POLITICS - Border Fence update

[Charles]

There is a compromise being floated by South Texas (Cameron and Hidalgo Counties) officals in regard to the proposed Border fence that would make most of the law suits over the taking of property go away.

This idea has the support of Gov. Perry, but Home Land Security has yet to sign on. I suspect they will, it makes sense for them to do so.

The idea is to place the fence on top of a reinforced existing levee system. There is a flood control levee along the river the length of these two counties. Doing this would not require the goverment to take any additional land. Holes would be placed in the fence to allow farmers and ranchers access to their land on the South side of the levee. This would not be a hardship as farmers can't move equipment over the levee and cattle can't walk up the existing levee. It is too steep.

However, it won't have any effect on the wet back traffic. The Border Patrol has men stationed on the Levee now every few hundred yards in eyeshot of each other right now. We do have "boots on the ground" or rather tires on the ground right now the length of the levee which covers two counties. If a human barrier won't stop them, a metal barrier won't stop them either.

This will solve the problem to taking property for the fence and the folks screaming for the fence will get a fence. Building a fence on top of the levee will also have a minimual effect on the environment. It might pee off the ground squirrels who burrow into the sides of the levee, but they will adjust.

It will be ineffective, but it will pour billions of dollars into the South Texas economy in the biggest Federal "pork barrel" project we have ever seen. I rather find this a bit humorous. It will be the "bridge to nowhere" project times a million, but we will enjoy spending all of that money. It will be the longest and most expensive "spite fence" in human history.

The levee has been in need of reinforcment for years and the Feds have not been willing to turn loose of the money. I think I am starting to become pro-fence.

Anyway... That is the fence news from Deep South Texas.

[Leverdude]

Kinda sounds like they dont need a fence there. Are the men on the levy ineffective at stopping border jumpers?

[Charles]

Leverdude... Here are the facts. The men can't see at night, even though they have night vision capability. That is when things take place. They do have some sensors implanted, but the coyotes have figured out how to deal with them.

What folks don't seem to understand is the river itself is as big a barrier as a fence would be. If you can swim the river , you can climb the fence. In order for a fence to have any effect at all, every foot of it must be monitored by human or electronic means 24/7/365. If you are going to do that, there is no need for a fence in the first place.

Now there are places in New Mexico, Arizona and California where there is no physical barrier (river). But you run into the same problem of monitoring the fence 24/7/365.

It just seems that folks have become fixated on a fence. They are pressuring the politicians to put up a fence. Politicians, who want to stay in power will respond to that kind of pressure and up goes a fence at a tremendous cost in taxpayer dollars. In doing so, they will also agree with the voters and say... Yep that is what we need!

I find it interesting that citizens who don't trust a politician to tell them if it is rainy or sunny, will feel a politician is credible when said politician agrees with them that a fence is a good thing.

I would agree we need to upgrade out border control, but a fence is an irrational response to the problem.

I have just applied for the new Passport Card issued by the State Department. Currently (as of 1/1/08) I have to carry with me my picture ID and a certifield copy of my birth certificate to reenter the US from a trip accross the border to Mexico. Next year I will have to have a Passport or the new Passport Card to get back accross. This should be a help in upgrading out border control.

The Border Patrol has had a big recruiting drive going on for some years, but can't fill it's ranks. Recently they have raised the age to 40, to take advantage of folks who retire from the military. Maybe that will be of some help. The jobs are there, but it seems that people don't want to do that kind of work. Maybe they need to think about hiring illegals to fill their ranks.

We have the technology to build a vitrtual fence, which we will have to have anyway to back the a physical fence. I can hear the taxpayers scream when we have to lay out billions for the virtual fence after the physical fence has proved to be worthless, which it will.

The folks who want to militarize the border or turn it into a "free fire zone" are just expending their energies on a vain notion as those things are not going to happen. It would be better if the nation could calm down, and start to think it's way through the issue to a solution that would be effective. Right now the whole thing is emotion driven and the politicals will respond and lay out mega billions to satisfy that emotion.

I just hope that the citizens who push for the fence don't blame the politiclans when the fence doesn't work. What do you think the chances of that happening are?

[dz86]

I have to agree with Charles about the whole fence thing. For a fence to work you'd basically have to build something like the Berlin wall from the Gulf of Mexico to the Pacific, and then staff it like the wall was.

If we were ever going to have adequate border security I'm afraid it would take battalions of troops to get it done. Personally, I'm not in favor of stationing troops along the border either.

Certainly increasing the size and capabilities of the Border Patrol is a start. But those guys have got to be backed up with some real laws, and real punishment for the offenders.

This immigration thing is a nightmare. I don't forsee any answers coming from the government anytime soon.

Dave

[cubrock]

Charles,

I respect your opinion on this. You certainly have had your boots on the ground, so to speak, for decades and can understand this from a perspective those of us far removed from the border can not. That being said, I don't mind a fence.

However, no barrier will work until we remove the economic incentive people have for coming here illegally in the first place. Removing the economic incentive will not happen until we start penalizing the tens of thousands of companies who hire illegals, most of them knowingly.

Until we do that, nothing else we try to do will matter. If we did that, we wouldn't need a fence.

BTW, I seriously considered applying for a Border Patrol job. It would have involved getting into serious shape, but it sounded neat enough to try. But, like 86ers job posting, it would have involved moving to the desert Southwest and that got a big no-go from my wife. Maybe their recruiting efforts should include incentives for spouses - like airplane tickets back home to visit family several times a year.

[45-70-]

Wouldnt it be much cheaper if the govt went thru with dozers and chemical plant killer and cleared a 50 yard zone, then posted signs in various languages stating that tresspassers would be shot?
Charles, I know from past discussions you think this method is harsh but in the long run, how many people are killed trying to swim or sneak across?
In reality, if a few were shot trying to cross, dont you think people on the other side would say, "It aint worth it." We could also post signs directing people to the immigration office if they want to come into the US but trying to sneak in would get a bullet. Why is that any more harsh then the electric subplant down the road from me with the big 10-foot fence around it with the warning signs that the fence is electrified. I have no problem understaning that if I try to climb into the subplant, I am going to get crispy fried.

[cubrock]

Wouldnt it be much cheaper if the govt went thru with dozers and chemical plant killer and cleared a 50 yard zone, then posted signs in various languages stating that tresspassers would be shot?
Charles, I know from past discussions you think this method is harsh but in the long run, how many people are killed trying to swim or sneak across?
In reality, if a few were shot trying to cross, dont you think people on the other side would say, "It aint worth it." We could also post signs directing people to the immigration office if they want to come into the US but trying to sneak in would get a bullet. Why is that any more harsh then the electric subplant down the road from me with the big 10-foot fence around it with the warning signs that the fence is electrified. I have no problem understaning that if I try to climb into the subplant, I am going to get crispy fried.

If we removed the economic incentive, they would decide on their own "It ain't worth it." No killing required, either accidental or intentional.

[Charles]

Cubrock... It might suprise to find out that I agree with you 100%. When IRCA (Immigration Reform and Control Act) was passed 20 years ago, it provided folks could not get a job unless they were legally here and all employers had to inspect documents and keep I-9 forms.

However, nobody every came around a looked at the forms. After a time, nobody bothered with them. The laws to prevent illegals from gaining employment has never been enforced. Another round of laws without enforcement is not an answer either.

IF, and that is a big IF, we had our current laws enforced and IF we had some sort of guest worker program in place, we could dry up the jobs and still keep the economic wheels turning in those sectors of the economy where there was shortage of workers. It would of course require applicants for guest worker status to be screened to strain out the trash, and the laws enforced so they don't over stay their permits.

All of this requires enforcement of immigration laws, which we have not been willing to do up to this point in our history. We have turned a blind eye so long that the problem has become bigger than we can swallow.

It has also not passed unnoticed that this new wallet size Passport Card that we border folks must have is as close to a foolproof national ID as we are likely to have. I know that goes against the grain of many, but is a solution already in place to who is and who is not entitled to be in this country legaly. Since IRCA was passed we have the technology for instant backround checks to buy a gun. We certainly has the technology for an employer to veritfy the authenticity of a Passport Card.

[Charles]

45-70- You are correct we have had this discussion before and we will not see eye to eye on your idea. But that aside, such measures are not going to happen and the energy you put into this issue would be better expended on something that can happen.

Folks who advocate solutions that are not going to happen become part of the problem as de facto advocates of the status quo. i.e...If we hold out for your solution, there will never be a solution. Fantasy won't get er done!

[Leverdude]

Charles,

Its true I'v spoken in support of a fence. But I'm not silly enough to think it would make a big difference by itself. I do believe that there is a need to do something. In places a fence may help in others it might not. They cant climb it if its topped with razor wire either.
Use of force doesn't seem out of line.
Signs explaining in spanish the new rules placed where they cant be missed shoud help them understand that we are serious.

You explained to me in another thread that the Mexicans wouldn't shoot me were I to invade Mexico, they instead would take my money & let me go. I dont doubt your asessment.
How about we just take all their valuables & turn them around.

Theres no easy way but something must be done. Punish Americans who pay them if it makes folks feel better but enforce border security at the same time.

Another thing not mentioned is the fact that many of these border jumpers are criminals & are armed & willing to commit crime, they bring drugs & other contraband into our country.
Mexico might just shoot if it regularly had gringo criminals breaking their laws & hurting their people I think, instead of coming in & spending money.

The cost, I think its silly to worry about the cost. However much it may be we spend more secureing countries that hate us.

Change the rules & put the fence on the other side of the River. If Mexico dont like it thats too bad. When they start controling the exodus we'll take it down.

Maybe its just me but I'm not at all comfy knowing that folks come & go as they please across the border. Might sound harsh but I'd have no issue just closeing all border crossings until its resolved. Course it wouldn't effect me, not like the latin gangs & illegal workers in my town do.
But, if we were being overrun by Canadian refugees I'd say the same thing about the northern border.
I like my country & have zero inclination to leave. If I do I can fly.
If you want to visit fly in & go thru customs.

Maybe a moat with sharks from Calipornia to the Gulf of Mexico would work.

[Charles]

Leverdude...I do respect you right and need to expression your frustratons, but again...you are talking fantasy and not reality. We are not going to electrocute, rob, or shoot wetbacks. Neither are we going to war with Mexico to put a fence on their side.

We need a national consensus on a real world solution and not just more heat without light.

[cubrock]

Cubrock... It might suprise to find out that I agree with you 100%. When IRCA (Immigration Reform and Control Act) was passed 20 years ago, it provided folks could not get a job unless they were legally here and all employers had to inspect documents and keep I-9 forms.

However, nobody every came around a looked at the forms. After a time, nobody bothered with them. The laws to prevent illegals from gaining employment has never been enforced. Another round of laws without enforcement is not an answer either.

IF, and that is a big IF, we had our current laws enforced and IF we had some sort of guest worker program in place, we could dry up the jobs and still keep the economic wheels turning in those sectors of the economy where there was shortage of workers. It would of course require applicants for guest worker status to be screened to strain out the trash, and the laws enforced so they don't over stay their permits.

All of this requires enforcement of immigration laws, which we have not been willing to do up to this point in our history. We have turned a blind eye so long that the problem has become bigger than we can swallow.

It has also not passed unnoticed that this new wallet size Passport Card that we border folks must have is as close to a foolproof national ID as we are likely to have. I know that goes against the grain of many, but is a solution already in place to who is and who is not entitled to be in this country legaly. Since IRCA was passed we have the technology for instant backround checks to buy a gun. We certainly has the technology for an employer to veritfy the authenticity of a Passport Card.

I agree with what you have said here - except maybe on a national ID card.

Does the current law provide stiff penalties for those who employ illegals? That is where the battle will be fought and won. We have to cut off the demand for illegal labor. Fighting the supply just doesn't work. Just look at the drug war. As long as there is demand, people will break the law to provide the supply.

[45-70-]

Charles, I respect your insight on this matter. I wont stop pushing my ideas though whether you think they are fantasy or not. I bet the thought of this country being independt of British rule started off as a fantasy

Watching what is going on with security and terrorist issues, I think more people are considering my route.

When it comes down to it, I dont care if they plant pink roses to keep the borders secure. We just need something that works and that goes for the North border also. You think the south border is open, the northen one is a joke.

Anyways Charles, I appreciate your front line comments from the local area.

[Charles]

Cubrock.. It has been a very long time, since I was familiar with the IRCA penalties. I do remember the fines were quite stiff and enough to get your attention. Stiff enough to make you think twice about the cost savings of hiring an illegal over a legal. Repeted offenses became criminal.

[cubrock]

Cubrock.. It has been a very long time, since I was familiar with the IRCA penalties. I do remember the fines were quite stiff and enough to get your attention. Stiff enough to make you think twice about the cost savings of hiring an illegal over a legal. Repeted offenses became criminal.

You are correct that it doesn't matter if it isn't enforced. And, we are to blame for not enforcing it with our political representatives!

[Charles]

Leverdude... Just a correction. Mexican police, when they catch a Gringo in violation of their laws, just don't take the money you have on you. They throw your pinche gringo colo in a filthy and brutal jail and hold you until they have bled you family and friends dry. When they have got every dime they can, they will throw what is left of you back accross the border.

[Tycer]

I have just applied for the new Passport Card issued by the State Department. Currently (as of 1/1/08) I have to carry with me my picture ID and a certifield copy of my birth certificate to reenter the US from a trip accross the border to Mexico. Next year I will have to have a Passport or the new Passport Card to get back accross. This should be a help in upgrading out border control.

Hunnerd bucks? Sheesh!

http://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/passcard.html

[Charles]

Nope..The $100.00 is for a regular book style Passport. The Passport Card is $20.00 plus a $25.00 "processing fee" for a total of $45.00. You can get both for $120.00 as they charge only one processing fee.

My old passport has expired, so I got both in case I have to take it on the lamb in hurry. The card is only good for land crossing to Mexico and Canada.

[Leverdude]

Leverdude... Just a correction. Mexican police, when they catch a Gringo in violation of their laws, just don't take the money you have on you. They throw your pinche gringo colo in a filthy and brutal jail and hold you until they have bled you family and friends dry. When they have got every dime they can, they will throw what is left of you back accross the border.

Oh, thats different. Lets just let them in.

[Blackhawk]

I think the whole idea of the fence w/o force behind it is too PC. I know we have boots on the ground but are unable to watch every inch of fence 24/7/365. So while we debate this issue no matter of force will be put behind the idea, ie shooting, high voltage, etc. We are a PC nation and lethal force is out of the question. So we'll sit and discuss this while more red tape piles up.

Sorry for the rant.

[Old Time Hunter]

If you agree with "guest workers" and "filling the worker shortage", I believe you would not need any form of passport to go "visit" Mexico. Please go visit without your passport!

[Charles]

If you agree with "guest workers" and "filling the worker shortage", I believe you would not need any form of passport to go "visit" Mexico. Please go visit without your passport!

Now that wasn't very nice. Shame on you!

[mescalero1]

Charles is correct about what comes of Gringos who make mischief in Mexico, I was surprised of his descriptive of the affair. Actually I laughed out loud!
This is NOT funny!
Something must be done, but we have not yet hit on the right path ,yet.

[brucew44guns]

Without political correctness, and with a govt who "REALLY" wanted to put their own country and own people first, the border problem to the south could be virtually eleminated in one day in my opinion. There are several solutions, but then it would take "WILL", and intestinal fortitude, but the border crossings could be stopped.

[Leverdude]

I think the path is easy. Just stop letting it happen like we do now.
We dont like it, or at least most here dont seem to, but the country as a whole is just letting it happen. I guess as long as serious deterrants are fantasy it will continue. Countries have gone to war over less. Cant see why we should fear Mexico so much we cant even impose sanctions on them if they refuse to curtail this garbage.

[Charles]

Update .... Wife just called and gave a report from what she heard on the local radio on her way to work. This fence stuff is a very hot topic on the border. It seems currently there are 45 lawsuits involving almost 3,000 acres in the Federal Court system in Cameron and Hidalgo Counties. These are lawsuits by individuals against the Goverment. This is just the tip of the iceberg and more could be filed.

Gov. Perry, Senator Hutchinson and the Homeland Security guy are gettng together down there to see if anything can be worked out. These and others potential law suits can tied that idiot fence up for years in court.

All of the border cities, the University of Texas and many private individuals are plantiffs in these law suits.

Ahemm... You will remember, your humble correspondent predicted this many months ago, when all of this fence hysteria strted.

[Grizz]

Charles, the fact that you are THERE and seeing what's going on counts for a lot. But, there are a couple hundred million Americans who see what's going on HERE, where the result of zero border control affects us.

It may seem like a great idea to you to just let 'em get by ya, then we can deal with the problems they cause.

Oh, who is they? They is the millions of illegal foreign invaders who are getting past you, to HERE.

So, it seems we have a problem, and so far I haven't seen you set out a solution. Meanwhile a couple hundred million other Americans besides you want it stopped. What's it? The transgression across our borders.

I am very interested in the solution you propose because from HERE a fence looks right, feels right, and is significantly better sounding than anything else we've heard HERE.

with diminishing patience,

Grizz

[Charles]

Several folks have alluded to this being a result of Political Correctness. This PC sillyness is a fairly recent notion, but the reasons we can't shoot folks willy nilly for crossing the border, go back as far as the mind of man remembereth not. Shooting border crossers that are not presenting an immediate threat of killing or doing serious bodly harm to persons is just plain murder by the laws which have been in place since the founding of this great country.

Even if we were at war with Mexico, the rules of war won't permit the intentional shooting of unarmed non-combatants.

If you seriously want to kill these folks, you will need to start with a Consitutional Admendment. As it now stands, when they hit the mid-point of the River, they are protected by the same Constutional rights are you and I.

After you have convinced Congress to ammend the Constitution, you have to have it ratified by the Sates. If you can do that, you will then have to change all of the laws involving the use of deadly force on the Border.

I think a calm and rational person would understand that all of this is just not going to happen and while it may sound attractive to some folks, it will forever be a fantasy.

[FWiedner]

I remember thinking that the correspondent's views seemed to be in favor of supporting and encouraging illegal immigration at the time, and more recent offerings don't seem to reflect any notable change.

[Charles]

Grizz... I would be the first to agree there is a major problem in the area of illegal immigation and we need to do something to get the situation in hand. I have never been for open borders and attempts to paint me a such are just not true. Folks make the jump from me not wanting their solution to thinking I don't want any solution..not true, not true and grossly unfair to say so.

I am just trying to present the real facts, in the real world of border control. Folks up THERE don't understand such realities and in their emotional response to the issue, pressure politicians to do something, anthing, whether it will solve the problem or not.

The problem won't be solved by anger, emotion, mud-slinging, name calling and fantasy. The problem will only yield when reasonable people, calm down, understand the real facts and problems and start to work toward a reasoned solution and not just an emotional response.

It is very easy for folks to say..."seal the border" and deport all of their butts. But as we are finding out the border is not "sealable" under our current legal system, which is not about to change. Much can and should be done to cut down on the numbers crossing. But we will never hermeticaly seal the border.

The solution will be multi-facited, but folks must first calm down, and work together to find real world solutions and not just spew slogans and invictive. Nothing will happen until this issue stops being a political football and reason can rule.

Doesn't sound very hopeful does it?..but I will continue to plug away, hoping that facts will temper emotions and someday we can stop fighting each other and do something that will actualy have a positive effect on the problem.

We should be able get control of our borders without turning ourselves into a nation of angry killers and turning the Stars and Stripes into a butcher's apron.

[Leverdude]

You dont have to shoot them arbitrarily, just as we dont shoot fugitives arbitrarily.(They are fugitives ) Your being silly Charles, I think your wiser than that.
We can use our armed men to round them up & push them back across. If they resist we use force as deemed necessary by men in the field, just like any other fugitive.

If you seriously want to kill these folks, you will need to start with a Consitutional Admendment. As it now stands, when they hit the mid-point of the River, they are protected by the same Constutional rights are you and I.

I never realised I had a constitutional right to ignore the law & flee from law enforcement without fear of reprisals. Fact is Americans get shot all the time when LEO say stop & they dont.

Its certainly a PC thing when theyre afforded MORE protection than us.

I dont think people want to kill these folks. They want them to obey the law. The rest of us face severe penalties for ignoreing or breaking it, up to & includeing being shot if we resist arrest.

We could also require Mexico to prosecute them for border violations if we return them. As an offer of goodwill if Mexico takes responsibility we can recognize it as a serious nation deserving of trade relations & such.
If they wont we should impose tariffs sufficient to pay for the costs we bear because of their national incompetence.

But under no circumstances should the American people be made to feel its unrealistic that we control acess to our country. That is what you seem to be implying. That its unreasonable to expect border security.

[Charles]

Leverdude

1) It is not unrealistic to want to get control of our Border. It can be done. It will require us to accept some things some foks don't want , i.e. a national identity care, hard sanctions against employers, a guest worker program, and many more dollars on actual border security. Dollars spent for things that will work and not things that won't work.

Currently we have boots on the ground at the actual border in the form of Border Patrol. They catch many, many illegals I see the numbers of about 50 percent.

There is a secondary line of security by checkpoints on all highways leading north from the border about 75 to 100 miles inland. They pick up a large number of illegals and drugs at these check points.

There are several thousand Border Patrol jobs going begging for want to people to fill them. The starting salary is in the mid 40s and at the end of one year that will be mid 50, plus excellent health care and retirement after 20 years. It is easier to get people to go to Iraq and Afganistan than come to the Border. Why is that?

2) There are folks on this board who do advocate the killing of illegals and turning the border into a free fire zone. You may not, but others do.

3) We do round them up and send the back across. They will be back again in 48 hours.

4) No American jurisdiction allows LEOs to shoot fleeing criminals. The criminals must be doing something that presents a physical threat to the LEO or another person. This is the law everywhere in this land. Check it out. i.e.. You can catch em, but you can't shoot em if they run away. Tis the law of the land, like it or not. Cops who shoot fleeing people and get caught at it, go to prison.

5) We cannot compel Mexico to enforce our laws, just like they can't compel us to enforce their laws. This whole notion flys in the face of national soverignity.

To get to No. 1 above, we must recognize that No. 3 - 5 are facts that are not going to change. Don't take my word for it..check them out.

To get to a solution, we must work with reality and not our feelings on what reality should be.

[Blackhawk]

Another area that this covers is Mexico's economy. Cantarell Field is Mexico's largest producing oil field. Roughly 37% comes from there. Reports are that the source is running dry. Estimates are that by 2010 Mexico may be in worse shape than it is now. Where do you think those people are going to go? Good ol'USA and in mass.

Another issue with this, NAFTA. Thank you for that one. Nestle Quick, Levi, Firestone Tires, some Fender Guitars, etc, etc. All made in Mexico.

[El Mac]

All of the border cities, the University of Texas ... are plantiffs in these law suits.

Why does that not suprise me? The Berkley of Texas. <barf>

A real fence, backed up by real force of arms, will indeed work and work well. Back that up by real laws and teeth against employers hiring wets and you have the problem reduce by about 95% overnight.

Of course, the naysayers will continue to rant that we are wasting our time... Sure. Whatever.

[Charles]

El Mac... The Univ. of Texas at Brownsville is not against the fence for any political touchy feelie, liberal reason. They are against it because it will slice off 1/3 of it's campus and put in on the wrong side of the wall. From the University's perspective that would not be a good thing.

What does "real force of arms" mean to you. Paint me a picture.

[FWiedner]

This photo depicts the justified execution of a criminal caught in the act.

[Blackhawk]

Economic enforcement:

1) No to national identity care or guest worker program.

2) No.

3) Agreed.

4) Agreed. But shootings do happen.

5) Yes I believe we can. And to do that we need to hit them in their pocket book. Repeel NAFTA. Either that or tax hades out of everything coming in from Mexico and while we're at it all other countries as well. No more oil from Mexico if they will not do something about their own borders. Make companies pay for having illegals at work. There are ways to make Mexico either step up or we can quit doing business with them.

Johnny

[Blackhawk]

justified execution

There is no such thing anymore.

[Charles]

For those not familiar with the photo. It was taken in Saigon during the Tet Offensive. The man with the little Smith and Wesson was the head General of the National Police and the man with the distressed look on his face was a Viet Cong sniper who had just killed one of the General's men. He was caught with the rifle in his possession.

I see no reason to post this photo is a discussion of illegal immigration.

[Blackhawk]

Another note on Border Patrol. Make a federal agency that works in each and every state to regulate illegals. If states won't do it then that's why I say make it a federal program. That way no one has to leave their home state and go work on the border. They can do good within their own state.

Johnny

[FWiedner]

What does "real force of arms" mean to you. Paint me a picture.

I see no reason to post this photo is a discussion of illegal immigration.

You asked the question.

I expressed my "opinion" in reponse to your question.

[El Mac]

To be sure, I'm NOT talking about execution as depicted in the Vietnam vintage photo.

I'm talking about clearly marked and posted warnings. A double layered fence with a clearly understood no-man's land. Let the cards then fall where they may. IF they were to make it through and be captured on our side, the coyote could be given a fair trial and hung. The wets could be set up on chain gangs cleaning up the litter along our highways or other work programs for a few years and then deported.

I'm also not opposed to declaring war on Mexico and taking about 10 miles of their side of the Rio Grande to set up the fence line so as not to inconvenience our farmers and ranchers.

When you deal with thugs, slugs and creeps - force truly is the universal language. I know its not PC but then again I don't care.

And yes, I realize the vast majority of the politicos and a large bit of the population have no stomach for violence of that sort. Like you Charles, I realize some laws would have to be ammended to move forward on this. I'm all for that. I also realize out gutless wonders in DC will never do it as long as they can continue to be elected by their apathetic constituencies.

Too bad.

[H_Talon]

How about if we stop being "Defensive" and make mexico responsible
for control of their people and make them stop allowing drugs across ...

1. notify mexico as of Jan 1st .. when we catch 1000 persons crossing
at 1001 we shut down the border .. all ports and in between till
Jan 1st of the next year ....

same with drugs ... jan 1st starts the scale ... reach 1001 LBS
and shut down the border till next year ...

no products, tourists, money NOTHING !!!!!!! crosses either way !!!!!

I think after the first year if the mexico can stand the financial ruin
they will got off their butt and let them patrol the border, let them
stop their people from crossing ... if we catch 1001 again we shut
it down ... they need us ,, we would learn to get along without them ...

just a thought ....

H_Talon

[Charles]

El Mac... That is fairly sharp, but one area of the picture is a little fuzzy. What happens in this "no man's land" between the two fences?

I suppose the being a Coyote could be made a capital offense and illegal aliens could be sentenced to a term on the work gang. All it would take is the proper legislation.

Declaring war on Mexico to take a strip of their land is a fairly complex situation. A guerilla war of terrorism from Mexico that would go for generations would be the likely result. A decision would have to be made if bombs blowing up in malls in Ohio would be worth what is gained. But that is for the higher up to decide. It is beyond my pay grade.

[Charles]

Mr. Talon... Figure into your plan the fact that Mexico is our largest trading party. Closing the border throw millions of U.S. Workers out of work. and would turn whole sections of the country in an economic wasteland that makes the great depression seem like a picnic.

Now throw in all of the other nations who would feel kinship with Mexico boycott our goods.

The cost to our economy and what it would do to our income tax rates would make the Iraq war and everything else we do seem like penny-anti poker. They would have to put on a extra shift to print enough worthless paper money to keep us afloat.

Check out the numbers and do the math before you sent your plan to Congress.

Don't forget one of Newton's laws that for every action, there is an equal but opposite reaction.

[H_Talon]

Mr. Talon... Figure into your plan the fact that Mexico is our largest trading party. Closing the border throw millions of U.S. Workers out of work. and would turn whole sections of the country in an economic wasteland that makes the great depression seem like a picnic.

Now throw in all of the other nations who would feel kinship with Mexico boycott our goods.

The cost to our economy and what it would do to our income tax rates would make the Iraq war and everything else we do seem like penny-anti poker. They would have to put on a extra shift to print enough worthless paper money to keep us afloat.

Check out the numbers and do the math before you sent your plan to Congress.

Don't forget one of Newton's laws that for every action, there is an equal but opposite reaction.

well action vs reaction .... your right we should just keep supporting
mexico till it destroys us .. and if I'm correct china is a way larger
trade partner than mexico ... the US supports the entire world
economy ... but trade deficients are killing us ... we allow products
into the US with low duty rates and quotas .,, other country's
don't want our products so they charge huge rates to price us out
of their markets ...

add the relief aid we give out we could defray
alot of the loss ... demand equal trade and cut aid we could save
billions ... we are allowing our " Humanity " to kill us as both a people
and a country ... if we don't tighten out belts and get control of out
lives and country .. we might as well just shoot ourselves and get it
over with ...

where is it written the USA is the world relief and police ... we take better
care of other countries than our own ....

we still send millions to middle eastern country's who make billions on
us in oil monies ... go figure !!!! allot of other country's just want us to
support them and then want to kill us ... hmmmmmm and we sill send
money ...

as for mexico .. yep it would hurt us too but what is the greatest pain
we are being invaded, out entire process is in danger of being over run.

and they do need us way more than we need them, everything we get
from can come from another place. everyone wants our money ..

look at a bigger picture if we keep this up ... life as we know it won't
survive ....

and as long as we keep talking a real plan might just develop ...

Talon

[Grizz]

Charles,

I'm a little rusty on the Constitution. Please explain how it applies to foreign invaders. You stated that at mid-river the illegals suddenly gain its protection. I forget where it states that standing on American soil entitles you to all American citizen benefits.

I actually don't believe it does say that, but am willing to be proved wrong.

Grizz

[Charles]

Grizz... SCOTUS has held for generations and generations that the Constitution apply to anybody physicaly in this country.

That is what the whole dust up is about over Gitmo. As long as those folks are off shore U.S. Constutional rights do not apply. If they are "enemy combatants" the Geneva Convention apply. If they are "battle field detainee", neither the Geneva Convention or the U.S. Consitution apply.

Bring them here for trial and they have the same rights as you and I.

This is the same reason the CIA holds people in other countries and on ships at sea. They can do things there they can't do here.

There really isn't any question about the law..it has been fixed and settled long, long before either of us was born. The principal is "enshrined" in U.s. Constutional Law.

As far as illegals go, the govt. has set up special Federal Immigration courts with slicked up procedure to make things go faster, but the same fundamental rights must be obeyed.

Sorry..but das da law!!! But don't take my word for it..Go pay your own lawyer $200.00 for his opinion on the matter.

[Grizz]

Grizz... SCOTUS has held for generations and generations that the Constitution apply to anybody physicaly in this country.

That is what the whole dust up is about over Gitmo. As long as those folks are off shore U.S. Constutional rights do not apply. If they are "enemy combatants" the Geneva Convention apply. If they are "battle field detainee", neither the Geneva Convention or the U.S. Consitution apply.

Bring them here for trial and they have the same rights as you and I.

This is the same reason the CIA holds people in other countries and on ships at sea. They can do things there they can't do here.

There really isn't any question about the law..it has been fixed and settled long, long before either of us was born. The principal is "enshrined" in U.s. Constutional Law.

As far as illegals go, the govt. has set up special Federal Immigration courts with slicked up procedure to make things go faster, but the same fundamental rights must be obeyed.

Sorry..but das da law!!! But don't take my word for it..Go pay your own lawyer $200.00 for his opinion on the matter.

Sorry to be so dense Charles, but I asked for reference in the Constitution. SCOTUS is not the Constitution, and it is illegal for SCOTUS to violate the Constitution. So it seems to me you are basing your view of American law on something other than the Constitution, while calling it the Constitution. I don't think those things can both be true at the same time.

But part b of this issue is this, aren't people standing on American soil subject to the laws of America? If so, then aren't Americans within their Constitutional rights to demand that the uninvited foreign nationals be strictly and swiftly subject to those laws? Without a bunch of beating around the bush.

Please don't assume that I assume anything about you or your position, that's why I am asking for specific clarifications.

IMO, SCOTUS is way off its rocker and it's one of the great harms that have befallen Americans. I'd like to see that rectified in my lifetime.

Grizz

[Charles]

Grizz..Grizz..Grizz

When the writers of the Constution put pen to paper, it never occured to them, they would have to spell out the issue that bothers you.

By the time ink dryed on the paper, courts were having to figure out what the document means because the documents does not cover every possible circumstance that humans encounter. The documents sets out principals and does not pretend to solve every issue known to mankind.

It was the intent of the writers that it should apply to everybody in this country...except slaves and women. That has been established by good historical and legal research and courts have recognized that to be the intent of the Constutions.

You are every lawyers dream client..that thinks SCOTUS is full of it and their decisions don't mean a thing. This is a free country and you are free to believe the moon is made of green cheese if you like. But don't try and go into court and tell the judge that the decision of SCOTUS are not the law of the land. I have seen that happen and it is fun to watch!!

Come September 2008 I will be teaching a couple of courses at Univ. of Texas Brownville on the United States Constitution. Come down and take the course. That is if my class room isn't on the wrong side of the wall

We can even find some time to do some shooting and eating good Tex/Mex cooking. I promise not to take you accross the river against your will. You might even like me..most folks who hang out with me do.

I am not the wide eyed liberal boogie man of song and fable. I am just a guy who like to live in the real world and deal with facts and not flights of fantasy and emotion.

Oh yes... I forgot about Part B of your post. For that please refer to paragraphy 5 or was that 4 of my post you quoted. It is very reasonable for Americans to expect illegal aliens to be deported as quickly as possible and that is the reason the Immigration Courts were created. Streamlined procedure, but the basic Constutional rights still apply.