|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,261 |
The reason is COST and the public demand for LOWER taxes and personnel. It costs money and the Border Patrol's budget is being cut just like other agencies. You can't have it both ways and demand lower taxes (or not increase), fewer Federal employees and still have increased security.
For the border to be made (almost) 100% secure, we'd have to position a Border Patrol agent every 100' along the 1,980 mile border to actually tackle illegals. That would be 52.8 per mile or 104,544 per shift. Assuming 4.5 men per position (allows for 3 shifts, vacation, sick time, training, court time, etc. - 4.5 is the security profession accepted number), we'd need 470,448 border patrol agents for complete coverage. AND THIS IS ONLY FOR THE MEXICAN BORDER!
The border Patrol is actually responsible for the 19,000 mile border (including Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, etc.)
According to the BP, there are currently about 15,000 BP agents covering the entire border; so we'd need to hire, pay and train an additional 455,448 agents, just for the Mexican border.
Who here will call Rep. John Boehner and demand that we spend the needed money? We don't have to cut cost to secure the border or hire more border agents. Bring home the Army and Air Force to close the Southern border. The Nation State is being invaded by a foreign army so this is really a job for the military and what they are supposed to do. Full military force on the border would eliminate the invading army from crossing the border.
Don't vote knothead, it only encourages them. Anonymous
"Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." Anonymous
"Self-reliance, free thinking, and wealth is anathema to both the power of the State and the Church." Derby Dude
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,009
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,009 |
Well...he is cutting the military. That always happens when I go running off at the mouth, someone points out that I'm wrong.  The military better watch it or they will be armed with bean bags too. They are our allies now. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424 |
Interior enforcement is now handled by ICE. This began under the Bush administration.
It has simply taken this long for .gov to ask "Then WTF do we have interior BP Stations?"
You're welcome,
Travis
Trump being classless,tasteless and clueless as usual. Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit. My young wife decided to play the field and had moved several dudes into my house
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,379
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 16,379 |
The reason is COST and the public demand for LOWER taxes and personnel. It costs money and the Border Patrol's budget is being cut just like other agencies. You can't have it both ways and demand lower taxes (or not increase), fewer Federal employees and still have increased security.
For the border to be made (almost) 100% secure, we'd have to position a Border Patrol agent every 100' along the 1,980 mile border to actually tackle illegals. That would be 52.8 per mile or 104,544 per shift. Assuming 4.5 men per position (allows for 3 shifts, vacation, sick time, training, court time, etc. - 4.5 is the security profession accepted number), we'd need 470,448 border patrol agents for complete coverage. AND THIS IS ONLY FOR THE MEXICAN BORDER!
The border Patrol is actually responsible for the 19,000 mile border (including Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, etc.)
According to the BP, there are currently about 15,000 BP agents covering the entire border; so we'd need to hire, pay and train an additional 455,448 agents, just for the Mexican border.
Who here will call Rep. John Boehner and demand that we spend the needed money? I've got to call BS on this one - I've SEEN through the NV the NM Nat Guard was using on their desert initiative (which was also cut back by BamBam!) The effective range of observation is astounding. Mark
I've always been a curmudgeon - now I'm an old curmudgeon.
~Molɔ̀ːn Labé Skýla~
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 67,693
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
OP
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 67,693 |
The reason is COST and the public demand for LOWER taxes and personnel. It costs money and the Border Patrol's budget is being cut just like other agencies. You can't have it both ways and demand lower taxes (or not increase), fewer Federal employees and still have increased security.
For the border to be made (almost) 100% secure, we'd have to position a Border Patrol agent every 100' along the 1,980 mile border to actually tackle illegals. That would be 52.8 per mile or 104,544 per shift. Assuming 4.5 men per position (allows for 3 shifts, vacation, sick time, training, court time, etc. - 4.5 is the security profession accepted number), we'd need 470,448 border patrol agents for complete coverage. AND THIS IS ONLY FOR THE MEXICAN BORDER!
The border Patrol is actually responsible for the 19,000 mile border (including Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, etc.)
According to the BP, there are currently about 15,000 BP agents covering the entire border; so we'd need to hire, pay and train an additional 455,448 agents, just for the Mexican border.
Who here will call Rep. John Boehner and demand that we spend the needed money? that is patent bullscheit djs, and you know it. If it were about 'cost', there many areas of the Federal Government that could be cut without impacting National Security. Always the apologist for hussein, eh?
Sam......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 9,341
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 9,341 |
Yes its about COST. Business wants cheap labor.
The end of democracy, and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,165
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,165 |
How about Obama eliminating one of his vacations. That would probably go a long way towards funding the BP Stations that he is shutting down. On second thought, he is out of Washington when he is on vacation. It might be better to eliminate one of the First Lady's vacations and let the President keep his. That savings would probably fund a couple of years of the BP expences that are being cut back.
Harry
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,697
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 14,697 |
To make it easier for 'wetbacks' to slip into the country to vote for Obammy!!
Even birds know not to land downwind!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 15,651
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 15,651 |
Didn't you know, the border is secure so we don't need as many stations now? 
NRA Life,Endowment,Patron or Benefactor since '72.
|
|
|
|
|
72 members (14idaho, 907brass, 44automag, 10gaugemag, 308xray, 11 invisible),
1,494
guests, and
820
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,387
Posts18,469,723
Members73,931
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
