Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Let's Debate This FENCE or WALL Nonsense

Our founding fathers had great foresight in enumerating the ways to control government power in the interest of protecting individual liberty and freedom.

Its simplistic to think that providing expedience to the military and law enforcement by eliminating those safeguards will solve the problem. The reality is we already have the laws and means to defend our boarder, what we lack is the will!

You let the military and police run roughshod, they'll run rough shod over everyone. Classic examples, war on drugs and Homeland security. Neither of which have achieved their stated goals, and both of which have turned us closer to the police state our founding fathers fought and died to protect us from.

This plus our military is not trained for law enforcement.

This is a law enforcement problem right now and unless we invad Mexico it will remain a law enforcement issue. Before anybody jumps me for that last comment I am not in favor of the US going to war with Mexico.

Key in on the Law enforcement issue. Those in charge of our borders have had their hands tied by those in Washington. It is an almost complete lack of enforcement or even the desire for the problem to go away that has caused the mess we have today. The problem will only get worse as long as our leaders sit on their hands and do nothing. Lets put the blame where it belongs. Generations of our elected leaders have done nothing. I really don’t see that changing.

DD is an Azhole, Scott, but a good Azhole, huh?

I spent an number of hours with Dan and hope to get to spend more in the future.

You know, you just MAY be close to getting onto something,....and are just having a hard time, valiantly trying to pull your head out of your nether orfice , Indie.

How be we make "alarming and massive changes" in the way MEXICANS have been living in THEIR country,..... first ?

Kid around a bit with that, and get back to us.

GTC

I'm not disagreeing with your "police state" thingee, but you're blaming the wrong people. Before the "War on Drugs" people went to prison for having them. The "War on Drugs" meant that people were no longer proscecuted for being criminals...they were treated like victims. The same has happened with the "War on Terrorism". The government has taken more action to protect the criminals then the people they are hurting. Same goes for illegal immigration.

Bullsh.it

So, you don't think it would be better if people went to prison for committing crimes, were deported for being here illegally and killed for being enemies of the country? You prefer felons to be arrested 40 times before seeing prison for the first time, illegal immigration encouraged and terrorists given the same rights as Americans?

Pat,

I'm not blaming the cops, they generally do the best they can and get screwed from both ends. Prosecutors and judges that won't/can't put away scum bags, and elected officials that won't stand behind cops.

As I've said before, it is a war on drugs, identify the enemies and kill them. That is a war.

Maybe I'm an idealist but I believe police can do good police work without trampling on peoples rights. Put together a solid case for the prosecutors, prosecute them, and lock them up. That does require the support of local governments, and the courts doing there job when the police have done theirs.

The rise in the use no knock warrants and seizing assets to fund police departments has done nothing to "win the war" but it has caused some peoples rights to be unnecessarily violated.

As kaywoodie pointed out, next year is the 100th anniversary of the US Army under the leadership of Blackjack Pershing (and the junior leadership of that great American, George S. Patton) riding roughshod over and back across the American border, putting the jackboot to a bunch of Mexicans and bringing peace and tranquility to more than a few South Texas ranchers.

Guess there weren't many libertarians among the South Texas ranchers in those days.

Edited to add: And the New Mexican ranchers. Didn't mean to leave them out.

And that worked so well for us elsewhere, didn't it?

Fixing Mexico is beyond our means and ability. What ever is wrong with Mexico is wrong because the Mexican people have made it that way. Not the US.

We wall them off, or we give up.

Start by giving anyone that hires an employee for more than 40 hours of labor without verifying their documents a mandatory night in jail, second offense- 30 days in jail, third offense- 6 months and if they do it more times than that a felony with 1 year minimum for each illegal they hire. Then give those illegals who perpetrate social assistance program fraud 6 months in jail before deportation in Sheriff Joe's tent jail. The wall will help, tough to drive a semi full of drugs and illegals across the border if there is a functional wall, but other measures will be needed too.

How about confiscating and selling off the pickup trucks of every independent roofer who hires a crew of illegals at a Walmart?

Wow, a long meandering thread. Build a "high tech" fence and keep them out.
Get immigration back to some semblance of an orderly process.
Its obvious none of the Dems or enough of the Repubs want to do it.
So, who does that leave the job to?

Follow the money and you will find it leads back to Washington.

We can't fix the border, we can't fix the sovereignty of this nation till we fix Washington.

All three branches of the .gov need a thorough cleaning and placed back in proper order before anything more than lip service happens on all the other issues that stare us in the face.

Iirc, we've done that about 14 times since JFK.

I will add in 1916 the American people expected military intervention for their protection along the border. There were US Troops and National Guard units stationed from the Gulf to the Arizona border. It was a different time. The Indian wars were still a very distinct memory in the minds of individuals from Fort Stockton to Yuma.

Did the punitive expedition achieve any goals? Well yes it did. While they did not accomplish their primary mission with the capture of Pancho Villa they did deplete his ability to field a large and threatening force ever again, with the ruination of his bandit army and depletion of his officer corps. Also it gave US Forces needed experience for its entry into the Great War. It showed Imperial Germany that we were a nation not to be taken lightly. On a political front it led Carrenza to begin talks with the U.S. And for his eventual dismissal of support for the plan of San Diego.

Those were different times and the idea of "rules of engagement" translated to high enemy body count.

Somebody has to build and maintain a physical barrier. Otherwise it stays a "free-for-all" with sanctuary cities and politicians who want to appease.

I still like Bristoe's idea for sanctuary cities!

It doesn't have to be an actual wall.

Federal military control of the border (which I believe is what an army is supposed to do), suspension of federal funds to sanctuary cities (go, Donald), a serious change in the nature of civil immigration removal proceedings and very real, very serious economic harm to those American citizens who traffic in illegals. There's a start.

Look, even the Mexican government admits there are about 30 million Mexican nationals living unlawfully in the US. I want them all to go away, and I think you do, too. I also want to keep all 30 million of them from coming back. I think you, do, too.

Question is, are we willing to accept what kind of people WE have to become to make that happen?