Kuddos ... but where's the budget for the wall to keep the ILLEGALS out?
DHS: All Illegal Immigrants Are Subject to Arrest (Including Crime Victims, Witnesses, and Those at Courthouses)
Illegal immigrants—no matter who or where they are—are subject to arrest, a Department of Homeland Security spokesman said Tuesday. This includes victims of crime, witnesses to those crimes, and those in a courthouse.
DHS spokesman David Lapan said at a news briefing that some of those victims and witnesses could be criminal immigrants themselves who pose a threat to the country or have been ordered to leave the U.S. in the past.
His comments come as local officials have spoken out against ICE agents making arrests in courthouses, arguing that targeting illegal immigrants there will deter some from coming forward to report crime or cooperate in investigations. ....
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2017/04/05/dhs-all-illegal-immigrants-are-subject-to-arrest-including-crime-victims-and-witnesses-n2309078
I saw a blurb somewhere that crossings were down 65%. I'm amazed at how just starting to enforce the law has made such a great impact. But that won't keep without the wall. The poverty of the wannabe illegals will eventually be overcome by their poverty caused by the gaps in the Mexican govt.
Wait for it ... someone will be saying that we don't need a wall now that the crossings are down so much.
Quote from: topside on April 05, 2017, 11:23:37 AM
I saw a blurb somewhere that crossings were down 65%. I'm amazed at how just starting to enforce the law has made such a great impact. But that won't keep without the wall. The poverty of the wannabe illegals will eventually be overcome by their poverty caused by the gaps in the Mexican govt.
Wait for it ... someone will be saying that we don't need a wall now that the crossings are down so much.
I'm not going to say a wall is not needed, but I will point out a wall, no matter how big, is useless if we do not enforce the laws over here. What got the illegals here was the fact that the laws were not enforced, not the fact that there was no wall. Now trump, go after those hiring the illegals! :thumbup:
Quote from: s3779m on April 06, 2017, 04:30:39 AM
I'm not going to say a wall is not needed, but I will point out a wall, no matter how big, is useless if we do not enforce the laws over here. What got the illegals here was the fact that the laws were not enforced, not the fact that there was no wall. Now trump, go after those hiring the illegals! :thumbup:
Laws are only as good as the people that are enforcing them. A wall useless? I'd say a good solid 25' reinforced steel wall, with additional; electrified fencing, two-meter-deep trenches, roads for patrol vehicles, electronic ground/fence sensors, thermal imaging and video cameras, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), sniper towers, and razor wire is pretty darned hard to call useless.
Eliminate all the social perks provided to illegals, enforce the laws and build the dang wall (as described above). Problems of illegal immigration would be significantly reduced if not completely halted.
Quote from: Ms.Independence on April 06, 2017, 07:15:30 AM
Laws are only as good as the people that are enforcing them. A wall useless? I'd say a good solid 25' reinforced steel wall, with additional; electrified fencing, two-meter-deep trenches, roads for patrol vehicles, electronic ground/fence sensors, thermal imaging and video cameras, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), sniper towers, and razor wire is pretty darned hard to call useless.
If the wall costs too much, it's less likely to be built.
We do need to put something below ground to obstruct tunneling under the wall.
(Anyone who's ever tried to keep a dog in the back yard knows that!)
Ground penetrating radar can see up to 100 feet deep, if the ground is dry enough.
Once again a wall is a Psychological barrier as well as a physical deterrent.
One of the best psychological ploys is to ENFORCE THE LAW AS IT IS WRITTEN.
word always gets around ON THE STREET....where it counts.....then they start to exaggerate and make up stories, each worse with the everybody trying to outdo the other in their horror story about La MIgra and Donald Trump.
This is how rumors and BS stories get their start....but in this case it works to our advantage.
Quote from: je_freedom on April 06, 2017, 08:38:50 AM
If the wall costs too much, it's less likely to be built.
We do need to put something below ground to obstruct tunneling under the wall.
(Anyone who's ever tried to keep a dog in the back yard knows that!)
Ground penetrating radar can see up to 100 feet deep, if the ground is dry enough.
Let's see ... cost of wall vs. years of supporting ILLEGALS. Got it!
Quote from: Ms.Independence on April 06, 2017, 09:50:41 AM
Let's see ... cost of wall vs. years of supporting ILLEGALS. Got it!
If we enforce the laws, we will not be supporting illegals.
Quote from: s3779m on April 06, 2017, 05:35:34 PM
If we enforce the laws, we will not be supporting illegals.
Unfortunately, enforcing the laws is just a tad expensive, estimated that it costs about $12,500 per person to arrest, detain, try, and deport. Of course, that is still far less than the costs of keeping them here and supporting them, but still rather pricey.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/feds-estimate-deportation-costs-12500-person
If a border wall were to cut illegal crossings by 300,000 per year, it would take less than 4 years for the wall to pay for itself in saved legal costs. (Assuming the popular figure of $12B to build a proper wall along the 1600+ miles of Mexican/U.S. border.) Add in the saved costs of patrolling a wall compared to an open border, and it will pay for itself in less than 3 years.
And, since there is another thread on the topic, I will only mention in passing the idea of taxing money orders and such sent outside the U.S.
Quote from: zewazir on April 06, 2017, 06:39:20 PM
Unfortunately, enforcing the laws is just a tad expensive, estimated that it costs about $12,500 per person to arrest, detain, try, and deport. Of course, that is still far less than the costs of keeping them here and supporting them, but still rather pricey.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/feds-estimate-deportation-costs-12500-person
If a border wall were to cut illegal crossings by 300,000 per year, it would take less than 4 years for the wall to pay for itself in saved legal costs. (Assuming the popular figure of $12B to build a proper wall along the 1600+ miles of Mexican/U.S. border.) Add in the saved costs of patrolling a wall compared to an open border, and it will pay for itself in less than 3 years.
And, since there is another thread on the topic, I will only mention in passing the idea of taxing money orders and such sent outside the U.S.
A very good point. Reducing illegal crossings would be a tremendous cost savings. Therefore, the increased enforcement is already working. Reports indicate crossings are down significantly since Trump was inaugurated.
Quote from: supsalemgr on April 07, 2017, 04:46:31 AM
A very good point. Reducing illegal crossings would be a tremendous cost savings. Therefore, the increased enforcement is already working. Reports indicate crossings are down significantly since Trump was inaugurated.
There is also the consideration of the drugs that cross our southern border. The so-called "War on Drugs" is another area where enforcement costs will be significantly reduced by preventing them from entering the U.S. in the first place.
Of course a wall will simply force the drug cartels to alter their infiltration routes, but as with all other illegal crossings, the cost of patrolling will be greatly reduced overall, not to mention allowing us to concentrate assets at strategic spots instead of trying to monitor all 1600+ miles, thus significantly increasing the chances of successful interdiction.
Quote from: zewazir on April 06, 2017, 06:39:20 PM
If a border wall were to cut illegal crossings by 300,000 per year, it would take less than 4 years for the wall to pay for itself in saved legal costs. (Assuming the popular figure of $12B to build a proper wall along the 1600+ miles of Mexican/U.S. border.)
I don't have any figures on this, but I suspect that
a majority of lawyers are against building the wall,
and this cost savings would be a primary motive.
Quote from: je_freedom on April 07, 2017, 07:13:21 PM
I don't have any figures on this, but I suspect that
a majority of lawyers are against building the wall,
and this cost savings would be a primary motive.
It's not just lawyers, although they probably do get a substantial share. Then again, the lawyers involved have been 8 years without a job already, considering we are just starting to move past the "hands off" policy of the previous administration.
I left a link above which relates to the estimate of deportation costs. Estimates of annual illegal crossings is available almost any search, as are estimated costs of building a functional barrier along the southern border.