Building a Wall between the USA and Mexico

[DonRocks]

Do people honestly think that in 5-10 years, smugglers in Mexico *won't* have drones that could lift people over a wall, and then return to lift others? Everyone is so damned short-sighted.

Drones will also be the drug-running agents of choice in the near future, if they aren't already.

[dcs]

Drones ain't got nuthin' on tunnels, which also by-pass the blocking intent of erecting a wall.  Border Patrol's 'tunnel rats' stalk drug smugglers in an underground game of hide-and-seek, by John Wilkens, November 26, 2017,  on latimes.com.

[DonRocks]

32 minutes ago, dcs said:

Drones ain't got nuthin' on tunnels, which also by-pass the blocking intent of erecting a wall.  Border Patrol's 'tunnel rats' stalk drug smugglers in an underground game of hide-and-seek, by John Wilkens, November 26, 2017,  on latimes.com.

One thing I honestly don't understand: If there's already a need for tunnels to get into the country, then why do we need a wall? Tunnels are time-consuming, expensive, and high-risk - once they're discovered, all that work is lost - so why do people need to build them if our current border security isn't working? 

This is a legitimate question (not a rhetorical one), and I'm hoping for some thoughtful answers that will explain it to me.

Maybe profiteers use them as a sure-fire means to get people and other things into the country, but only in exchange for a lot of money? Until they're discovered, they're almost surely less risky than hauling ass across the border. Or are they all owned by drug cartels?

Have you ever seen these yellow street signs in the Southwest, of adults and children running? They're at-once hilarious, tragic, and thought-provoking:

One-hundred years from now, these will be in the Museum of American History in the "Oddities" section.

[dracisk]

18 minutes ago, DonRocks said:

Have you ever seen these yellow street signs in the Southwest, of adults and children running?

Oh my goodness I never knew about those signs. :-(

[dcs]

1 hour ago, DonRocks said:

One thing I honestly don't understand: If there's already a need for tunnels to get into the country, then why do we need a wall? Tunnels are time-consuming, expensive, and high-risk - once they're discovered, all that work is lost - so why do people need to build them if our current border security isn't working? 

This is a legitimate question (not a rhetorical one), and I'm hoping for some thoughtful answers that will explain it to me.

Maybe profiteers use them as a sure-fire means to get people and other things into the country, but only in exchange for a lot of money? Until they're discovered, they're almost surely less risky than hauling ass across the border. Or are they all owned by drug cartels?

Have you ever seen these yellow street signs in the Southwest, of adults and children running? They're at-once hilarious, tragic, and thought-provoking:

One-hundred years from now, these will be in the Museum of American History in the "Oddities" section.

I certainly have no insights into the practice whatsoever, but if I had to speculate I would say volume.  Once constructed, you likely could move contraband (human, pharmaceutical, or otherwise) at an alarming rate and quantity versus a border crossing or drone, both of which are subject to aerial surveillance or vehicle inspection (if at a proper border crossing).  From what I have read, I do not think these tunnels are all that easy to detect.

I have seen those signs on the I-5 down near San Diego.  At least when I was last there (admittedly quite some time ago), the median of the I-5 was kind of a free zone.  People would just sort of hang out on the median and the police and immigration had a policy of not attempting to roust them because they did not want folks running onto the highway to avoid arrest.  The median crowd would just wait for a moment when law enforcement seems scarce and traffic is light enough and then they make a break for it.  It was quite the scene.

Apparently this is less of a situation today per this Wikipedia entry.

[Al Dente]

The wall is a solution looking for a problem. It's also a dog whistle. 

[Ferris Bueller]

Drugs, guns, currency and people are run through the tunnels - it is another component in the smuggling operations which appear to work in combination with the other air, land (above ground), and sea "delivery" methods.  I believe the idea that when one method decreased or limited, the other avenues make up for the lack of access.  Drones will likely make the process more efficient, but if the security powers that be are not figuring out a way to jam or scramble the radio frequencies used for drone control then we really are &#$*%#.  Hard to believe that as quickly as these drones have come to market that someone cannot figure out a way to disable them.  I know this is the cause of recent security challenges in US prisons (and abroad) providing cell phones, weapons and drugs to inmates.  How have we not out-smarted the technology?  I believe the "wall" was an overly simplified way to target the segment of voters & society it resonated with, all under the guise of national security albeit fear. Build a wall, and it will keep all illegal immigrants coming from our Southern border.  It would provide jobs for those working on it (installation, design), materials and profit would come from all the concrete/rebar/heavy construction equipment (trucks/dozers/cranes) etc needed to get said materials and forms onsite to build the components and then formulate a wall.  I guess the wall becomes another component of our infrastructure which will need to be maintained like our bridges, tunnels (automotive), ports, airports, sewage & water systems, train depots etc, etc etc.  I am not sure if I shed light on your original question, however I am sure it may increase the debate here. 

[DonRocks]

29 minutes ago, Ferris Bueller said:

Drones will likely make the process more efficient, but if the security powers that be are not figuring out a way to jam or scramble the radio frequencies used for drone control then we really are &#$*%#. 

...

 I am not sure if I shed light on your original question, however I am sure it may increase the debate here. 

You did - much appreciated.

I've often said that we have 100, maybe 200 years to hurry the hell up and make friends with our enemies, because in the not-too-distant future, any hostile person will have the technology readily available to kill millions of people, if not more.

People are just not thinking long-term, and to say that we could be approaching the end of the human race is not outlandish.

Sep 4, 2014 - "Noam Chomsky: The End of History?" by Noam Chomsky on inthesetimes.com

 

[Finatic]

The wall is not a total solution.  It is merely one arrow in the quiver of our border control agents.  It will allow them to better focus on preventing illegal immigration and import of illegal drugs.  The Pope decried the plan to build our wall, yet he lives inside one!

[DaveO]

On 1/22/2018 at 5:09 PM, DonRocks said:

Do people honestly think that in 5-10 years, smugglers in Mexico *won't* have drones that could lift people over a wall, and then return to lift others? Everyone is so damned short-sighted.

Drones will also be the drug-running agents of choice in the near future, if they aren't already.

On 1/22/2018 at 7:07 PM, Al Dente said:

The wall is a solution looking for a problem. It's also a dog whistle. 

This wall "thing" is a bunch of con artist bs in my book.  It appealed to the very right of the right wing.  On top of that Trump completely BS'd it with his Mexico is going to pay for it....that was a complete package of Poo!!!   Today per the news Trump is seeing if he can get the Pentagon budget to fund it.  The recent funding bill put a pittance of funds toward this wall.

Of recent years illegal immigration of Latin American nations has dropped.  If our economy sours especially in the areas where Latin Americans often land jobs a lot of people will leave.  If economies South of the US border sour or political situations get horrendous, illegal immigration  will increase.

Something that never gets publicity is the number of folks on the American side who regularly break the laws and bring in immigrants.  Instead of a wall focus on those hombres as just one example.  If you can't find em all, at least publicize it.  Let the public know that a lot of folks on the American side are profiting off of this illegally if not leaving immigrants in the middle of deserts to starve and die.

And if a wall is built, if and when immigrating to the US becomes a matter of life or death people will find myriads of ways to get around it, as referenced above.

Lastly I'm one of the last people in the US bothered or affected by this.  I don't live in an area seemingly inundated with immigrants.  I wouldn't know an illegal immigrant if I met one.  Clearly I'm not bothered by it.  But if its anything its a call out to the crappiest racist oriented hate elements within our nation.  This whole thing is pitiful.

[DonRocks]

Serious question: What would prevent someone from leaning a ladder against The Wall, scaling it, picking the ladder up, putting it on the other side, and descending? 🤔

[Mark Slater]

21 hours ago, DonRocks said:

Serious question: What would prevent someone from leaning a ladder against The Wall, scaling it, picking the ladder up, putting it on the other side, and descending? 🤔

Be careful. The simpletons that think a wall is a viable solution might get offended. 

[DonRocks]

6 minutes ago, Mark Slater said:

Be careful. The simpletons that think a wall is a viable solution might get offended. 

Well, the primary contractor is supposed to be Floyd Pinkerton.

I'm a well-rounded and very stable genius.

[Steve R.]

21 hours ago, DonRocks said:

Serious question: What would prevent someone from leaning a ladder against The Wall, scaling it, picking the ladder up, putting it on the other side, and descending? 🤔

Not so serious answer: they will put up signs every 50 feet saying "no ladders allowed".

[Ferris Bueller]

or maybe "no se permiten escaleras"

[DonRocks]

17 hours ago, Mark Slater said:

Be careful. The simpletons that think a wall is a viable solution might get offended. 

4 hours ago, Steve R. said:

Not so serious answer: they will put up signs every 50 feet saying "no ladders allowed".

2 hours ago, Ferris Bueller said:

or maybe "no se permiten escaleras"

I'm not trying to be a smart aleck; from a practical viewpoint, how would a wall prevent either a ladder, or a high-powered drone, from simply assisting people over? How has this question not been asked before?

[Ericandblueboy]

Quote

Fences or walls obstruct crossers’ paths, cutting off a straight shot into the interior of the country. But a barrier is not the permanent object that some people imagine. Natural events can knock down parts of a border fence. One storm in Texas left a hole for months. Fences and walls can also erode near rivers or beaches, as the one in San Diego did. And they can be penetrated: Some fencing can be cut in minutes, and the Border Patrol reported repairing more than 4,000 holes in one year alone. They neglected to mention whether that number equaled that year’s number of breaches.

Much of the current fencing can be easily mounted with a ladder or from the roof of a truck. In some cases, border crossers can scale the fence without any additional equipment. One viral video from 2010 shows two women easily climbing an 18-foot steel bollard-style pedestrian fence in less than 20 seconds. Smugglers can even drive over the fence using ramps, a fact that was discovered only when a couple of foolish drug entrepreneurs managed to get their SUV stuck on top. (They took the dope and split.)

A wall would probably be less easily damaged by man or nature. But in at least some areas, its impassibility could also become a maintenance liability. Border Patrol agents have told Fox News that a border wall would still “have to allow water to pass through, or the sheer force of raging water could damage its integrity, not to mention the legal rights of both the U.S. and Mexico to seasonal rains.” In 2011, for example, a flood in Arizona washed away 40 feet of steel fence.

While not “impenetrable,” a concrete wall would impede efforts to cut through it. Trump has also claimed that no one would ever use a ladder to go over his wall because “there’s no way to get down.” After pondering the question for a second, he then conceded, “maybe a rope.” Nonetheless, the height might discourage some people from attempting to climb it, and it would certainly take them longer to do so, giving Border Patrol agents additional time to reach them.

excerpted from Why the Wall Won't Work, by David Bier for the Cato Institute.

From what I understand, there will be motion detectors and other things mounted on the walls, alerting agents to intrusions.  The agents would then go catch the climbers.  Also, I believe the wall is intended to create jobs, regardless of its efficacy.

[DonRocks]

The Cato article doesn't address the possibility of simply picking the ladder up, and moving it to the other side - either that, or mounting a double-length ladder with a hinge in the middle, which folds down onto the other side.

43 minutes ago, Ericandblueboy said:

From what I understand, there will be motion detectors and other things mounted on the walls, alerting agents to intrusions.  The agents would then go catch the climbers.  Also, I believe the wall is intended to create jobs, regardless of its efficacy.

Climbers, or birds/bats?

Assuming that drone technology becomes sophisticated enough to carry people over - and I suspect it already is - I'm not sure how motion detectors could distinguish between the two (unless cameras were set up across the entire width, and the motion detectors alerted people sitting in front of a view screen). This also increases the cost by an order of magnitude, and will require eternal vigilence - I think people may be naively assuming that "The Wall" is going to be akin to some type of medieval fortress, which people couldn't scale without being pelted by cows and geese.

(John Cleese (the guy on top of the wall) is also the waiter in the gross-out scene with Mr. Creosote.)

 

[ktmoomau]

On the drone thing- most drone manufacturers are required to put chips in drones that don't let them fly in specific airspace- I know this because you can get an exemption, but it is very hard, I know a place that has one and someone who has had tog o through this process for that place.  Once you have that paperwork you then have to send it to the drone manufacturer who then can make you a drone that can fly in that airspace- there are still restrictions though.  Now could someone do something to beat that programming- maybe, but currently that is how they keep most drones out of airspace they shouldn't be in.  There is a LOT of airspace like that in DC.

[DonRocks]

18 minutes ago, ktmoomau said:

On the drone thing- most drone manufacturers are required to put chips in drones that don't let them fly in specific airspace- I know this because you can get an exemption, but it is very hard, I know a place that has one and someone who has had tog o through this process for that place.  Once you have that paperwork you then have to send it to the drone manufacturer who then can make you a drone that can fly in that airspace- there are still restrictions though.  Now could someone do something to beat that programming- maybe, but currently that is how they keep most drones out of airspace they shouldn't be in.  There is a LOT of airspace like that in DC.

But this is just begging for illegal drone manufacturing in (or exported to) Mexico - either that, or simple chip removal/replacement. I don't even want to think of the destruction that might occur should a bomb-carrying drone descend into a crowded area, but that's a whole other topic.

The entire width of the Mexican-American border can't possibly be restricted airspace (can it?) - there are planes flying over it every day.

[Ferris Bueller]

I have to figure the "wall" whether new or existing has/will have plenty of cameras on it.  They will not stop a ladder or drone, but advance notice may serve as a deterrent.  Drones can be scrambled and range limited, hopefully part of any planning for as much $$ as this whole thing may eventually cost.  

[Al Dente]

There's an informative 3-part podcast series on Radiolab about the deadly impact of border control policy. 

Back in the late 80's and early 90's, the typical strategy for getting across the border was for hundreds of immigrants to bum rush the border agents in or near a city. The example they used was the El Paso/Juarez City border where at one point thousands were crossing each day. Many of the illegals would be caught and returned to Mexico, but most would get through. Over time, the border patrol was beefed up and walls were improved and extended. This dramatically cut down on these crossings which caused illegals to take the much more dangerous route across the remote Sonoran Desert where there were no walls. Since that time, it's estimated that thousands if not tens of thousands of immigrants have died of exposure in the desert. 

The INS has maintained that only a relatively small number of people die each year because they don't find many bodies. It was thought that the bodies would be preserved in the dry air and would take months to decompose, but a team of scientists discovered that a body can be picked clean by vultures in a matter of days. Ants then come along and consume the bones thereby causing any evidence to simply disappear. Our government has turned a blind eye to this-- out of sight, out of mind.

45's pandering proposals will only make this problem worse. It's a real humanitarian crisis. But, you know... MAGA!

"Border Trilogy Part 1: Hole in the Fence" on wnycstudios.org

[dracisk]

Border Patrol arrests people for giving food, water, and medical care to migrants trying to cross the desert. What a country.

"ASU teacher arrested, charged with harboring undocumented immigrants", The State Press, January 24, 2018.

[Tweaked]

First of all Border Angels is a wonderful nonprofit providing aid along the southern US border.

Second, every Republican (who still trip over themselves to demonstrate their love for Ronald Reagan) should read the closing section of Reagan's Farewell Address to the Nation.  They will then realize how far their party has moved away from Reagan's vision.

I would bet a decent amount of money that few current members of the House have read Reagan's Farewell Address.