actually.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Jesus. This thread has gone to shit a little bit. People getting all judgey because DS figures there should be stronger deterrents for people entering the country illegally. Ie, harder boarders to smuggle bodies across. Do you weirdos really think there is something wrong with that?? I don't get it. I don't get anyone trying to defend people who are in a country illegally. Why the bleeding hearts for illegals? And why do people care if illegals are dumb enough to run off into the desert and die, for that matter?
I don't mind judging someone who supports shooting or blowing up people for ANY reason. I'm against the death penalty for murder, and you people expect me to support it, without any form of human rights or due process, for a crime as heinous as illegally crossing a border? Honestly, I think anyone who thinks that way suffers from a serious lack of compassion - a sociopathic trait. That even applies to your statement about 'illegals dumb enough to run off into the desert and die'. But what do I know, I'm just a bleeding heart weirdo :roll:
Lets set up lookout towers to shoot people from. Good plan. And a second layer - checkpoints inland from the border, and harass every person we see. Even better!
um....why not set up checkpoints at the lookout towers,and instead of shooting the people you see, send them back or arrest and deport them? Just not as fun, or....?
'Stronger deterrents' and harder to penetrate borders does not equal walls, landmines, and firing squads....unless you're North Korea, or maybe.....nazi Germany?
Why did you quote me?? I never said anything about killing anyone. I am totally against that, and despise the death penalty. Please do not attribute those kinds of actions to me. I'm talking about a simple road check. Why are you talking about walls and towers and murder?? People going off in the desert and dying is dumb. I don't know what you are trying to say, but am positive that you're twisting my words... mangling them, actually.
I quoted you because I wanted to explain why I was getting 'all judgey'....you were defending DS wanting 'stronger deterrents' only a few posts after he advocated walls, towers, and murder as deterrents....if you missed those posts, I guess we have a misunderstanding, apologies and thanks for the clarification.
But, to the second part - I think it's pretty cold to throw out blanket statements saying you don't care if people die in the desert, as if they don't have an individual story to tell. a broken law, or a risky action, shouldn't negate a person's empathy. maybe I am a bleeding heart. I'm actually pretty saddened by this thread in general :(
What yes or no question are you asking? I'll answer anything. I don't hide my opinions. And yes, I do think your posts in this thread are funny.
And what's wrong with defending a country's borders even if it's with guns. You don't want to be shot. Don't cross the border illegally. Pretty simple. I suggest you read the article I just posted.
Either you're fucking with me, or you're not reading my posts at all... I asked it 3 times, then quoted all 3 instances in a single post... I'm not typing it again
I'll take a look at your article.
You do realize it's your country (and mine), creating the demand for these drugs, and there is someone on your side of the border paying for them, right?
You do realize that your country's one-sided funding of the drug war in Mexico has played a MAJOR role in the escalation of violence?
You do realize that that same funding and escalation of the drug war that resulted in drugs being routed away from traditional smuggling routes, and taken directly through your borders?
You do realize that NAFTA, then US industry outsourcing are major contributing precursors to the destruction of the manufacturing and agricultural sectors in the areas hardest hit by the drug war...?
It's not so much that you don't accept any sliver of culpability for the conditions in other countries...that's pretty much the norm...it's the lack of foresight in your solutions that gets to me. (well, lets be frank, the shoot-first mentality is flat out barbaric )
You do realize it's your country (and mine), creating the demand for these drugs, and there is someone on your side of the border paying for them, right?
You do realize that your country's one-sided funding of the drug war in Mexico has played a MAJOR role in the escalation of violence?
You do realize that that same funding and escalation of the drug war that resulted in drugs being routed away from traditional smuggling routes, and taken directly through your borders?
You do realize that NAFTA, then US industry outsourcing are major contributing precursors to the destruction of the manufacturing and agricultural sectors in the areas hardest hit by the drug war...?
It's not so much that you don't accept any sliver of culpability for the conditions in other countries...that's pretty much the norm...it's the lack of foresight in your solutions that gets to me. (well, lets be frank, the shoot-first mentality is flat out barbaric )
There is a ridiculously easy and outrageously beneficial solution to all of those problems. The US needs to legalize drugs. It would stop all the violence, improve the criminal justice system, and save the US economy.I don't really know what it would do for Mexico though... possibly it would make them legalize drugs too. Win-win.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I don't mind judging someone who supports shooting or blowing up people for ANY reason. I'm against the death penalty for murder, and you people expect me to support it, without any form of human rights or due process, for a crime as heinous as illegally crossing a border? Honestly, I think anyone who thinks that way suffers from a serious lack of compassion - a sociopathic trait. That even applies to your statement about 'illegals dumb enough to run off into the desert and die'. But what do I know, I'm just a bleeding heart weirdo :roll:
Lets set up lookout towers to shoot people from. Good plan. And a second layer - checkpoints inland from the border, and harass every person we see. Even better!
um....why not set up checkpoints at the lookout towers,and instead of shooting the people you see, send them back or arrest and deport them? Just not as fun, or....?
'Stronger deterrents' and harder to penetrate borders does not equal walls, landmines, and firing squads....unless you're North Korea, or maybe.....nazi Germany?
Why did you quote me?? I never said anything about killing anyone. I am totally against that, and despise the death penalty. Please do not attribute those kinds of actions to me. I'm talking about a simple road check. Why are you talking about walls and towers and murder?? People going off in the desert and dying is dumb. I don't know what you are trying to say, but am positive that you're twisting my words... mangling them, actually.
I quoted you because I wanted to explain why I was getting 'all judgey'....you were defending DS wanting 'stronger deterrents' only a few posts after he advocated walls, towers, and murder as deterrents....if you missed those posts, I guess we have a misunderstanding, apologies and thanks for the clarification.
But, to the second part - I think it's pretty cold to throw out blanket statements saying you don't care if people die in the desert, as if they don't have an individual story to tell. a broken law, or a risky action, shouldn't negate a person's empathy. maybe I am a bleeding heart. I'm actually pretty saddened by this thread in general :(
I'm just defending DS's views about the road blocks.
But yeah, I don't have much empathy for people who lose their lives due to doing stupid shit. I do have empathy for those whose lives are really difficult... doesn't excuse them from acting stupid and losing their lives like that. That is their conscious decision, so i'm not going to expend lots of emotion for those who make those choices. .
The US has to protect its own interests first. It can't afford to try and help those from other countries. Its own citizens have enough problems already. I do think that each nation has to sink or swim on its own for the most part, and that counts for the people in them too. It doesn't mean I don't feel for them, but I'm realistic and logical when it comes to issues like this as well. The US has to stop the illegal immigrants so it can better focus its resources on its citizens. Desperate times call for desperate measures.In the scheme of things road checks like this are quite innocuous.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
There is a ridiculously easy and outrageously beneficial solution to all of those problems. The US needs to legalize drugs. It would stop all the violence, improve the criminal justice system, and save the US economy.I don't really know what it would do for Mexico though... possibly it would make them legalize drugs too. Win-win.
:thumbup: absolutely.
I'm not sure where Mexico would fit in in a world without the drug war...depends how it was set up for international trade. But I'm sure they'd be happy with an end to the violence at this point. I guarantee you if the US legalized drugs, most of the Western world would follow suit over night. There is no denying the US has massive influence on drug policy the world over. It's intrinsic to their foreign policy on every level from foreign aid, to military actions, intelligence cooperation, black ops funding, and on down the list....
I'm just defending DS's views about the road blocks.
But yeah, I don't have much empathy for people who lose their lives due to doing stupid shit. I do have empathy for those whose lives are really difficult... doesn't excuse them from acting stupid and losing their lives like that. That is their conscious decision, so i'm not going to expend lots of emotion for those who make those choices. .
The US has to protect its own interests first. It can't afford to try and help those from other countries. Its own citizens have enough problems already. I do think that each nation has to sink or swim on its own for the most part, and that counts for the people in them too. It doesn't mean I don't feel for them, but I'm realistic and logical when it comes to issues like this as well. The US has to stop the illegal immigrants so it can better focus its resources on its citizens. Desperate times call for desperate measures.In the scheme of things road checks like this are quite innocuous.
I understand what you're saying. No one can sit and dwell on every tragedy in the world. But I do think many of these stories would be beyond tragic. Some of these people might even qualify as refugees (in some countries) due to conditions attributed to the drug war. Something tells me that wouldn't fly in the US tho. I agree that Mexicans should stand up for themselves, and the US should stand up for it's own citizens first....but I think that kind of forgets the culpability I mentioned earlier. There are other aspects of international trade to be addressed, but if, as you say, the US ended the drug war, I think it would absolve them of a large amount of that culpability.
The roadblocks: I see them as less innocuous in the small scale - as a short term, drastic measure. It's the entirely possible rammifications of them becoming normalized; used more and more often, to combat situations with decreasing severity, that I find most odious. If unauthorized border crossings are waning....when do they decide it's not desperate times anymore? Or do they just keep going with the checkpoints until they stop catching these people (indefinitely)?
For truth.
Popular Canadian joke:
What do Terry Fox (super famous dude who ran across Canada on one leg for cancer research and dies in the process, never completing the run) and Hitler have in common?
Neither one of them could finish a race.
for truth: that was a stupid fucking joke...not sure what kind of person would think that was funny...and I was asking DS...perhaps s/he can answer a question for once...
no back to the topic at hand...
there seems to be two schools of thought here....on one side we the have the "if you have nothing to hide and holocaust jokesters". The other side says "this is America, I shouldn't have to show my papers"...
as I see it, when the police randomly kick down the door of one of the "nothing to hide" folks, they'll quickly move to the other side...
Jesus. This thread has gone to shit a little bit. People getting all judgey because DS figures there should be stronger deterrents for people entering the country illegally. Ie, harder boarders to smuggle bodies across. Do you weirdos really think there is something wrong with that?? I don't get it. I don't get anyone trying to defend people who are in a country illegally. Why the bleeding hearts for illegals? And why do people care if illegals are dumb enough to run off into the desert and die, for that matter?
my heart does not bleed for illegal immigrants...it bleeds for road blocks on american roads...not border crossings...no matter why you are hear you are afforded the protections of the constitution, which has due process limits. That applies to everyone here in the US...illegally or not...
Okay
..... I don't understand why the road blocks would bother anyone. I don't actually think anyone has adequately expressed why they are against simple road blocks where they ask if you're a citizen because they are trying to catch and (mainly) deter illegal immigrants in the area. I understand there is some grand principle involved.in this objection, but it still doesn't really make any sense in the face of reality.
PS - holy fucking shit to those photos DS posted. I didn't realize there were enough people doing that to make that big of a mess.
because when you give a little a lot gets taken. It starts with illegal immirgration road blocks. add that to stop and frisk in NYC simply for being on the street and you start to have problems. Would you be ok if every time you walked passed a cop they searched you? would that be ok? this is how it starts...they justify it as high crime areas...they believe they are going good, but in reality they set the stage for far worse grabs in the future...to me a right can't be violated just a little bit...there is a line, even if you cross it just a little right away you have still crossed it.
Effective deterrence is so hard to prove...but no one can convince me that effective deterrence is worth giving up rights...if people thought they were going to actually be caught no matter how they attempted to get into the country they wouldn't try...but since we catch so very few compared to all those that get through there is no deterrence no matter what we do...
This gets quoted a lot, but those willing to give up a little liberty for security deserve neither and will lose both.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
What yes or no question are you asking? I'll answer anything. I don't hide my opinions. And yes, I do think your posts in this thread are funny.
And what's wrong with defending a country's borders even if it's with guns. You don't want to be shot. Don't cross the border illegally. Pretty simple. I suggest you read the article I just posted.
Either you're fucking with me, or you're not reading my posts at all... I asked it 3 times, then quoted all 3 instances in a single post... I'm not typing it again
I'll take a look at your article.
I still don't see any question that you have asked that I haven't answered.
because when you give a little a lot gets taken. It starts with illegal immirgration road blocks. add that to stop and frisk in NYC simply for being on the street and you start to have problems. Would you be ok if every time you walked passed a cop they searched you? would that be ok? this is how it starts...they justify it as high crime areas...they believe they are going good, but in reality they set the stage for far worse grabs in the future...to me a right can't be violated just a little bit...there is a line, even if you cross it just a little right away you have still crossed it.
Effective deterrence is so hard to prove...but no one can convince me that effective deterrence is worth giving up rights...if people thought they were going to actually be caught no matter how they attempted to get into the country they wouldn't try...but since we catch so very few compared to all those that get through there is no deterrence no matter what we do...
This gets quoted a lot, but those willing to give up a little liberty for security deserve neither and will lose both.
You make a lot of assumptions. You mention deterrence. Put guns along the border and that's one hell of a dterrent. All the methods that are being used are actually already being used. I haven't been frisked by cops in 20 years. I've been through a road block 4 or 5 times coming back from Canada. Big deal.
You do realize it's your country (and mine), creating the demand for these drugs, and there is someone on your side of the border paying for them, right?
You do realize that your country's one-sided funding of the drug war in Mexico has played a MAJOR role in the escalation of violence?
You do realize that that same funding and escalation of the drug war that resulted in drugs being routed away from traditional smuggling routes, and taken directly through your borders?
You do realize that NAFTA, then US industry outsourcing are major contributing precursors to the destruction of the manufacturing and agricultural sectors in the areas hardest hit by the drug war...?
It's not so much that you don't accept any sliver of culpability for the conditions in other countries...that's pretty much the norm...it's the lack of foresight in your solutions that gets to me. (well, lets be frank, the shoot-first mentality is flat out barbaric )
Drugs are illegal. So is drug smuggling. So are illegal weapons. So are illegal immigrants. Call my solution barbaric. Call it what you want. But I guarantee a wall gets put up with men with guns evry 500 yards that are trained to shoot. This bullshit stops.
because when you give a little a lot gets taken. It starts with illegal immirgration road blocks. add that to stop and frisk in NYC simply for being on the street and you start to have problems. Would you be ok if every time you walked passed a cop they searched you? would that be ok? this is how it starts...they justify it as high crime areas...they believe they are going good, but in reality they set the stage for far worse grabs in the future...to me a right can't be violated just a little bit...there is a line, even if you cross it just a little right away you have still crossed it.
Effective deterrence is so hard to prove...but no one can convince me that effective deterrence is worth giving up rights...if people thought they were going to actually be caught no matter how they attempted to get into the country they wouldn't try...but since we catch so very few compared to all those that get through there is no deterrence no matter what we do...
This gets quoted a lot, but those willing to give up a little liberty for security deserve neither and will lose both.
You make a lot of assumptions. You mention deterrence. Put guns along the border and that's one hell of a dterrent. All the methods that are being used are actually already being used. I haven't been frisked by cops in 20 years. I've been through a road block 4 or 5 times coming back from Canada. Big deal.
I know a fair amount about deterrence and the studies that have been done on it as a concept of crime prevention (criminology student for years). ultimately what works is a clearance rate above about 20-25%...meaning that if they caught one out of every 4 or 5 people trying to sneak across the border that might be a deterrent...The methods done to reach that point inside the border of the US should be guided by the constitution. That is all I am saying...protecting the border is one thing...doing it on a road that goes between California and Arizona that I was stopped at is another.
I don't assume things about the government and its grasp at power...it happens in small bits...you start with dui check points you move to stop and frisk...you start with allowing wire taps some times to allowing wire taps on everyone all the time (patriot act) you start by fighting terrorists over seas, you then declare the US a battle ground and give your army the ability to indefinitely detain US citizens...Power of government never stands still, they always want more...if you give them a little they will be back for the rest later.
That isn't an assumption, that is fact...
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I know a fair amount about deterrence and the studies that have been done on it as a concept of crime prevention (criminology student for years). ultimately what works is a clearance rate above about 20-25%...meaning that if they caught one out of every 4 or 5 people trying to sneak across the border that might be a deterrent...The methods done to reach that point inside the border of the US should be guided by the constitution. That is all I am saying...protecting the border is one thing...doing it on a road that goes between California and Arizona that I was stopped at is another.
I don't assume things about the government and its grasp at power...it happens in small bits...you start with dui check points you move to stop and frisk...you start with allowing wire taps some times to allowing wire taps on everyone all the time (patriot act) you start by fighting terrorists over seas, you then declare the US a battle ground and give your army the ability to indefinitely detain US citizens...Power of government never stands still, they always want more...if you give them a little they will be back for the rest later.
That isn't an assumption, that is fact...
This is quite funny to me actually. You talk like the US government is out to take over everyone's lives. Yes, everyone in the government sits in one big room and has meetings plotting how they take everyone's rights away.
I look at the roadblocks like this. Let's say you go to a hospital to have a simple cut stitched up. All of a sudden a highly contagious person comes into the same ER you are in. The offcials decide to quarantine the hospital and everyone inside it. You must now give up your freedom for the benefit of the whole to stop that virus. The southern border is infected with a shitload of viruses of illegal immigrants, illegal drug smugglers, illegal gun importers and having to stop at a checkpoint to answer a question or maybe show an ID (which they actually don't ask for) is for the benefit of the whole. It has nothing to do with you as an individual...it has everyhting to do with the nation as a whole.
I know a fair amount about deterrence and the studies that have been done on it as a concept of crime prevention (criminology student for years). ultimately what works is a clearance rate above about 20-25%...meaning that if they caught one out of every 4 or 5 people trying to sneak across the border that might be a deterrent...The methods done to reach that point inside the border of the US should be guided by the constitution. That is all I am saying...protecting the border is one thing...doing it on a road that goes between California and Arizona that I was stopped at is another.
I don't assume things about the government and its grasp at power...it happens in small bits...you start with dui check points you move to stop and frisk...you start with allowing wire taps some times to allowing wire taps on everyone all the time (patriot act) you start by fighting terrorists over seas, you then declare the US a battle ground and give your army the ability to indefinitely detain US citizens...Power of government never stands still, they always want more...if you give them a little they will be back for the rest later.
That isn't an assumption, that is fact...
This is quite funny to me actually. You talk like the US government is out to take over everyone's lives. Yes, everyone in the government sits in one big room and has meetings plotting how they take everyone's rights away.
no it is actually much worse. That could be stopped, that is a simple good vs evil scenario...They do it in the name of what is best for people without giving thought to where the programs can lead to...Most programs are motivated by good intentions, but those programs and abilities will exist long after those running them now are gone...Do you mean to tell me that if someone like Nixon or worse yet, J. Edgar Hoover had the ability to legally, indefinitely detain ...ah forget it...i will simply end it with the road to hell is paved with good intentions
I don't believe anyone actively sits in a room and decides what rights to go after, I do believe they sit in the house of reps and the senate and bring up ideas and propose legislation that aims to combat serious problems without realizing that they are causing serious problems by passing the legislation. We don't need to give up the liberty of all individuals to solve the problems caused by a few...(the word few isn't intended to mean that illegal immigration doesn't cause problems)
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I know a fair amount about deterrence and the studies that have been done on it as a concept of crime prevention (criminology student for years). ultimately what works is a clearance rate above about 20-25%...meaning that if they caught one out of every 4 or 5 people trying to sneak across the border that might be a deterrent...The methods done to reach that point inside the border of the US should be guided by the constitution. That is all I am saying...protecting the border is one thing...doing it on a road that goes between California and Arizona that I was stopped at is another.
I don't assume things about the government and its grasp at power...it happens in small bits...you start with dui check points you move to stop and frisk...you start with allowing wire taps some times to allowing wire taps on everyone all the time (patriot act) you start by fighting terrorists over seas, you then declare the US a battle ground and give your army the ability to indefinitely detain US citizens...Power of government never stands still, they always want more...if you give them a little they will be back for the rest later.
That isn't an assumption, that is fact...
This is quite funny to me actually. You talk like the US government is out to take over everyone's lives. Yes, everyone in the government sits in one big room and has meetings plotting how they take everyone's rights away.
no it is actually much worse. That could be stopped, that is a simple good vs evil scenario...They do it in the name of what is best for people without giving thought to where the programs can lead to...Most programs are motivated by good intentions, but those programs and abilities will exist long after those running them now are gone...Do you mean to tell me that if someone like Nixon or worse yet, J. Edgar Hoover had the ability to legally, indefinitely detain ...ah forget it...i will simply end it with the road to hell is paved with good intentions
I don't believe anyone actively sits in a room and decides what rights to go after, I do believe they sit in the house of reps and the senate and bring up ideas and propose legislation that aims to combat serious problems without realizing that they are causing serious problems by passing the legislation. We don't need to give up the liberty of all individuals to solve the problems caused by a few...(the word few isn't intended to mean that illegal immigration doesn't cause problems)
Well I will say I'm happy the checkpoints exist and look forward to the US government hopefully becoming even more active and filtering these viruses out.
Comments
Stay away from the borders then. Unfortunately until this country takes a dramatic turn in defending the borders a secondary defense has to be taken and is already in place.
..... I don't understand why the road blocks would bother anyone. I don't actually think anyone has adequately expressed why they are against simple road blocks where they ask if you're a citizen because they are trying to catch and (mainly) deter illegal immigrants in the area. I understand there is some grand principle involved.in this objection, but it still doesn't really make any sense in the face of reality.
PS - holy fucking shit to those photos DS posted. I didn't realize there were enough people doing that to make that big of a mess.
It's a huge problem actually. People in the northern part of the country I don't think realize how big it is. All they do is read about "roadblocks" and start waving the Constitution. There are thousands coming into the country illegally everyday. Some carrying illegal weapons. SOme carrying illegal drugs. Some working here illegally...getting paid...and then leaving the country with their untaxed money. Some illegals come here when pregnant knowing that whne they give birth their children will instantkly be given US citizenship and then become "anchor babies".
I've given my solution...and it's harsh...but I bet it would work.
Same here.
And did we ever find any stats on how much time and money it costs to run these checkpoints and how many "illegals" are caught? I'm inclined to think its not a good use of our tax dollars.
And building giant walls is not the answer.
Not many are caught at the checkpoints becasue they are forced into the deserts actually. Exactly what they want to happen. If you have ever been in the Southwest pretty much 20 feet off of the major highways in these regions are not the nicest of conditions. Clog the roads and make it hard for the smugglers and illegals to pass. Put them in the desert where our technology can find them. And as far as cost...how much extra money in the grand scheme of things does it cost to put 4 or 6 officers at these checkpoints in relation to the good they are doing for the country? Simplest and cheapest way in my eyes is a bigger wall (since there is actually a wall already) and more guns.
Lets set up lookout towers to shoot people from. Good plan. And a second layer - checkpoints inland from the border, and harass every person we see. Even better!
um....why not set up checkpoints at the lookout towers,and instead of shooting the people you see, send them back or arrest and deport them? Just not as fun, or....?
'Stronger deterrents' and harder to penetrate borders does not equal walls, landmines, and firing squads....unless you're North Korea, or maybe.....nazi Germany?
DS - you want me to take a stab at solving a problem that all the experts in your country haven't been able to solve, but you won't answer the simple yes or no question I've asked you five times in this thread?
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wir ... t-16768439
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
What yes or no question are you asking? I'll answer anything. I don't hide my opinions. And yes, I do think your posts in this thread are funny.
And what's wrong with defending a country's borders even if it's with guns. You don't want to be shot. Don't cross the border illegally. Pretty simple. I suggest you read the article I just posted.
It will take a lot more tanking before the US economy gets to Mexican levels.
But, to the second part - I think it's pretty cold to throw out blanket statements saying you don't care if people die in the desert, as if they don't have an individual story to tell. a broken law, or a risky action, shouldn't negate a person's empathy. maybe I am a bleeding heart. I'm actually pretty saddened by this thread in general :(
I'll take a look at your article.
You do realize it's your country (and mine), creating the demand for these drugs, and there is someone on your side of the border paying for them, right?
You do realize that your country's one-sided funding of the drug war in Mexico has played a MAJOR role in the escalation of violence?
You do realize that that same funding and escalation of the drug war that resulted in drugs being routed away from traditional smuggling routes, and taken directly through your borders?
You do realize that NAFTA, then US industry outsourcing are major contributing precursors to the destruction of the manufacturing and agricultural sectors in the areas hardest hit by the drug war...?
It's not so much that you don't accept any sliver of culpability for the conditions in other countries...that's pretty much the norm...it's the lack of foresight in your solutions that gets to me. (well, lets be frank, the shoot-first mentality is flat out barbaric
But yeah, I don't have much empathy for people who lose their lives due to doing stupid shit. I do have empathy for those whose lives are really difficult... doesn't excuse them from acting stupid and losing their lives like that. That is their conscious decision, so i'm not going to expend lots of emotion for those who make those choices. .
The US has to protect its own interests first. It can't afford to try and help those from other countries. Its own citizens have enough problems already. I do think that each nation has to sink or swim on its own for the most part, and that counts for the people in them too. It doesn't mean I don't feel for them, but I'm realistic and logical when it comes to issues like this as well. The US has to stop the illegal immigrants so it can better focus its resources on its citizens. Desperate times call for desperate measures.In the scheme of things road checks like this are quite innocuous.
I'm not sure where Mexico would fit in in a world without the drug war...depends how it was set up for international trade. But I'm sure they'd be happy with an end to the violence at this point. I guarantee you if the US legalized drugs, most of the Western world would follow suit over night. There is no denying the US has massive influence on drug policy the world over. It's intrinsic to their foreign policy on every level from foreign aid, to military actions, intelligence cooperation, black ops funding, and on down the list....
The roadblocks: I see them as less innocuous in the small scale - as a short term, drastic measure. It's the entirely possible rammifications of them becoming normalized; used more and more often, to combat situations with decreasing severity, that I find most odious. If unauthorized border crossings are waning....when do they decide it's not desperate times anymore? Or do they just keep going with the checkpoints until they stop catching these people (indefinitely)?
for truth: that was a stupid fucking joke...not sure what kind of person would think that was funny...and I was asking DS...perhaps s/he can answer a question for once...
no back to the topic at hand...
there seems to be two schools of thought here....on one side we the have the "if you have nothing to hide and holocaust jokesters". The other side says "this is America, I shouldn't have to show my papers"...
as I see it, when the police randomly kick down the door of one of the "nothing to hide" folks, they'll quickly move to the other side...
because when you give a little a lot gets taken. It starts with illegal immirgration road blocks. add that to stop and frisk in NYC simply for being on the street and you start to have problems. Would you be ok if every time you walked passed a cop they searched you? would that be ok? this is how it starts...they justify it as high crime areas...they believe they are going good, but in reality they set the stage for far worse grabs in the future...to me a right can't be violated just a little bit...there is a line, even if you cross it just a little right away you have still crossed it.
Effective deterrence is so hard to prove...but no one can convince me that effective deterrence is worth giving up rights...if people thought they were going to actually be caught no matter how they attempted to get into the country they wouldn't try...but since we catch so very few compared to all those that get through there is no deterrence no matter what we do...
This gets quoted a lot, but those willing to give up a little liberty for security deserve neither and will lose both.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Very well placed in a mostly face palm worthy thread.
Thank You, this was my i've given up, obviously not going to change D.S. mind
I still don't see any question that you have asked that I haven't answered.
You make a lot of assumptions. You mention deterrence. Put guns along the border and that's one hell of a dterrent. All the methods that are being used are actually already being used. I haven't been frisked by cops in 20 years. I've been through a road block 4 or 5 times coming back from Canada. Big deal.
Drugs are illegal. So is drug smuggling. So are illegal weapons. So are illegal immigrants. Call my solution barbaric. Call it what you want. But I guarantee a wall gets put up with men with guns evry 500 yards that are trained to shoot. This bullshit stops.
I know a fair amount about deterrence and the studies that have been done on it as a concept of crime prevention (criminology student for years). ultimately what works is a clearance rate above about 20-25%...meaning that if they caught one out of every 4 or 5 people trying to sneak across the border that might be a deterrent...The methods done to reach that point inside the border of the US should be guided by the constitution. That is all I am saying...protecting the border is one thing...doing it on a road that goes between California and Arizona that I was stopped at is another.
I don't assume things about the government and its grasp at power...it happens in small bits...you start with dui check points you move to stop and frisk...you start with allowing wire taps some times to allowing wire taps on everyone all the time (patriot act) you start by fighting terrorists over seas, you then declare the US a battle ground and give your army the ability to indefinitely detain US citizens...Power of government never stands still, they always want more...if you give them a little they will be back for the rest later.
That isn't an assumption, that is fact...
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I look at the roadblocks like this. Let's say you go to a hospital to have a simple cut stitched up. All of a sudden a highly contagious person comes into the same ER you are in. The offcials decide to quarantine the hospital and everyone inside it. You must now give up your freedom for the benefit of the whole to stop that virus. The southern border is infected with a shitload of viruses of illegal immigrants, illegal drug smugglers, illegal gun importers and having to stop at a checkpoint to answer a question or maybe show an ID (which they actually don't ask for) is for the benefit of the whole. It has nothing to do with you as an individual...it has everyhting to do with the nation as a whole.
no it is actually much worse. That could be stopped, that is a simple good vs evil scenario...They do it in the name of what is best for people without giving thought to where the programs can lead to...Most programs are motivated by good intentions, but those programs and abilities will exist long after those running them now are gone...Do you mean to tell me that if someone like Nixon or worse yet, J. Edgar Hoover had the ability to legally, indefinitely detain ...ah forget it...i will simply end it with the road to hell is paved with good intentions
I don't believe anyone actively sits in a room and decides what rights to go after, I do believe they sit in the house of reps and the senate and bring up ideas and propose legislation that aims to combat serious problems without realizing that they are causing serious problems by passing the legislation. We don't need to give up the liberty of all individuals to solve the problems caused by a few...(the word few isn't intended to mean that illegal immigration doesn't cause problems)
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Well I will say I'm happy the checkpoints exist and look forward to the US government hopefully becoming even more active and filtering these viruses out.