Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chris Christie Proposes Tracking Immigrants the Way FedEx Tracks Packages

Posted by timothy on from the nobody-hates-new-immigrants-like-old-immigrants dept.

PolygamousRanchKid submits the news that New Jersey governor (and Republican presidential candidate) Chris Christie said yesterday that he would, if elected president, create a system to track foreign visitors the way FedEx tracks packages. The NYT writes: Mr. Christie, who is far back in the pack of candidates for the Republican presidential nomination, said at a campaign event in New Hampshire that he would ask the chief executive of FedEx, Frederick W. Smith, to devise the tracking system."At any moment, FedEx can tell you where that package is. It's on the truck. It's at the station. It's on the airplane," Mr. Christie told the crowd in Laconia, N.H. "Yet we let people come to this country with visas, and the minute they come in, we lose track of them." He added: "We need to have a system that tracks you from the moment you come in." Adds the submitter: "I'm sure foreign tourist will be amused when getting a bar code sticker slapped on their arm."

13 of 576 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah, nah. by YukariHirai · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm somewhat interested in visiting the US, but this kind of bullshit would absolutely kill any desire to go there.

    1. Re:Yeah, nah. by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm somewhat interested in visiting the US, but this kind of bullshit would absolutely kill any desire to go there.

      It took this? Not our general policy of running around the world tampering with governments, murdering people, and blowing up cities for profit?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Yeah, nah. by kyrsjo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even if we may be skeptical to or disagree with US policy, it doesn't mean that we dislike everyone who lives there or what is there.

  2. Christie is ideal by msobkow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Christie would make the ideal VP for Trump. They're both ignorant bigots.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Christie is ideal by dinfinity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At first I thought that Trump was deliberately put into the picture to draw the playing field towards 'the right', i.e. make one guy say the most outlandish stuff so that the previously outlandish things the rest said actually seem reasonable (and conversely, making the actually reasonable stuff sound silly and far away from reality).

      But the completely baffling thing to me is that there are actually droves of people in the US that not only support Trump, but actively defend his words and say asinine shit like: "He's a true American. We need a guy like that for president" and: "The media are making him sound racist". I remember being very surprised that a moron like Bush Jr. could become (and stay!) president, but this is definitely a new low for the US. Trump hasn't been elected yet, but the fact that so many people like him and support him is already deeply, deeply disgraceful.

  3. Dumbest thing I've heard today. by 3vi1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FedEx packages are travelling through a confined system of checkpoints. Unless Christie wants to put checkpoints all around America and have everyone showing their papers to TSA agents on every public highway, it just won't work.

    1. Re:Dumbest thing I've heard today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He probably does.

  4. Re:Unnecessary by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The last thing I want to see is the travesty that is asset forfeiture expanded.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  5. Wrong people to strip by realxmp · · Score: 5, Informative

    They still would come because they have nothing to lose, most of them have net assets of close to zero. The first generation tends to live hand to mouth. The people who make the money are the American factory owners and farmers who employ them. These are the people you would need to asset strip to stop employment of immigrants but if we think politicians are going to go after these people (their biggest donors) we are naive. Incidentally if the U.S. did manage to deport all 11 million of them it would cause a massive economic implosion due to a drop in demand for basic goods. It would likely also cause a closure of US factories and increase the offshoring of US industry.

    1. Re:Wrong people to strip by Alomex · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The savings in entitlement expenses would more than compensate

      [citation needed]

      In fact I'll save you the trouble, people have studied this and found the exact opposite. Illegal immigrants can access few entitlements yet pay many taxes, so they are usually net contributors.

      That is, if you care about the facts.

    2. Re:Wrong people to strip by TedHornsby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I work in the construction industry, an industry especially notorious for the employment of illegal immigrants, so I have some personal experience in regards to illegal immigration. First of all, this picture Donald Trump has been painting of violent criminals and Mexican citizens coming here in droves to live off government welfare programs is just not true. These are blue-collar, hard-working, decent people who have come here to escape ruthless violence (fueled by American demand for illegal drugs) and extensive poverty. They have become the foundation that several sectors of the US economy are built on. What people like Donald Trump and his ilk need to realize is that the violent criminals, for the most part, have no real inclination to pack up and move themselves across the Rio Grande. It's much easier for these drug gangs to operate on their side of the border, where widespread corruption has enabled them to operate with near impunity, than it is for them to "invade" America, where they have to deal with state, local, and federal law enforcement agencies that are more motivated by arrest and seizure statistics than a personal bribe. Speaking from my own experiences, the career criminals that do come across the border end up being arrested over here, which results in their deportation back across the border. 99% of Mexicans here illegally are ordinary people simply trying to support themselves and their families. As things are now, these people live in constant fear that any encounter or interaction with police or government officials will end up with them sitting in a holding cell, awaiting deportation, while their wife and children remain in America. These families are torn apart, with wives and mothers suddenly finding themselves with 3 children to support and no source of income. One woman I know of has resorted to collecting scrap metal to support a 5 year-old son and infant daughter. The sight of a 5 year-old kid helping his mother load an old water heater into a truck so that they might be able to keep a roof over their heads is something that those arguing for tougher immigration enforcement never have, and probably never will, experience. The truth of the matter is that those working here illegally are not much different from the people who comprise our own working-class. In fact, Mexican workers that are paid "under-the-table" (as in they don't have anything taxes taken out of their paycheck) are relatively rare. Meaning they financially contribute to a system under which they are considered as faceless statistics and under which they have no voice. This has gotten long enough, so I'll stop here. Just remember, that just because someone is labeled "illegal" does not make them a criminal. P.S.: Before somebody decides to get pedantic with that last statement, I am aware that being here illegally means they are in violation of the law, and technically a criminal. What I was trying to illustrate was the absurdity that people are criminalized for simply providing for themselves and their loved ones.

  6. But it wouldn't work anyway. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But it wouldn't work anyway.

    I don't think he even understands FedEx. FedEx cannot tell you where a package is RIGHT NOW. They can only tell you where it was LAST SCANNED.

    The reason this works well for packages is that packages don't move themselves. And even then it has failures. This will completely fail because HUMANS can wander around on their own.

    Sounds more like Christie wants to associate his campaign with something that people have a mostly positive opinion of. But I'm pretty sure that FedEx will not want to be associated with a losing candidate OR the concept of tagging and tracking undesirable races/nationalities (shades of Nazi German there).

  7. Re:The above is informative ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's your definition of "peace"? There are always multiple wars going on in numerous places in the world, constantly. Many of these are being interfered with, instigated, or supported by the US and its allies. It's profitable to sell weapons to both sides, to keep the wars going. The only more profitable situation is when you get your puppet installed as leader, then you can just pilfer the public assets wholesale.

    Just because it's peaceful in your little gated neighbourhood, doesn't mean the rest of the world is a-ok.