Slashdot Mirror


Should America Build a Virtual Border Wall? Or Just Crowdfund It... (chicagotribune.com)

As America's government faces its longest-ever shutdown over the president's demands for border wall funding, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has suggested "possible alternatives to a physical wall," according to one Silicon Valley newspaper: Among the president's justifications for a wall is to stop drugs from coming into the United States, so Pelosi proposed spending "hundreds of millions of dollars" for technology to scan cars for drugs, weapons and contraband at the border. "The positive, shall we say, almost technological wall that can be built is what we should be doing," Pelosi, D-San Francisco, said during her weekly press conference.

That didn't go over well with Fight for the Future, a digital rights advocacy group that on Friday started a petition asking Democrats to drop plans for a "technological wall" that it says could threaten Fourth Amendment rights that guard against unreasonable searches and seizures. "Current border surveillance programs subject people to invasive and unconstitutional searches of their cell phones and laptops, location tracking, drone surveillance, and problematic watchlists," the group's petition says...

In December, the Department of Homeland Security's Office of the Inspector General released a report that showed searches of electronic devices at the border were up nearly 50 percent in 2017. The report also found that border agents were not always following standard operating procedures for searches, including failing to properly document such searches. In addition, information copied by agents were not always deleted as required.

The article also notes that Anduril Industries -- founded by Oculus Rift designer Palmer Luckey (and funded by Peter Thiel) -- is one of several companies already working on "a virtual border wall."

CNN also reports on a GoFundMe campaign started by an Air Force veteran to simply crowdfund the construction of the wall. Though 340,747 people pledged over $20 million, it failed to reach its $1 billion goal, and is now pointing supporters to a newly-formed non-profit corporation -- named "We Build the Wall."

Meanwhile, another 7,121 GoFundMe members have pledged $160,985 to a rival campaign raising money for ladders to climb over Trump's wall.

462 comments

  1. Apples and oranges... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Insightful

    AFAIK, the "wall" is supposed to be built outside of official border crossing points. "Official" border crossings have used x-ray or similar scanners since at least 2012; they probably check for radiation too.

    https://www.cnet.com/news/dhs-...

    I'm not actually in favor of a wall, but Nauseating Nancy Pelosi seems to be discussing an entirely different issue. What's the long-term solution? Fix the broken immigration system, issue an amount of guest-worker permits that's sufficient to meet demand for immigration.

    If we're going to build a "wall" along the border, I'm not sure that either a wall or high-tech will do much. Anyone willing to cross a hundred miles of desert isn't going to be fazed by another obstacle that's surmountable. Want to patrol the more rugged parts of the border? First build a road or track along it, then use Border Patrol mounted on horseback combined with drones with IR cameras. The terrain is such that mounted troops are actually more effective than motor vehicles or walls.

    1. Re:Apples and oranges... by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Border Patrol disagrees with you:
      https://www.kusi.com/cnn-reque...

      The advantage of a physical wall is it doesn't care who is in the white house. When you rely on catching people crossing illegally what to do with them after is a matter of policy that can be determined by the administration. If you prefer ignoring the law and allowing illegal immigration this is a feature.

    2. Re:Apples and oranges... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Taken out of context -- the Border Patrol talking head stated that walls work in urbanized areas where they can be patrolled easily, not that building a wall through rural/desert areas would be terribly useful.

    3. Re:Apples and oranges... by lgw · · Score: 1, Troll

      Clinton (both), Pelosi, and most high-profile Democrats were in favor of border security, including a wall, before Trump was involved. Didn't Bill Clinton even promise a wall in some year's SOTU?

      It's not about the wall, clearly. They don't want Trump to get a win. Pure pettiness. Which is fucking stupid: do you utter morons really expect to beat Trump in a war of petty childish behavior? Seriously? That outranks a land war in Asia for a fight not to pick! Both sides are holding their breath until they turn blue; guess who has the least to lose from brain damage? Trick question, they're all idiots.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    4. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A wall is basically a mounting point for sensors: ground radars, vibration detectors, automated low altitude radars and optical detectors. And 5G networks with AI, of course.

    5. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, they support a bollard fence. And in urban areas where it makes sense. Putting anything in the desert nowhereville stops nothing unless you patrol it. You're a moron.

    6. Re:Apples and oranges... by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "What's the long-term solution?"

      The long term solution is to remove the incentives that brings illegals here in the first place.
      Eg: Birthright Citizenship

    7. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Democrats wanted a wall, there would be a wall.

    8. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The long term solution is immigration reform so that people who want to work and pay taxes here can do so, supervised, legally, and without a 20 year wait. The whole system is dumb.

      The Republican party went full racist retard rather than trying to find effective solutions. All the wall is is a self-signed participation trophy as Trump heads off to prison.

    9. Re:Apples and oranges... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

      You're assuming that I'm bothered by illegal immigration ... frankly, I'm not, and there are plenty of other issues that are more pressing in the US.

    10. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The democrats are for any form of border security that doesn't physically prevent anyone from entering the country. That would be counter-productive to their strategy of also nixing any legislation that could counter voter fraud. Of course, they want to be able to track people entering the country unlawfully, so cameras and so forth are ok. They want to be able to be sure they can find them to register them to vote, after all.

    11. Re:Apples and oranges... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      If they disagree with his views on a 3000 mile wall, why post a link to page referring to a cherry-picked place?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    12. Re:Apples and oranges... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

      It makes the patrolling a lot easier. Having to climb up and over a wall is a much more obvious action to spot/witness (either by eye or drone or sensor) than dodging from bush to bush flat on the ground.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    13. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Walls dont get overtime or die. Walls work.

    14. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A wall over the Rio Grande doesn't make patrolling it easier. A drone (aircraft, not 4 rotor) can stay up indefinitely and spot people with FLIR. A wall is pointless. You're a moron, not a cop, not a soldier. You never served.

    15. Re:Apples and oranges... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      On the Rio - sure! In other places - a wall. They work. And they work well.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    16. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Want to stop illegal immigration? Give million dollar per worker per day for hiring illegals on top of prison time for the employer, say a minimum of 10 years.

      Then make legal immigration easier and far less time consuming and expensive, we want more tax payers, not less.

    17. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have no idea, and you're a moronic faggot doubly having been told several times they almost entirely come in through airports, you treasonous little cunt lol.

    18. Re:Apples and oranges... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Trick question, they're all idiots.

      They won the election. Who's the idiot? Trick question, you don't want to know.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    19. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOD UP ^^ SUCCINCT BASIC SHIT PLZ, dishonest republican talking points do not affect this fact whatsoever.

    20. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What use is a camera or drone in a stretch of land that has no means to slow people down? A wall, even if breached, would slow someone down long enough for someone to respond. Pelosi's technology at ports of entry will just deter people from the ports of entry. Security is only as strong as the weakest link. Or in this case, mile and miles of open land with no barrier or patrol.

    21. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No jobs won't stop them. California wants to give them free medical, free college, drivers licenses and enroll them in every other entitlement program. They'll have no need for jobs.

    22. Re:Apples and oranges... by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 2

      The advantage of a physical wall is it doesn't care who is in the white house.

      It should start caring, because the only thing more useless than a border wall, is a perpetually unfinished border wall.

    23. Re:Apples and oranges... by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      I've overstayed my visa in a couple different countries. It was never because of birthright citizenship.

    24. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Listen, imbecile, it's not about not wanting Trump to get a win. It's the fact that 5bn is only a minuscule fraction of what this thing will cost, both in terms of initial building and ongoing maintenance. It's a monstrous waste of money. The Dems are the adults in this room.

      Democrats and Republicans had a DONE DEAL that included billions in border security funding. Then the right wing spin machine pointed out that if Trump signed it, he would be weak because it didn't include funding for a wall. Trump then had a tantrum and here we are.

    25. Re: Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if it was a fence with slats running 100 ft deep and 100 ft high?

      Would that do nothing in the middle of nowhere?

      Ah, I thought so. Your version of the wall may not, but a version of the wall will.

      Have a good day dipshit

    26. Re:Apples and oranges... by lgw · · Score: 1

      OK, then, politicians are the smart ones. Man, if from where you are the mind of a politician looks smart .... How do you even use a keyboard?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    27. Re:Apples and oranges... by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      The long term solution is to remove the incentives that brings illegals here in the first place.
      eg. a history of Western governments using everything from the War on Drugs to Communism as excuses to interfere with and cripple the governments, and as a result the economies, of various South American countries, resulting in economic and social conditions that would make people so desperate they'd be willing to trek thousands of miles and risk arrest just to improve their conditions.

      FTFY. Birthright citizenship? Are you nuts? What proportion of illegal immigrants do you seriously think are coming here as part of a long term strategy to get pregnant and give birth?

      Another alternative interestingly is to stop worrying about it. Make visas easier to get. Make residency easier to get (and hence citizenship.) Result? Probably fewer employers encouraging immigrants, because they wouldn't be able to rely upon its illegal status to pay shit wages under the table. But that would, you know, actually help the same blue collar workers that anti-immigrant assholes pretend to be helping with their rhetoric, whereas the entire point of the wall isn't to stop illegal immigrants from driving blue collar workers out of their jobs, the entire point is to make sure it continues to happen while looking like the people who are trying to prevent it.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    28. Re:Apples and oranges... by fustakrakich · · Score: 0

      OK, then, politicians are the smart ones.

      A hell of a lot smarter than the people that vote for them, wouldn't you agree? I mean, the solution is simple. You seem to be unaware of how things work, maybe you prefer to be when the blame can't be passed any other way. Eh, whatever, you answered the question... thankyouverymuch

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    29. Re:Apples and oranges... by lgw · · Score: 1

      A hell of a lot smarter than the people that vote for them, wouldn't you agree?

      Hell no. I do not believe we area nation of peasants ruled by our aristocratic betters! Fuck that idea in its entirety. That idea is the cancer killing America.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    30. Re:Apples and oranges... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Well, you're just not getting it then. The simple fact is that all we have to do is vote them out. It is not their fault when they win.

      Unless you try to understand the fundamentals, we are doomed. But take heart, the moderators are on your side. Blame passing is the *in* thing these days.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    31. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The long term solution could be to make the world a better place, and/or stop messing other countries, but the current social order needs more people to be miserable in order to sustain the current tower of cards we call civilized world.

    32. Re:Apples and oranges... by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Birthright citizenship isn't the incentive though, people want their kids to be in the US for the same reason they want to be in the US: Better jobs, safer, higher standards of living compared to their home counties.

      To remove those incentives you have to either improve the countries they're coming from or make the US worse. Personally, I'd prefer not to make the US worse

    33. Re:Apples and oranges... by lgw · · Score: 1

      To quote Milton Friedman:

      I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or it they try, they will shortly be out of office.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    34. Re:Apples and oranges... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or it they try, they will shortly be out of office.

      Exactly. That is done with the vote. It's still up to us. You cannot avoid responsibility for the people you reelect. If you give them more than one chance, you're the idiot. It can't be any more obvious.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    35. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She is acknowledging the need for the wall but can't capitulate to trump, so we'll end up with a worse surveillance-state solution

    36. Re:Apples and oranges... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm fine with this, or building more of a fence in rural areas with wide gaps to allow wildlife through but are also monitored more closely.

      The most effective border security is physical barrier in high-population areas like where US and Mexico cities are both right at the border, Then a hard-to-climb fence in the other areas with large gaps for wildlife migration. Electronic surveillance such as cameras, drones, etc. then fast response teams for when someone is found cross the border.

      And the most important thing is not making it viable to live in the US illegally. No employment, no drivers licences, no welfare benefits, fast deportation when you get caught

  2. Running the numbers ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    1/12/2019 @ 6:46 PM CST

    Goal $1,000,000,000
    Current Donations $20,360,122
    Current People 340,800
    Current Days 26
    People/Day 13,108
    Donations/Day $783,082
    Days Til Goal 1,277
    People Til Goal 435,203,679

    The idea was to get $80 from all Americans (I don't know what that means ... babies can't participate).

    Currently, it's at $59.74 per donor, on average.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:Running the numbers ... by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 1

      I thought it was $80 from everyone who voted for Trump?

    2. Re:Running the numbers ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      You may be right (I think you are) about that. The narrative has changed since gofundme declared the goal was not reached in time.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    3. Re:Running the numbers ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously fell flat when it turned out that most people didn't vote for Trump because they actually wanted a wall, but instead because they fell for Russian propaganda.

      However Trump got to power, there's never been a democratic mandate for his wall. Not at any point in time has there ever been any evidence that there's a majority in favour of it.

      It's a personal vanity project, so that he can think about how when he's dead people will still be talking about the Great Wall of Trump.

      Which is pretty fucking sad, really. I almost feel sorry for the guy given he's spent his entire life living with that degree of insecurity, never being happy, always filled with fear and rage.

    4. Re:Running the numbers ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Until the science is in, nothing is obvious.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    5. Re:Running the numbers ... by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      Some survey showed that 39% of the population supports a border wall. If the Government decided to issue Wall Bonds, and every adult that wanted the wall bought $75 worth of them Trump would have his money.

      Estimated Population: 328 Million
      Adults are about 60% of that: 196.8 Million
      Wall Supporters 39%: 76.752 Million
      $75 per supporter: $5,756,400,000

      Personally I'm opposed to the idea of a border wall as it'll just be wasted money. If we want border security there are much more effective ways to do it like drones and aerostats for monitoring then dispatching response teams as needed. Whether or not we really need better border security is still not something I'm convinced of, but spending money on a static wall in the middle of nowhere is a nonstarter for me.

    6. Re:Running the numbers ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      I agree with you and there's even more to consider.

      $5bn isn't enough to fund the proposal and project planning stage of a wall. Estimates run from 21.5bn to 70bn to impossible to do.

      There's a lot of up-front work to be done.

      Some owners along the border have converted parts of their properties to places of worship. Others have donated land parcels to conservationist organizations with deep pockets.

      Some owners are not on the border, but have denied permission for roads needed to get to the properties along the border.

      Many towns almost seamlessly straddle the border (especially in Texas) and each side depends upon the other.

      So, 5bn won't even pay for enumerating the problems of building a wall.

      I endorse your last paragraph and see immigration, even illegal, as a net positive for the US.

      Our best strategy going forward is to just don't fuck with the status quo.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  3. Yay Totalitarianism! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pelosi proposed spending "hundreds of millions of dollars" for technology to scan cars for drugs, weapons and contraband at the border.

    And hell, why not give money to all those private security companies to scan us fucking everywhere else while we're at it. It can't cost more than, say, an extra few trillion or so. The plebs are good for it.
    Fucking trust the Dems to play their part in our ratchet effect dystopia by taking a fucking awful idea and and proposing a merely terrible one. An expensive idea of course, because after all these Republican tax cuts, the swifter destruction of government finances will hasten the end of all our nasty public services that neither party is very keen on anymore (Except the Big Data/Big Brother/Big Bomber stuff).

    Crowdfund fucking my ass. Another juicy Big Government contract to fuck us all over while making profit for our emerging techno-overclass. Washington D.C. should be nuked.

    1. Re:Yay Totalitarianism! by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      The mainstream wings of BOTH parties in the US are authoritarian assholes.

  4. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you really want to fly when air traffic controllers are working without pay and probably even more stressed out than usual? That's how mistakes happen and mistakes get people killed.

    Notice I'm not weeping for the "papers please" TSA jobsworths, but things like air traffic control, FAA inspections, FDA inspections, Dept of Ag, are actually useful and desirable.

  5. The human cost by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 0, Troll

    There is also the human cost to consider.

    Rep. Brooks outlines the cost of not having a wall:

    “With the southern border, we have the loss of at least 15,000 Americans a year. You have 2,000 that are homicides by illegal aliens, according to federal government data. You’ve got another 15,000, 16,000 that die each year from heroin overdoses, 90 percent of which comes across our porous southern border. That’s not counting the 55,000 additional deaths that are caused by overdoses, a significant amount of which comes across the southern border,” Brooks stated."

    I've looked into this, and the numbers are accurate. The GAO estimates for 2009 show that Arizona had 240 illegal immigrant inmates incarcerated in federal prison for homicide related charges. California had 2430, Florida had 480, New York had 1350, and Texas had 900.

    "Taking the data only from these five states, and assuming that each person incarcerated for a homicide-related offense is responsible for only one death, yields 5,400 people killed by illegal aliens."

    For comparison, automobile deaths in the US is around 35,000 annually.

    Total non-medical deaths in the US is about 161,000 annually. Deaths due to illegals is more than 2% of that, possibly as much as 10%, depending on where you put the blame for overdosing.

    All of this is fact, and should be the basis for any political arguments about the wall.

    The human cost of not having a wall is very high.

    1. Re:The human cost by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Insightful

      i can't speak to the murder statistics, but most fentanyl comes by ship from China these days. Most heroin that comes from "down South" probably comes in trucks or by ship, commingled with legitimate cargo.

    2. Re:The human cost by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 0

      Also, sentences for murder tend to be longer than a year, so the number of people in prison for murder at any given time doesn't reflect the annual murder rate with any degree of accuracy.

    3. Re:The human cost by AHuxley · · Score: 0, Troll

      the wall forces most shipments to pass into inspection.
      Illegal mights then has to attempt to pass their fake documents.
      The wall hears the criminals, illegal migrants to areas where they face some inspection.
      K9 units, truck scanning, voice prints, CCTV on all drivers and passengers.
      That the neat part of a wall. Criminals and illegal migrants have to pass inspection and show documents.
      Like in any normal nation again :)

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    4. Re:The human cost by caseih · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How will a wall help with any of that? Most illegal immigration is the cumulative result of people overstaying visas. In other words entering through a port of entry and then just not leaving. Furthermore the rate of illegal immigration into the US has steadily declined over the years in total, and in particular from Mexico. Immigration from other non-North American countries has increased, but the overall rate seems to be declining.

      This current so-called crisis in Tijuana has nothing to do with border walls or border security either. These are folks who will claim asylum at the port of entry. A giant wall across the border wouldn't change this situation.

      Also, where will this wall be built? Are wall supporters ready to spend the money not only to build the wall but to buy the land? The vast majority of the land along the border is privately owned. Will the government just take the land? Steal it from Mexico? What about rivers? This doesn't seem to be very well thought out. Earmarking a huge amount of money for a project with no real plan doesn't seem like a good idea to me. I have to wonder who benefits from this wall's construction?

    5. Re:The human cost by turbidostato · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Thats why walls work"

      There's one thing I don't understand, though... I have clear memories of Trump stating it was going Mexico the one to pay for the wall so, what's the problem with the wall not having a line in USA's budget? Wasn't exactly that what Trump expected -and promised?

    6. Re:The human cost by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Arizona had 240 illegal immigrant inmates incarcerated in federal prison for homicide related charges. California had 2430, Florida had 480, New York had 1350, and Texas had 900

      That's some interesting math considering that it's more than the total number of inmates in federal prison for homicide charges.

    7. Re:The human cost by quantaman · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is also the human cost to consider.

      Rep. Brooks outlines the cost of not having a wall:

      “With the southern border, we have the loss of at least 15,000 Americans a year. You have 2,000 that are homicides by illegal aliens, according to federal government data. You’ve got another 15,000, 16,000 that die each year from heroin overdoses, 90 percent of which comes across our porous southern border. That’s not counting the 55,000 additional deaths that are caused by overdoses, a significant amount of which comes across the southern border,” Brooks stated."

      I've looked into this, and the numbers are accurate.

      And completely irrelevant to a wall. Do you really think people are carrying bags of heroin on their backs through the desert? The heroin comes through ports of entry, hidden in trucks or ships.

      Rep Mo Brooks is lying to you.

      The GAO estimates for 2009 show that Arizona had 240 illegal immigrant inmates incarcerated in federal prison for homicide related charges. California had 2430, Florida had 480, New York had 1350, and Texas had 900.

      "Taking the data only from these five states, and assuming that each person incarcerated for a homicide-related offense is responsible for only one death, yields 5,400 people killed by illegal aliens."

      For comparison, automobile deaths in the US is around 35,000 annually.

      Total non-medical deaths in the US is about 161,000 annually. Deaths due to illegals is more than 2% of that

      Wow that article is hilarious.

      "DACA is bad because a much larger group of which DACA is a very unique subset committed bad crimes!! And I'm skeptical of studies that completely contradict my thesis but won't actually say why!!!!"

      depending on where you put the blame for overdosing.

      All of this is fact, and should be the basis for any political arguments about the wall.

      The human cost of not having a wall is very high.

      Even assuming illegal immigration was as terrible as you say did you notice last year when Democrats and Trump agreed to a deal for $25 billion in wall funding, but then immigration hardliners came in and blew it up?

      There's a reason they did that, a wall is a giant waste of cash and not that useful for stopping illegal immigration.

      But if President Crybaby really wants a wall he can do the thing Presidents are supposed to do when they want a policy and needs the other party's support. Negotiate and find something of value they'll take in exchange.

      The US system does not give Trump the right to build a wall without congressional support.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    8. Re:The human cost by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If we would simply sit on the sidelines for the next " War on X ", we could easily build that wall 10x over.

      Folks talk about how it would be a waste of money to build it, yet where is all that outrage when the US is spending TRILLIONS of dollars in the never ending conflicts in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, etc. etc. ?

    9. Re:The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "I can't be outraged about two different things at once!" Seriously?

    10. Re:The human cost by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      State prisons hold illegal immigrants, too...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    11. Re:The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point was he was he showed cOkian Head was a lying faggot making shit up again, pay attention stupid.

    12. Re:The human cost by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

      No, he didn't. You can be a Federal prisoner but held in State prison. Illegal Immigration is a Federal offense, Homicide is a State offense. You would be a Federal and State prisoner, and probably held in State prison. But still counted by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

      But I get it, better to nit-pick a tiny point, ignoring the fact there are literally thousands of convicted, illegal alien murders in our system. Nope, no problems with illegal aliens - ignore the thousands who we've convicted for murder. Look over here - we can argue over a Federal and State criminal being counted in the Federal system but held in State prison!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    13. Re:The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Breitbart is a white supremacist website. You know that, and you're also a white supremacist. I can't think of anything worse to say about you, because it's not really possible to be a lower piece of subhuman garbage.

    14. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If your concern is reducing human deaths, mandate increased spending on federally funded exercise and nutrition programs. Much higher impact per dollar.

      If you really want a wall that could work, pay Mexico to build it on their southern border.

    15. Re:The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point was he was he showed cOkian Head was a lying faggot making shit up again, please pay attention stupid.

    16. Re:The human cost by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      Nice, then we need to expand and enhance ICE and get unconstitutional "sanctuary State/city" laws tossed... More ICE for everyone!

      That's what it would actually take if Republicans really wanted to address the issue of illegals.

      The wall is just an act of pandering to Republican voters who irrationally believe it will be a panacea for all our illegal immigration woes. The entire mindset behind it is "We want to win the next election, so we need to build that wall", nothing more.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    17. Re:The human cost by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      i can't speak to the murder statistics

      The murder statistics are nonsense. Saying "Mexicans murder people in America, therefore we should have a wall", is as silly as saying "Californians murder people in Nevada, therefore we should have a wall".

      Illegal immigration does not increase violent crime

      Mexican immigrants are LESS likely to commit violent crimes than native born Americans

    18. Re:The human cost by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      With the southern border, we have the loss of at least 15,000 Americans a year.

      Damn! That many are escaping, eh? We need a Wall!

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    19. Re:The human cost by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      yet where is all that outrage when the US is spending TRILLIONS of dollars in the never ending conflicts in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, etc. etc. ?

      There was plenty of outrage. Probably more than on any other issue since Vietnam. But most of those trillions are already spent, or are being spent on things like disability pay and long term care of wounded that are unavoidable. The on-going cost of out small remaining footprint is not much.

      Besides, opposition to "The Wall" is not about it being expensive, but about it being stupid. I would oppose it even if Mexico really was paying for it. We should have cooperation and positive engagement with our neighbors. A wall is the opposite of that.

    20. Re:The human cost by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Nice, then we need to expand and enhance ICE and get unconstitutional "sanctuary State/city" laws tossed... More ICE for everyone!

      Or we could just legalize drugs. If a law isn't working, sometimes the solution is to repeal it rather than to pile on more laws, police, and walls. Just a thought.

    21. Re:The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >two different equivalently-mentioned things

      Ha, cute. Yes, we are familiar with this method.

      Alright, go ahead, you can be outraged (about two different things at once) towards the lady watering a multi-acre lawn and the lady watering her cactus. Indeed, they are both in need of correction, having broken the water rationing of this hypothetical.

    22. Re:The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where I live (AZ), a lot of gov't workers are Mexican (or of Mexican descent), so shutting down the gov't and denying them a regular paycheck is pretty close to Mexico paying for the border wall... Just sayin'.

    23. Re:The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So do you live under a canopy instead of a walled house/apartment?

      There's an old saying: good fences make good neighbors, and good neighbors build good fences. There is no reason why building a wall would impede cooperation and engagement with our neighbor.

    24. Re:The human cost by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      There's an old saying: good fences make good neighbors, and good neighbors build good fences.

      You are misinterpreting the "old saying". It is from Mending Wall, a poem by Robert Frost. His neighbor says "Good fences make good neighbors." But the point of the poem is that the fence actually serves no real purpose at all, and is a barrier between two people who would likely be better friends without the fence.

      But don't worry, you are in good company. Sarah Palin also completely missed the point.

    25. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is the truth and not what people keep repeating. President Trump said specifically that Mexico was going to pay for the wall one way or another. At no point did President Trump say Mexico was going to write the US a check. What he meant is that the US through several means is going to save money and use it to help pay for the wall, such as when NAFTA was renegotiated.

      The anti Trump folks in my party and the media have manipulated what the President has said so they can call him a liar and whatever else.

      -geekpoet

    26. Re:The human cost by zidium · · Score: 3, Funny

      As a Texan, I am highly motivated to keeping the masses of people from California, New York, Illinois, oh and especially Oregon and Washington and to a much lesser extent the liberals in Colorado from migrating here after their own states have started failing.

      But, alas, like Britain and the Poles, we don't have the authority to do that.

      I'm all for a Texit. 250%. Or a Calexit. Either would enable this goal to be possible.

      --
      Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
    27. Re:The human cost by Pseudonym · · Score: 2

      Which border did the ones in New York cross illegally?

      The main problem with the statistics, however, is that the US does not incarcerate murderers for only one year. To find the yearly homicide rate, divide 5400 by the average length of a sentence in years. Then it's not 2%, but something much closer to statistical noise.

      If you want to talk about reducing deaths from overdoses then by all means let's talk about building a high quality public health system.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    28. Re:The human cost by Pseudonym · · Score: 2

      the wall forces most shipments to pass into inspection.

      A wall is no barrier to a drug trafficker armed with a drone or a tshirt cannon.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    29. Re:The human cost by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      If I were the Democrats right now, I'd offer just enough money to do a detailed engineering study and a thorough environmental impact assessment. Seems like a small price to pay to get a reality check.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    30. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Makes sense, most of Arizona was Mexico before it was stolen

    31. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't care what Trump promised. I care about getting the wall built.

      If your only argument is about something Trump said during the campaign, then welcome to the right side. I'm glad we can agree on this.

      I'll assume you were as outraged over Obama's numerous broken promises about health care, Guantanamo, etc.

    32. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "B-b-but my door is no match for a rocket launcher, so I'm leaving a gaping hole in my house"

      You sniveling, traitorous pieces of shit will be hung.

    33. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, your quoted statistics have been debunked numerous times, because nobody is talking about "all immigrants", you fucking moron.

      Second, we can kick out illegal immigrants easily under existing laws, and eliminate the problem entirely. If we could also legally kick out all Californians, we'd do that too.

    34. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure. Want to come tell the pitbulls next door that? They suddenly couldn't get into my yard and try to attack my dogs anymore, somehow, magically last summer.

      It of course had nothing to do with the fucking wall I had built, which they are now stuck outside of barking literally right now while I type this, right? You absolute and completely retarded fucking imbecile...

      I always knew leftists were deranged and mentally ill, but I assumed that you at least lived in a reality where basic physics still existed..

    35. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are assuming that a wall will help in heroin and fentanyl being less available. History has shown that illegal drugs will find new ways in if one is cut off.

    36. Re: The human cost by narcc · · Score: 2

      No one believes that. You know, because of all the evidence against it.

    37. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, that's why during the election he sent out a plan to the media where Mexico would write a check of 5-10 billion for the wall.

    38. Re: The human cost by Cyryathorn · · Score: 2

      Straight from Trump's campaign website. In this case, he didn't say the instrument of payment would necessarily be a check per se, nevertheless the "Mexican government will contribute the funds". The plan was to pressure remittances to coerce the Mexican government into contributing the funds. There would be no need to put pressure on remittances if all along it was going to be a natural outcome of an improved trade deal.

      https://assets.donaldjtrump.co...

      On day 1 promulgate a "proposed rule" (regulation) amending 31
      CFR 130.121 to redefine applicable financial institutions to include
      money transfer companies like Western Union, and redefine "account" to
      includewire transfers. Also include in the proposed rule a requirement that
      no alien may wire money outside of the United States unless the alien
      first provides a document establishing his lawful presence in the United
      States.
      On day 2 Mexico will immediately protest. They receive approximately $24
      billion a year in remittances from Mexican nationals working in the United
      States. The majority of that amount comes from illegal aliens. It serves as de
      facto welfare for poor families in Mexico. There is no significant social safety
      net provided by the state in Mexico.
      On day 3 tell Mexico that if the Mexican government will contribute the funds
      needed to the United States to pay for the wall, the Trump Administration will
      not promulgate the final rule, and the regulation will not go into effect.

    39. Re: The human cost by Cyryathorn · · Score: 1

      From the same memo: "It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-
      10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year
      after year."

      (The $24 billion is a reference to the remittances sent from Mexicans in America back to Mexico.) Again, not necessarily a check, but a "one-time payment".

    40. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice. Found out you were wrong and resorted to childish name calling. Great way to win arguments, maybe if you cry and pound the floor a bit that will help your point too.

    41. Re: The human cost by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      The use of rocket launchers in home invasions is rare at best. Drug traffickers are regularly using tshirt cannons right now.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    42. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not the person you are responding to, but since you asked...

      Guantanamo, yes. I was very vocal about that.

      Health care, not so much. He did pretty well considering the obstructionist Congress he had to deal with.

      The difference between Obama and Trump is that the people who voted for Obama thought they were getting an outsider and got a politician. The people who voted for Trump thought they were getting an outsider and got a con man. Harold Hill without the charm.

    43. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Con man? He's literally shut down the government to get his promises done.

      Two Supreme Court justices later, you've lost the ability to say he isn't exactly the man we elected. There's not a single thing he's done as president that isn't fucking awesome.

    44. Re:The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US system doesn't give the President the powers to implement things like DACA, either, but that didn't stop Obama or the judges blocking ending it.

      You'll find that the majority of what the federal government does these days is things it isn't supposed to have the authority to do.

    45. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The obstructionist congress he had with majorities in both sides for his first two years? Lying faggots lie. News at 11.

    46. Re:The human cost by quantaman · · Score: 1

      The US system doesn't give the President the powers to implement things like DACA, either, but that didn't stop Obama or the judges blocking ending it.

      That's actually somewhat debatable, just Trump's Musl^H^H^HTravel ban (which I think was a lot more unconstitutional) the courts give the President a lot of latitude on how to enforce laws, particularly immigration law.

      But there is no law that gives Trump the authority to expropriate a bunch of land and build a giant wall on the Mexican border. And certainly none that gives him the money to do so, that's unambiguously outside of his authority.

      You'll find that the majority of what the federal government does these days is things it isn't supposed to have the authority to do.

      Which is a completely different question from asking whether the Executive branch of the government can allocate money which is explicitly under the authority of the Legislative branch.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    47. Re: The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And shotguns are still being used to blow locks off doors, the principle is the same without quibbling.
      Show some data to make your point about the efficacy of walls against migration (the topic). Don't hide behind "regularly" as politico-agenda-speak for "often enough". It's not compelling.

    48. Re:The human cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your articles are bullshit, because of the very common and very deceptive tactic of mixing together legal and illegal immigrants.

      Legal immigrants are those that have applied for access to the US, been reviewed (such as checking for a criminal record), and then permitted in. It should be obvious to anyone that this group will have a lower likelihood of committing crimes than a completely randomly selected group.

    49. Re:The human cost by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The murder statistics are nonsense. Saying "Mexicans murder people in America, therefore we should have a wall", is as silly as saying "Californians murder people in Nevada, therefore we should have a wall".

      No, it's not silly. Because Californians living legally in the US are different than people who we should be preventing from being here when they cheat to do so. If we can reduce some of the tens of thousands of crimes committed in the US by those who are illegally present, that's tens of thousands of crimes fewer we have to deal with. People who end up alive, instead of dead.

      Let me guess. You're going to say that there are simply a fixed number of crimes, and if the illegals who commit thousands and thousands of violent felonies every year weren't in the country, then law-abiding citizens would step up and commit those crimes instead? Do you realize how absurd your position on this actually is? How about we just use that old liberal/progressive staple: "If we can save just one life by [banning/regulating/taking-away-liberty-in-some-way], then it's worth doing." So, if we can prevent thousands of violent felonies from being committed by people, many of whom have been repeatedly deported and who simply walk back across the border because there's nothing stopping them or even slowing them down, doesn't that more than qualify for a Progressive "Think Of The Children" blessing for whatever method contributes to that end? No? I see.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    50. Re: The human cost by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      Show some data to make your point about the efficacy of walls against migration (the topic).

      If you go back to the start of this thread, it claims that part of the human cost of not having a wall is death by drug overdose. The efficacy of a wall in clamping down on drug trafficking is entirely on topic.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    51. Re:The human cost by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      I have clear memories of Trump stating it was going Mexico the one to pay for the wall so, what's the problem with the wall not having a line in USA's budget? Wasn't exactly that what Trump expected -and promised?

      Because Mexico isn't going to pay for it. You are, providing it ever happens, which it won't. Because Trump is full of shit.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    52. Re:The human cost by tbannist · · Score: 1

      Well, if you want to reduce the absolute number of violent crimes in America, clearly the more efficient option would be to deport all the legal Americans and leave only the illegal immigrants behind. That would reduce the violent crime rate by far more than deporting all the illegal immigrants, because not only do illegal immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate than American citizens, they are also fewer of them.

      Clearly, you are just not willing to go too far enough to get the results you want.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
    53. Re:The human cost by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      And, who made Robert Frost a social expert.

      Walls make good neighbors, as it delineates a property boundary and reduces conflict.

      Contracts make for good business partners, as they delineate responsibilities and reduce conflict.

      Fences and walls serve very good purposes. Why else do you think they are so popular?

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  6. When faggots like you lie do you even realize it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "There is literally no impact on regular Americans outside of DC." - When faggots like you lie do you even realize it anymore?

  7. Medicaid for immigrants? by WorBlux · · Score: 1

    Pension bailout? Planned Parenthood? New Aircraft Carrier group?

    Just crowdfund it. It'll be apparent everybody just want everyone else to pay for their pet cause.

    1. Re:Medicaid for immigrants? by Xest · · Score: 1

      I can't wait for the USS GoFundMe to enter the Strait of Hormuz to sort out Iran with it's complement of F-38 Kickstarter fighter jets piloted by guys in bright red Red Bull sponsored pilot suits all being livestreamed on Facebook playing to the tune of whatever the latest RIAA determined "hit of the moment" is.

    2. Re:Medicaid for immigrants? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow you just summed up the tragedy of the commons and used that as an argument? Libertard.

  8. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by ctilsie242 · · Score: 1

    You mean "nonessential" people like sysadmins who are not at work updating the latest local root bugs, or updating certificates, while Iran is doing a major attack against DNS servers? These "nonessential" people normally ensure that when you go to www.irs.gov to file taxes, you are really going to "www.irs.gov", and not "www.irs.ir", "www.irs.ru", or whatever TLD Lower Elbonia uses. Hopefully your tax return won't be captured and your refund snatched, but "nonessential" people prevent that from happening.

    Then there are the national parks. The "nonessential" people keeping others from chainsawing stuff down in Joshua Tree, so they can romp with their four-wheelers.

    Or perhaps food safety. USDA and other inspection workers are "nonessential", I guess. Just hope you don't get sick from another lysteria bout.

    Maybe the CDC is "nonessential", as it really doesn't matter to some if a mutant flu starts or another SARS variant causing a high casualty count. Perhaps Ebola rearing its head may not be stopped because the "nonessential" people on the lookout for things like that are sidelined.

    There will be ramifications of this shutdown that echo for years after this. We don't need a wall on the southern border; we need one in cyberspace.

  9. Virtual walls don't work by AHuxley · · Score: 0, Troll

    Once the illegal migrant is in the USA they are free to stay for decades and generations.
    Another nations criminal is free do do crime in the USA once past a virtual detection system.

    Build a wall and the crime, illegal migration and moment of drugs stops along the wall.
    Illegal migrants then have to present a legal crossing with fake documents and are easy to return to their own nations.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:Virtual walls don't work by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      I guess we should just strike through that "give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free" crap, eh?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Virtual walls don't work by AHuxley · · Score: 1, Troll

      AC when an illegal migrant enters the USA they are free to wonder around the USA for years, decades and generations.
      Criminals can do all the crime they want until detected.
      A wall makes the illegal migrants and criminals have to pass under a camera, get scanned, pass K9 units and have a legal reason to enter and stay in the USA.
      Their documents have to be accepted. Their reason to be in the USA has to be accepted.
      Count every person into the USA. Count every person out of the USA. No more illegal immigration AC.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:Virtual walls don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wettbakkk Migrants stay forever? Not if Trump empowers white citizens militia to butcher-them-out, from Canada to Key West. Drive into the sea thieving illegals and the Trotsky-slut bitches who pimp them. Settle it now Bosco in the only way that matters.

    4. Re:Virtual walls don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Killing cowardly nazi faggots like yourself is a PROUD American tradition, one that we'll be making great again as the Drumpftard traitor hangs. You deserve the same and you will get it.

    5. Re:Virtual walls don't work by AHuxley · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The "tired, your poor, your huddled masses" arrived in the USA legally at that time.
      Entering the USA now as an illegal migrant now via some random location is not legal.
      People with an approved reason to enter theUSA, move tot the USA will still be accepted.
      People can still enter the USA at a legal crossing location as normal people do.
      Present their documents issued and they are legally in the USA.
      The wall keeps out criminals, drugs, illegal migrants by making them have to risk a legal crossing location.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    6. Re:Virtual walls don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you really that naive? How does this shit get modded up?

    7. Re:Virtual walls don't work by Orgasmatron · · Score: 1

      Can you cite the statute you are referring to here?

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
    8. Re:Virtual walls don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing your ancestors actions where considered illegal by the Native Americans.

    9. Re:Virtual walls don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The poem you're quoting from, "The New Colossus" was written by a wealthy Jewish heiress, Emma Lazarus. She was not tired, not huddled, and certainly not poor. It was added to the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty several decades after the French gifted the actual statue.

      We should absolutely strike through that poem, as it has nothing to do with the original intention of the gift. It was always intended as the Statue of Liberty, not the Statue of Unlimited Immigration.

    10. Re:Virtual walls don't work by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      Build a wall and the crime, illegal migration and moment of drugs stops along the wall.

      Uh, no, it won't. The vast majority of drugs are smuggled through the legal checkpoints and a wall won't stop them at all.

      Illegal migrants then have to present a legal crossing with fake documents and are easy to return to their own nations.

      No, they aren't. Because most of them claim asylum from persecution or imminent danger in their home country and those claims by law have to be investigated before they are repatriated.

    11. Re:Virtual walls don't work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except most of the drugs, illegal immigrants and criminals already come through the legal crossing locations, and a wall's not going to stop any of them.

  10. Technology can't stop people from crossing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Technology sounds fine in the abstract, but it can't stop people from crossing unless you want to have armed drones. All it can do is say "hey there are some people crossing the border here" and then it is up to humans to go and intercept them. To stop the people the technology detects, you have to have perpetual funding and 24x365 staffing.... and a lot of staffing to cover a 2,000 mile border.

    Sure some people will try to scale the wall. But not many. And even then it slows them down... every person in a group of 200 can't carry their own ladder and if they want to share 1 ladder they have to queue up. That delay is important because it gives you more time to get LEO to that location.

    More importantly, a wall will divert most people to the ports of entry for orderly processing. Only the die-hards, criminals, smugglers, etc., will try to scale it.

  11. Re: Pelosi Won't Vote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cool story bro. Have any more you can share?

  12. 800,000 federal employees w/o paychecks this week by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    would beg to differ. As would any air traveler who's stuck waiting in line because they're closing terminals due to a TSA shortage. Oh, and anyone who goes to public parks. And there's a ton of government web sites down.

    But of course you know all this and are just trolling. I shouldn't feed the trolls, but there's a slim chance someone might believe you. There's a mountain of stuff private industry won't do because it's not profitable enough but it still needs doing.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  13. Simple Solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The solutions are simple and very cost-effective for society.

    The problem is the rich people who currently run government know 95% of the public, including 2nd generation illegal invaders, do not want them there, and are desperately trying to figure out the right noises to utter to get the public to just ignore the problems so they can have their cake and eat it too.

    The real issue is the uttering of noises is largely their placebo right now, not ours.

    Public isn't going to back down on this one, so fix it or wait for real disaster to strike. Your call.

  14. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    If you didn't read the news, you wouldn't know there is a federal shutdown.

    There is literally no impact on regular Americans outside of DC.

    As long as the taxes are removed from my paycheck, the government is not shut down.

    I don't even feel sorry for the nonessentials. Go look for a new job not funded by taxpayers if you want to avoid political gridlock delaying your paycheck.

    That's just not true. 800,000 Americans have been directly impacted by the shutdown. By directly impacted, I mean that they are not receiving a paycheck. You have a right not to feel sorry for those impacted but don't go around saying that nobody outside of DC is effected as that is just plain false.

  15. Well if you want a real solution by rsilvergun · · Score: 1, Troll

    it's not interfering with Latin American countries for the sake of oil profits, cheap labor and our stupid, anti-left wing drug war.

    If you want folks to stop streaming over the boarder make it so their countries aren't hell holes. Those people in the Caravans are refugees from political violence America caused by destabilizing their governments. Reign the CIA and the war hawks in.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Well if you want a real solution by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

      Yep, some of the things the US does in Latin America are fucking awful. It's a shame that the Americans involved in the following incident weren't arrested in Honduras, put on trial, and hanged from a short rope...

      https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

    2. Re:Well if you want a real solution by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Most of them are not refugees from political violence. Most of them are leaving for financial reasons. And the caravans started because Pueblos Sin Fronteras organized them and told these people their life would be much better if they left for the US. There's a reason the last one hit the border right at election time.

    3. Re:Well if you want a real solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't know, and the Constitution requires them to be given the chance to prove their case. If you're too dumb to understand that you shouldn't be discussing this.

    4. Re:Well if you want a real solution by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Informative

      They have a chance to prove their case at any US embassy outside the USA for a real legal reason to enter the USA.
      An illegal migration is not a reason to enter the USA.
      The US embassy will then consider and if approved grant the needed documents to any person with a real reason to enter the USA.
      For a holiday, education, visit, approved health care, to stay in the USA, to move to the USA.
      They can tell their story at any legal crossing location.
      The wall AC stops random criminals and illegal migrants from wondering into the USA AC.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re:Well if you want a real solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wondering into the USA AC

      No the wall gives USA Cowards a physical embodiment of their "superiority" that they can point to and feel smug about while hiding behind a concrete slab that's easily bypassed any number of ways. Or is that steel slats they can hide behind nowadays? Oh, my bad it's a bushel of peaches to hide behind now.

      Your entire reason for holding the country's politics hostage, demanding 800,000 workers go with out pay, destroying international relations which will haunt us for generations, making US leadership an even bigger laughing stock on the international stage that it already is, and allowing our rivals to point at us and say "what a bunch of idiots", is a personal pride issue. You're disgusting.

      Further, you've started the conversation by declaring the entire premise of the migrations illegal without any evidence or justification. "They crossed an imaginary line, therefore bad." is your "logical" thought process. You then declare moving to the US as a legal reason for entering the country. So let me say this in a way you'll understand: "Migrations == Moving dumbass."

    6. Re:Well if you want a real solution by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    7. Re:Well if you want a real solution by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      AC not allowing in illegal migrants and criminals will not haunt anything for generations.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    8. Re:Well if you want a real solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A wall doesn't accomplish that MORON. YOU STUPID FAGGOT YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD ENOUGH TIMES, THEY COME VIA THE AIRPORTS, DIPSHIT.

      Honestly I don't know if you're illiterate or full on extra chromosomes, but being a Trump supporter you're dipping towards the latter.

    9. Re:Well if you want a real solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, didn't you lefties yell and scream and call Trump a racist for saying these people are coming from shit holes? And yet your argument calls their countries "hell holes" which is essentially the same thing?

    10. Re:Well if you want a real solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you cite the part of the US Constitution that speaks about asylum?

    11. Re: Well if you want a real solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      30% come by air.

      You're a Mexican or liberal shill. Either way, we don't care and your Mexican relatives can suck a steel slat.

    12. Re:Well if you want a real solution by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      the last one hit the border right at election time

      Because that's about 25% of the time and the weather was better? Or is there another reason?

    13. Re:Well if you want a real solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless we're operating airlines out of US Embassies, embassies are not a port of entry. Embassies also aren't required by international and US law for the exact opposite reason involved with the Khasshogi murder-when the would-be refugee returns to their country (as they would have to unless you plan to include accommodations in the embassies so everyone can be an Assange), Hitler McStalin's men who were watching the embassy can grab and kill them.

  16. Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The advantage of a tunnel under a physical wall makes the 5 billion wasted for the cost of a shovel. Border official shows Trump tunnels under wall

    1. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tunnels take time to dig and create a single entry point that can be monitored more easily. Claiming a shovel makes the entire wall useless is an idiotic argument, especially when walls have been demonstrably effective where we already have them.

    2. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only place a wall works is in urban areas where people are on both sides. That's where we have them now. Yes, tunnels make walls useless, you're an idiot to disagree with this obvious fact.

      Israel has a hell of a time, their wall does nothing but harass civilians. They bring the rockets bombs and guns in by tunnel, every time. Whoops, moron debunked effortlessly, lol. Go have a good cry snowflake.

    3. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel experienced about a 75% drop in cross-border terrorist attacks after they built walls between the Gaza Strip and Israel proper.

      They use the walls, because they work. Hamas spends hundreds of millions on things like tunnels, and Israel still destroys almost all of them before they can be used more than a few times.

    4. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel has GUARDS patrolling the walls, and massive expenditures trying to find the tunnels - and they STILL aren't successful for months at a time. THOUSANDS of rockets imported like it's nothing. Nice job.

      https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/gaza-rocket-hits-bus-israel-launches-strikes-palestinian-enclave-n935161 - 370 launched in one go, lol. GREAT JOB, WALL!

        Lol inbred Republicans are morons. Most immigrants are coming via airport anyway lol. Your whole party is retarded traitors now, nobody has a clue.

    5. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, tunnels made by drug cartels to move millions in drugs.... can be done for the cost of a shovel... right.

      And a kid's model rocket can carry a nuclear warhead from North Korea to Tokyo.

      Get your head out of your ass.

    6. Re:Trumptards are morons. by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3, Informative

      Border fence in Israel cut illegal immigration by 99 percent, GOP senator says - Politifact says it's true. I'd say a 99% cut in illegal immigration is rather good, wouldn't you?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    7. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'd say a 99% cut in illegal immigration is rather good, wouldn't you?" If 99% didn't come through AIRPORTS, you dumbass traitor supporting faggot? Israel has an entirely different situation on every level, derp.

      Go figure, you're a constantly obfuscating moron trying to forget that almost all illegals come via airports. Again.

    8. Re:Trumptards are morons. by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gonna have to ask for a citation of that. We know about 600,000 overstay their visa (because we check them at the border - the airport), and we know we catch 300,000 illegally crossing the US-Mexico border. How many do we NOT catch? Any numbers for that?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    9. Re: Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Compare Israel's border length and problem (attacks) to USA's southern border length and problem (immigrants and maybe some drugs and guns but not intent on destroying the USA)... ROI will be different.

    10. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Israel also has troops along every inch of the border patrolling all the time, and it's a tiny fraction of the size of the US border, AND most people come through airports anyway.... just how stupid are you, GOP traitor lol?

      Shutting down the government to force a wall nobody wants, NOW, and shuttering actual law enforcement agencies of the government to do it? You morons need to hang, every last one. You're too dumb to be here legally.

    11. Re: Trumptards are morons. by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes. We will need more border patrol agents. Thankfully we have ~40 times the population, so having a population of 330 million supporting border agents for 2000 miles of border should be easier than a population of 8.7 million supporting border agents for 440 miles of border. And ours just want to sell drugs, not kill us. So they see survival - not being caught and/or killed - as more important.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    12. Re:Trumptards are morons. by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The Israel border is 440 miles long - about 22% of the US Southern border. I think we can agree we have more than 5 times the resources available to patrol?

      As far as most people coming through the airports - citation needed. We know how many came through because we have paperwork/visa entry information on them. Do we have equivalent data on those illegally crossing the border - those never checked, never vetted, never issued a visa? No? Then how can you make the claim?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    13. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You failed. I already asked you to prove that more illegals came over the border than via airports. You failed, because you're a lying faggot trying to obfuscate with nothing. You have nothing, faggot.

    14. Re: Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get a job that doesn't involve lying on the internet implausibly, faggot. More illegals come via airports than the border itself, you're just uneducated and dishonest, it's ok, we're used to faggots like you here.

    15. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cite something saying more cross the border walking than arriving at airports. Put up or shut up moronic treasonous faggot. You can't do shit about facts, and the fact is they come via airports.

      You failed. Hang next to Drumpftard the traitor, nobody cares that you can't google.

    16. Re:Trumptards are morons. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      GOP senators say a lot of things. What they never ever do is admit that they are condoning genocide, which is what's going on when they cite Israel as a potential model for the USA to follow. That wall only works as well as it does (which you will notice is not 100%) because of snipers and missiles. Do you WANT a future in which we're launching missiles at Mexico? Because that's the future you're promoting.

      Any time anyone says "but Israel does it" you can tell they are morally bankrupt.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    17. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Baki · · Score: 2

      If you read the quoted article form politfact.com really, you'll see it is not so clear:

      Rated "mostly true", however it is hotly debated in Israel in howfar the 90% reduction (not 99%) is due to the fence or due to other factors.

      A fence/wall is told to be only effective "on a small scale and with many guards". The situation on the US-Mexican border is found to be completely different from the Isaeli southern border, no conclusions can be drawn from this to the effectivity of a fence or border on the 2000 mile long US-Mexican border.

    18. Re: Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No sir. Mexicans that have money fly. The rest are shit from a shit hole that have to sneak in and bring shitty poverty and it's related ills with them.

    19. Re: Trumptards are morons. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      We had plenty of immigrants rushing the military presence at the border on a daily basis. They are burning flags. MS13 and other gangs/drugs/gun runners now run their own government in portions of Mexico, Guatemala, Brazil, Belize and a number of other South American states, some argue even a number of Texas towns where police don't want to go in certain neighborhoods at night.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    20. Re:Trumptards are morons. by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      El Paso's wall works, it cut illegal immigration by 89%. Not quite the 99% of Israel, but nothing to sneeze at either, eh?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    21. Re:Trumptards are morons. by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Walls work for El Paso, TX, what makes you think they won't work in other locations? When about 89% of border patrol agents say a wall will help them do their job, why do you insist otherwise? Do you believe you know more about enforcement of border laws and the issues/problems faced than the actual agents on the border?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    22. Re:Trumptards are morons. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      El Paso's wall works, it cut illegal immigration by 89%. Not quite the 99% of Israel, but nothing to sneeze at either, eh?

      So it keeps out the refugees, but not the bad hombres?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    23. Re:Trumptards are morons. by mea2214 · · Score: 1

      Tunnels take time to dig and create a single entry point that can be monitored more easily.

      The men in The Great Escape based upon a true story built multiple working tunnels in a prison camp monitored by Nazis 24/7. Hundreds of tunnels were built under the Berlin Wall under constant East German surveillance. See the movie "Der Tunnel" based upon a true story. Great move and proves you wrong.

    24. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they missed three.... Unanswerable question.

      You are chasing the boogie-man.

    25. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we have more than 5 times the resources to patrol with... Yet, I cannot understand why you would think this would be a good use of our resources, when compared to other things which those resources could be used for...

      Infrastructure improvements, in which those extra laborers would be extremely useful, possibly?

    26. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Claiming a shovel makes the entire wall useless is an idiotic argument, especially when walls have been demonstrably effective where we already have them.

      People who claim a physical barrier is useless are lying to serve their own interests .

      Of course people can go over walls; people can break into your house "if they really wanted to" and yet you close your door and lock it.

      Why?

      Because its a deterrent and impediment, giving authorities more time to respond.

    27. Re:Trumptards are morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Official statistics from various sources actually say that around 3,000 illegal immigrants get caught crossing per year. Your source has it amped up 100x, which is what I typically see in right wing fear sites, so that tells me about where your information comes from.

  17. Re:Yes! Socialism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Socialism" is what makes life in the "Capitalist world" good. Public roads, public education, subsidized medicine research, safety regulations, military, police, equality... All "socialist" ideas, borrowed and implemented in every place you'd want to live.

  18. Go away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The drugs are the problem. The demographic time bomb is. We don't need any third world mud people.

  19. Irony by DaMattster · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Crowdfunding the border wall might be a good idea. The irony of doing it that way is that it will show just how unpopular it is overall. I will bet that it will fail to reach the goal because only the lunatic fringe wants the wall built. As an NBC commentator noted, "It is a 13th century solution to a 19th century problem." Drugs will still make it into the United States by flying them via drones. Furthermore, those wishing to cross illegally need only to dig tunnels.

    1. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The irony here is that the real professionals, people in the know, have given reports on the situation at the border. All of the facts support a wall does help in many situations.

      Go ahead and say that building a wall wont reduce crime in all areas of border related crimes - show your ignorance.

      The problem here is people thinking they know everything and ignoring facts.

    2. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a moron. A wall only helps in urban areas where it's being patrolled. Everywhere else it's easily gone over, under, or through. Again, Republican retards are incapable of basic brainpower.

      Even Texas Sheriffs who support Trump are saying this is retarded.

    3. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think we've already seen that. Of all the money requested they raised 0.35% of it.

    4. Re:Irony by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, those wishing to cross illegally need only to dig tunnels.

      Come in on a travel visa and don't leave. Far less work than all that pesky digging.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    5. Re:Irony by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Or just go in with tourist visas

  20. you're just too dumb to know about tunnels? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/01/11/border-official-trump-tunnels-under-wall-acosta-pkg-vpx.cnn .... Is it possible you're just too dumb to know about tunnels? I mean, you are fucking dense, but..

    1. Re:you're just too dumb to know about tunnels? by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      The US mil can detect tunnel use as they need that skill in war zones all over the world AC.
      Informants talk.
      The problem with a tunnel is the entry part and exit part. Too much new activity gets noticed a short distance from each side of the nation.
      Governments get really good at watching for new patterns and understand changes to transport weight AC.
      All faces are on CCTV.
      The wall makes it just that much more difficult no not have the ability to drive/move into the USA without detection and searches 24/7 AC.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  21. Re:800,000 federal employees w/o paychecks this we by lgw · · Score: 1

    As would any air traveler who's stuck waiting in line because they're closing terminals due to a TSA shortage.

    Easily solved with less government: remove the TSA entirely. Go back to airports with private security. Return to respecting the 4th amendment. Government agents searching you without probable cause in order to fly is such a blatant violation of our rights, and I don't ecall anything in the Bill of Rights that says "unless we're scared".

    There's no evidence that the TSA improves security over the process we had in 1999. Other changes did help security, but not the TSA. We don't like them. We don't need them. But the government will never relinquish any power, no matter how petty or useless, over the people.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  22. Re:800,000 federal employees w/o paychecks this we by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " Go back to airports with private security " You must be too young to remember all the bombings and hijackings of the 60's and 70's. Go figure you're full of dumb ideas in lieu of knowing your history.

    Have you met the blathering faggot above, (c)Okain "warrior" lol? I bet you guys could solve world hunger if you put your empty heads towards a libertarian moronic solution, why not try?

  23. How about we just... by MikeRT · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Take $20B out of the DoD budget and build a really awesome border wall.

    Advantages:

    * $20B that is spent domestically.
    * $20B that builds things that last (ie not ordnance, bullets, etc.)
    * Will pay for itself quickly with the reduction in human traffic across the border.
    * Defense spending that saves lives instead of taking them.

    Disadvantages:

    * Keeps the flow of new Democratic voters reduced.
    * Doesn't enrich the Military Industrial Complex.
    * Forces the Chamber of Commerce to hire more native low skilled workers.

    Huh, hard choice.

    1. Re:How about we just... by future+assassin · · Score: 1

      Advantage to new pro Russian gov
      Citizen can't escape.

      Disadvantage to US citizens
      They can't escape.

      --
      by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    2. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spend 600 million on a pilot wall in the worst most frequent problem areas, by existing apprehension statistics. The fence should be made of whatever the border patrols on the ground think necessary chain, concrete or steel. This will cause funnel points, improving the efficiency of troopers.
      As the pilot will be successful, another 600 mil automatically to plug the funnel points. Trump may have his wall, but not all at once. He saves his voter base by getting another 300 mil for coastguard to focus on money/drugs. Take 1.5 bil and call it a win/win.

    3. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >* Keeps the flow of new Democratic voters reduced.

      You ever notice how it's always Republicans voting for Republicans that are busted for actual voter and election fraud. pretty weird huh. all those gullible morons such as yourself show up to the polls in their QAnon tee-shirts and American flag sweat pants and vote multiple times because they've been suckered into thinking the Democrats are doing it.

    4. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grand O'l Party of Russian Oligarchs agree!

    5. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you propose taking money out of a budget that protects America for something that is proven not to be effective at stemming the flow of drugs (which by and large enter the US through the post if originating from China and through trap compartments in cars and trucks if coming from Mexico). A wall won't stop drugs coming through legal points of entry. A big part of the problem is migrants showing up at our door and surrendering to law enforcement in large numbers to claim asylum. We got no place to put them. A wall won't fix that. $20B won't build a complete wall. So there will always be places we have to "build the wall" even though reasons we don't have the wall now are impossible terrain (like a river) or a years long battle with private land owners to claim eminent domain. I don't think I have to tell you that dividing private land in half through force of law is a very big government solution.

      Also, a lot of Mexicans are conservative. I'm serious. They're pretty big into Christianity and favor a lot of conservative positions. They could be future Republicans if Republicans would stop treating them like shit.

      Finally, we could target the people who hire illegals with very stiff fines. But we don't punish rich people like the President who hire illegals for the menial jobs. Maybe if we did, there wouldn't be a supply of illegals to meet the demand for them. We could fix that tomorrow but we won't. We're going to squabble about a 13th century solution to a 19th century problem.

    6. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keeps the flow of new Democratic voters reduced.
      Asshole. Fucktards like you are the real reason this country is so fucked up, and why we have this goddamned fuckstain idiot traitor sitting in the goddamned Whitehouse. I wish someone would put a bullet in his fat head while there's still time to save the country from his bullshit, Pence too while they're at it, he's even worse. Fuckers like YOU should have your voting rights revoked permanently and your citizenship revoked too.

    7. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Take $20B out of the DoD budget and build a really awesome border wall.

      Because the total cost is $150B just for construction. Would congress even agree to a $20B DoD funding cut?

      * $20B that is spent domestically.

      It's already spend domestically.

      * $20B that builds things that last (ie not ordnance, bullets, etc.)

      A wall requires regular maintenance just like our failing infrastructure.

      * Will pay for itself quickly with the reduction in human traffic across the border.

      It literally will do nothing to reduce human traffic. The people coming in are presenting themselves to request asylum.

      * Keeps the flow of new Democratic voters reduced.

      Non-citizens cannot vote.

      * Forces the Chamber of Commerce to hire more native low skilled workers.

      No, it wouldn't. It would go to the same companies that are currently working on the fence.

      Actual disadvantages:
      * It's ineffective and waste of money.
      * It would be rewarding bad behavior and thus encouraging more of it.
      * The people that live along the border don't even want it.
      * It makes the US look cowardly and racist (like you pro-wall people).
      * It will cost way more money than current estimates.
      * There are still maintenance/repair costs.
      * The nation is going into debt just to fund it.
      * The US started the mess in the 1980s that has has people fleeing Honduras now.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    8. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the fuck does reduction of traffic across the border "pay for itself" to the tune of $20B? That's completely preposterous. I can't believe someone modded you up for this asinine conjecture.

    9. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Non-citizens cannot vote.

      No voter-ID laws ensure that not only they can, no records are made to audit to see if they did.

      Gee which party is both against the basic security practice of authenticating a user before allowing them to vote and against the basic security practice of a physical barrier?

    10. Re:How about we just... by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      It literally will do nothing to reduce human traffic. The people coming in are presenting themselves to request asylum.......

      ......... * The people that live along the border don't even want it.

      Excuse me? Who the holy fuck are you to say what we want? I want the wall. I'm within' 5 miles of the border. Illegals are still flooding across the border. Saw a group of 5 of them yesterday (you bet your ass I called them a CBP taxi). If they were here to request asylum, why were they sneaking through the bushes? People who want asylum cross at a point of entry and present themselves to the authorities.

      You've just been proven to be a liar. Carry on.

    11. Re:How about we just... by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 1

      Non-citizens cannot vote.

      Wrong wrong wrong. They can and do vote where liberal governments allow it, and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

    12. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I agree with the list of disadvantages I need to emphasize some. It will cost way more money than current estimates.

      The current estimates were dreamed up without professional oversight. There's been no environmental impact assessment of drainage or engineering analysis of terrain etc. The costs of the wall, as currently proposed, are strictly the costs of constructing a hundred feet of wall multiplied by the number of hundred-foot sections. The GAO has assessed the cost of the wall to be way higher than estimated. And yes, it's also completely ineffective at its stated purpose of halting illegal immigration and restricting the flow of illegal drugs.

      Pelosi is suggesting the US spend money on something that might actually achieve the stated goals instead of Trump's baby. Yes it's political. The point is more to make Trump look like an unreasonable idiot and force him to lose face than to promote Democrat interests. But there you have it.

    13. Re:How about we just... by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

      ...*snip*...

      Disadvantages:

      * Keeps the flow of new Democratic voters reduced.

      Low-skill illegals cross via a border, versus the majority who simply overstay visas. Of the border-crossers, they are too scared of getting caught and deported to try and vote. They can't even register to vote, in any case.

    14. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No voter-ID laws ensure that not only they can, no records are made to audit to see if they did.

      First of all, you may want to read up on how the voting procedure works without voter-ID laws in place. There is very much a record of who has and hasn't voted.

      Second, voter-ID laws do not allow any additional form of after-the-fact auditing that you couldn't do without.

      Third... what exactly is the incidence of non-citizens voting when they otherwise would not have been allowed due to the lack of voter-ID laws?

    15. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They can and do vote where liberal governments allow it

      They can vote in American Idol, too.

      Municipalities can run their elections however they see fit (modulo discrimination and such). The OP's point holds for state and national offices.

    16. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Informative

      * The people that live along the border don't even want it.

      Excuse me? Who the holy fuck are you to say what we want?

      I'm the fucking guy that reads polling data from border states regarding the wall. Who are you to discount multiple polls?

      Illegals are still flooding across the border.

      The numbers say otherwise. It's at 20 year low.

      Saw a group of 5 of them yesterday (you bet your ass I called them a CBP taxi). If they were here to request asylum, why were they sneaking through the bushes? People who want asylum cross at a point of entry and present themselves to the authorities.

      Excellent anecdotal straw man argument. Well done.

      You've just been proven to be a liar. Carry on.

      Your idea of what constitutes proof does not behove you.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    17. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Those are municipal elections and they literally have no influence on state or federal elections. The question is, why would you care how a city chooses to run itself?

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    18. Re:How about we just... by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 1

      Because by your own admission, they're non-citizens. Non-citizens should have *zero* voting rights, period, and certainly not those who willfully break the law in the first place. If you want to vote in the US, then you have to become a citizen. To do that, you have to wait in line and do it legally. My ancestors all did it. I know a number of people who have done it recently. It's terribly, horribly unfair to those people who live in the same municipalities who waited and paid many thousands of dollars to go thru the process the right way to become legal US citizens to give those same, hard-earned rights to people that purposely broke the fucking law. Just because these Maryland towns and San Francisco have found loopholes to allow illegals to vote does not make it just or fair. Additionally, most of the time all municipalities receive significant revenues from their state and the Federal government (fund from legal US taxpayers). You are giving illegals a say in how the tax dollars of legal US citizens in other jurisdictions are spent, which is wrong.

      I'm not sure why liberals think that enforcing immigration to the US using the methods currently legally available, and strictly controlling who we let in -- you know, like Canada does it, for example -- is such a burdensome requirement.

    19. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Non-citizens should have *zero* voting rights, period,

      I can agree with that federal elections but shouldn't it be up to states and cities to determine their own laws so long as they do not conflict with federal law?

      and certainly not those who willfully break the law in the first place.

      It's true they violated the law at one point but it's reductive and dehumanizing to simply classify them as criminals and then dismiss them entirely.

      I'm not sure why liberals think that enforcing immigration to the US using the methods currently legally available

      You got me all wrong. I'm all for people legal immigration and I think the onus should be upon those who employ illegal immigrants. That said, it's something that the Republican party has rejected because they want the cheap labor. They pretend to be hardliners against illegal immigration because it gets them votes. Rounding up illegal immigrants and deporting them is just like the wall, they know it wont actually do anything to address the problem but it gets votes.

      If they were actually wanted to address illegal immigration then they would go after the corporations that provide them the money to stay here.

      and strictly controlling who we let in

      We already have a strict immigration process. This comes across as a racist dog whistle to keep brown people out more than anything else.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    20. Re:How about we just... by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      The numbers say otherwise. It's at 20 year low.

      Low does not equal zero. We're seeing plenty of them here in San Diego County.

      Excellent anecdotal straw man argument. Well done.

      You say there are no illegals, I see them with my own eyes. It's not a straw man. I don't know what polls you are reading or how accurate they are (I'm gonna assume you didn't vet them) so I'm going to dismiss your appeal to authority out of hand. I can conduct a poll too. It's called speaking to my neighbors. Some oppose the wall and a some favor it. I don't know the ratio, but It's certainly pro-wall. I'm not going to claim 4-3 or 3-2, but the majority favor a wall. Maybe things are different when a person actually owns land that borders the border. I can see people who live 2-3 miles inland being more lackadaisical about it. But the folks who actually have illegals sneaking through their property at night are much more pro-wall.. We've watched the failure of the immigration system for the last 40 years.. Constant streams of illegals sneaking into the country...

    21. Re:How about we just... by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the legal issues with acquiring the land and splitting off part of the US (basically giving it to Mexico), not to mention the environmental issues

    22. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keeps the flow of new Democratic voters reduced.

      Hypocrite. Don't think we've forgotten your boy Ronnie keeping Florida a swing state (making the W and Trump presidencies possible) with the promise that the wink-and-a-nod "illegal" Cubans would be getting their plantations back when the Castros bought it.

      Cubans also prove that oceans aren't the impenetrable barrier you like to pretend they are.

    23. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Low does not equal zero. We're seeing plenty of them here in San Diego County.

      Perfect is the enemy of good. There is also low crime but it doesn't mean there is zero crime? Should we do away with our person freedoms until we route out the remaining criminals?

      You say there are no illegals, I see them with my own eyes. It's not a straw man.

      Sounds like you don't understand what a straw man argument is.

      I don't know what polls you are reading

      Then you clearly haven't looked at any polling data for border states.

      or how accurate they are (I'm gonna assume you didn't vet them) so I'm going to dismiss your appeal to authority out of hand.

      Actually, the polls were conducted by various companies that poll the public regularly on issues. They have gained a reputation for accurate polling. I looked at the questions posed they were no leading. You dismissing polls the just saying you don't agree with them so it doesn't matter.

      I can conduct a poll too. It's called speaking to my neighbors. Some oppose the wall and a some favor it. I don't know the ratio, but It's certainly pro-wall.

      It's not really a poll if you can't get actual numbers and it's not representative of anything other than your street. Sorry amigo, that's a double fail.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    24. Re:How about we just... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Illegals are still flooding across the border.

      The numbers say otherwise. It's at 20 year low.

      The two are not mutually exclusive.

    25. Re:How about we just... by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      In what way is a border wall infringing on our freedoms? I bet you have a door on your house.. Criminals can come in the window, but doors help too.

    26. Re:How about we just... by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Actually, the polls were conducted by various companies that poll the public regularly on issues. They have gained a reputation for accurate polling. I looked at the questions posed they were no leading. You dismissing polls the just saying you don't agree with them so it doesn't matter.

      I asked the demographics. If you're asking people in LA what they think about a border wall, that's a lot different than asking people in San Diego, which can be a lot different than asking people who own land that touches the border..

      I CAN SEE THE ILLEGALS WITH MY OWN EYES. THERE ARE LOTS OF THEM SNEAKING IN.

      Come on down and take a look. Quit it with the appeals to authority. I'm suggesting the perfect way to make an informed decision. Come down and look at the fucking border. Fuck your polls..

    27. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      In what way is a border wall infringing on our freedoms?

      You missed this part: "Low does not equal zero." and my response that "Perfect is the enemy of good." because a border wall would not stop 100% of illegal immigrants which is what he implied. The only way to actually get to zero would require sacrificing freedoms.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    28. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      I asked the demographics.

      I'm not going to spoon feed you polling information. You can do the same thing I did and do as simple internet search.

      I CAN SEE THE ILLEGALS WITH MY OWN EYES. THERE ARE LOTS OF THEM SNEAKING IN.

      What is a border "wall" (who the fuck knows what it would be) going to do that the border fence isn't doing? Do you think it's going to magically keep all the illegal immigrants out?

      Wouldn't it be more effective just to make corporation legally responsible for validating immigration status? Have you considered why Republicans haven't passed legislation for that despite it being brought up several times? The simple answer is that they want the cheap labor and to keep you chasing your tail by never actually solving the problem. The more they can exploit wedge issues, the more idiots like you will vote for them.

      Fuck your polls..

      And that sir, is what is called willful ignorance.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    29. Re:How about we just... by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      I'm for both! It's not either or.. Give me a wall/fence/whatever AND employment verification... You know damn well that security is a layered approach.

    30. Re:How about we just... by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Low is a relative term. The infiltrations may be low by historic measures but it's still A LOT OF PEOPLE.

    31. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      What is a border "wall" (who the fuck knows what it would be) going to do that the border fence isn't doing?

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    32. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Then support something effective rather than this bullshit "we need a wall" which literally will be no more effective than the current border fence.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    33. Re:How about we just... by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      You are aware that some of the current border fence is 3 strands of barbed wire, right?

    34. Re:How about we just... by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      What is a border "wall" (who the fuck knows what it would be) going to do that the border fence isn't doing?

      Well, for one thing the "wall" won't be 3 fucking strands of barbed wire.. I know of several places where there isn't even the wire... Just open air.. The wall slows the people down at the very least .. You either have to climb over it or tunnel under it.. Neither is as fast as simply running past it. This gives CBP time to react.

      Simple illegals aren't tunneling under the fence.. That's the domain of traffickers (drug and human). Couple the wall with vibration sensors and digging under it gets more difficult.. Sure it'll still happen but they'll still be able to catch some of the people.. Anything that makes sneaking into the country more time consuming and difficult can be added to the multi-layer approach.

    35. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Well, for one thing the "wall" won't be 3 fucking strands of barbed wire..

      How about in your area, it's a full fence, right? How will anything change if it's a "wall" (aka another feckless fence)?

      I know of several places where there isn't even the wire... Just open air..

      Yes, some parts of the border fence aren't built out yet. Do you think 2000 miles of wall will magically be built overnight? Though, I've read they will have the same "open air" area so it's not going to be all 2000 miles.

      The wall slows the people down at the very least .. You either have to climb over it or tunnel under it.. Neither is as fast as simply running past it. This gives CBP time to react.

      HA! What, they'll be there in an hour? Yeah, really useful.

      And yet for all the effort of building this wall (second fence), it would still be ineffective. Why don't you realize that physical limitations unnecessary if you simply make getting a job in US extremely difficult without a valid ID or visa? Why don't you realize that isn't what your politicians actually want? Why don't you realize that's not what people like you want because they fail to see how it would impact them?

      Don't get me wrong, I'll all for letting fools destroy their own livelihoods but I don't want to pay to make it happen when a simple change would make it more pointless than it already is.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    36. Re:How about we just... by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      No. It's not a full fence in all of my area... It's 3 strands of fucking barbed wire... I just said that. There is a lot of full fence, but once you get east a bit it's 3 strands of barbed wire.. when there is actually anything at all. In some areas someone (smugglers?) has removed entire sections of the barbed wire entirely.

      An hour? This is the problem.... You're flapping your gums and you don't have a clue what you're talking about.. There is no part of the border, in this area, that is an hour away from CBP. 10 minutes max.. There are substations all over the place and the CBP has helicopters and motion sensors..

      You remember the Berlin wall? I'm gonna assume no, because you're a millennial or something.. There used to be this wall around Berlin.. It wasn't 100% effective at keeping people in, but it did a pretty damn good job. Well, this wall would be like that.. But instead of keeping assholes in, we'd be keeping assholes out. Won't be 100% effective, but it'll probably do a decent job. Top it with concertina/razor wire and it will be a deterrent to a lot of people.

      Anyhow, I'm done responding to you. I live near the border, I can see what's going on with my own eyes. I'm not having a border debate with some asshole who probably lives in the middle of the country.

      Yes, some parts of the border fence aren't built out yet.

      This... more than anything... It's been FORTY FUCKING YEARS that those parts have been open... Just walk across... la dee dah.... If you don't get that..... I don't know what to tell you.

    37. Re:How about we just... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Won't be 100% effective, but it'll probably do a decent job.

      Yeah, I've already made that argument that it's currently not 100% effective but it's doing a decent job and you started yelling about how it's not zero.

      Physical limitations are unnecessary if you simply make getting a job in US extremely difficult without a valid ID or visa. Won't be 100% effective, but it'll do a great job.

      Work smarter, not harder.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  24. A WALL STOPS PEOPLE ARRIVING BY PLANE, EH MORON? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cokain warrior you really are overhigh if you think a wall stops people arriving at airports, you dumb nazi faggot lol. When Trump hangs be sure to cry, lol.

  25. Virtual border wall? What a JOKE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You either have a physical border wall or you can't got shit.

  26. Well you'd need one anyway. by hey! · · Score: 2

    Any barrier that can be built by tools can be penetrated by tools, it's just a matter of time and preparation. And in the very remote places the wall will go through, people have lots of time.

    For the wall to work, it needs pretty close to continal surveillance in those remote places. Not only along the wall, but in front to detect people who went through or over or under. You also need to be able to catch those people. Once you have those things, you don't really need the physical wall anymore.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your proposal is acceptable. Please inform the fuckwads in Congress they need to fund it.

      Or were you not serious.

    2. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by SirAstral · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Any barrier that can be built by tools can be penetrated by tools, it's just a matter of time and preparation."

      Do you have locks on your doors? They won't stop a thief that wants in either, but I bet you use them all the same. Locks do at least retard their entry and keeps the thieves with low initiative out so there is at least some benefit.

      "For the wall to work, it needs pretty close to continal surveillance in those remote places. Not only along the wall, but in front to detect people who went through or over or under. You also need to be able to catch those people. Once you have those things, you don't really need the physical wall anymore."

      A statement of ignorance. Surveillance does not need to be continual. In fact the building of a wall is usually so you can avoid that expense. Only occasional surveillance is necessary.

      It is an open border without a wall that would need continual surveillance because there is no wall to delay entry at all.

      I don't even agree that we need a stupid wall, but I am smart enough to figure that out, why aren't you?

    3. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by LordKronos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Physical barriers only work when the delay they add is proportional to the response time, or when the barrier improves the response time.

      Police response time to your house is often only a matter of minutes. A door lock works because either it adds a few minutes of delay for the thief trying to bypass it stealthily (giving neighbors or homeowners a chance to spot the intrusion and call police) , or because it draws attention if you bypass it quickly (neighbors or homeowner hear door kicked in or window being broken). Even a 15 second delay may be all it takes for a homeowner to run and retrieve a gun from a safe.

      Walls/fences work in urban areas because they prevent casual flow of people back and forth, and because they are well monitored. The 15 seconds it takes someone to scale a fence is plenty of time to mobilize the guards and intercept. These are the areas where we already have walls/fences built.

      Out in the desert, even if you know the exact moment that someone breaches the border, the response time can be hours. Adding 5 or 10 minutes for someone to scale the wall is trivial. If you can track down and intercept someone who breached the border 1 hour 50 minutes ago, you can almost surely track down someone who breached the border 2 hours ago.

    4. Re: Well you'd need one anyway. by hey! · · Score: 1

      The most recent proposals for a steel slat wall could be breached with common tools in minutes. Certainly less than an hour. Explosively formed penetrated can do it in seconds, and since you don't need standoff capability like insurgents taking out an armored cehicle, even simpler designs can be used than the garage built examples we faced in Iraq and Afghanistan. But even a cutting torch or diamond bladed rotary cutter will make reasonably short work of structural steel.

      What this means is you have have to check remote sections of fence pretty frequently, and be prepared to find people who get through.

      As for locks they don't stop burglary, they only delay it very slightly. It's just about taking a precious minute or two away between the time the burglar enters the house and when cop's arrive. Put the finest deadbolt made on a house in the middle of the wilderness, and it will do exactly nothing to keep anyone out.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    5. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bingo. Mod ^^ kronos up for basic shit that DESTROYS republican traitors dead.

    6. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by thegarbz · · Score: 0

      Do you have locks on your doors? They won't stop a thief that wants in either, but I bet you use them all the same. Locks do at least retard their entry and keeps the thieves with low initiative out so there is at least some benefit.

      Of course the locks on my door don't stop hardened criminals. But I didn't put locks on my door to stop the influx of hardened criminals and drugs into my home. I mean that is the argument the orange faced dipshit is using.

      Now quick build that wall so your kids don't get raped.

    7. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a locksmith friend tried to convince my father when I was young that he should replace our front heavy wood door with a steel one because "thieves could just take a chainsaw and cut through wood"

      my dad scoffed and said "and yeah a steel door, they could just take a stick of dynamite and blow it off the hinges too"

      my mom added "or just break a window"

      like others said, door locks and home fences are no barrier to determined intruders, they're really their to try to delay them a tiny bit and make it so they have to make a little ruckus and probably draw attention to themselves

      or as some have said before, they really only exist to keep your neighbors from walking in on you naked...

    8. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

      There was an old grain elevator I saw demolished, and it took a dedicated crew of construction people with heavy equipment a couple of weeks to bring it down -- battering the concrete with a wrecking ball, then guys torching the rebar enough to get the embedded concrete to crumble.

      Some of the demonstration concrete walls look really difficult to penetrate, it's not like some burlap sack filled with hand tools would be sufficient you would probably need something a lot more sophisticated and a lot more time -- concrete saws, cutting torches for rebar, and possibly hours spent attacking the wall.

      Maybe a doorway or something could be cut through it in a matter of hours with concrete saws and acetylene torches, but that's non-trivial effort. And I'd wager the people who build these could use techniques that frustrate simple mechanical attacks -- steel mesh in the concrete that damage concrete saw blades, for example.

      If you have to haul hundreds of pounds or more equipment and tools to attack the wall, the wall becomes more useful the more remote it is because you can't just drive up with a 1 ton pickup filled with saws and torches, you have to haul it by hand.

    9. Re: Well you'd need one anyway. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      But even a cutting torch or diamond bladed rotary cutter will make reasonably short work of structural steel.

      Just about anything will make short work of structural steel. Abrasive disc cutters, cold saws, reciprocating saws with a bimetal blade...

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    10. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by hey! · · Score: 1

      The problem with most bad strategies is that they depends on the opponent stubbornly attacking the strongest point. Suppose you *did* build a concrete wall -- which would cost way more than five billion, by the way. People would just go over or under it (or around it; most people we're concerned with aren't doing land crossings of the sourthern border). So my point stands: you'd have to *watch* the area of the wall.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    11. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do have locks on my doors and windows, but they mostly keep out the honest people or those merely looking for crimes of opportunity. They do nothing to keep out somebody who really wants to break in.

      One wintry night a thief broke into my neighbor's house. This thief walked right past the front door that was entirely unlocked, past a door that was locked but had a key under the mat in front of it, and to a third door that was locked and obstructed by stacked up patio furniture being stored for the winter. The thief moved all the furniture and broke the door to get into the house rather than take even 5 seconds to try one of the other doors.

      Erecting a giant wall in the desert is like locking the attic windows on my house. Nobody is going to go to the effort of erecting a 30-foot ladder, climb up to my attic, and then give up and go home because the window is locked! Likewise nobody is going to trudge across hundreds of miles of desert just to turn back when they encounter a wall. They'll find a rope, fashion a ladder, or pay some nearby farmer to leave some fertilizer and diesel fuel next to a wall to blow a hole in it.

      dom

    12. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

      Don't get me wrong, the wall has lots of problems that mean it probably shouldn't be built.

      They had teams of testers, including I think some special forces, trying to climb the wall and one of the selection criteria was that trained people couldn't get over it with simple climbing implements.

      Tunneling under the wall is problematic in the Southwest as many of the locations aren't easy to tunnel under -- rocky soils, bedrock close to the surface, and the fact that the wall would probably have footings that extended deep enough to make tunneling even harder.

      And the difficulty of breaching it wouldn't mean that it wouldn't need to be watched, but that it would need to be watched less intensively than a "virtual wall" or a more simple barrier.

    13. Re:Well you'd need one anyway. by hey! · · Score: 1

      One thing years of being a software engineer taught me is any fool can come up with security he himself can't defeat. That's because you build it around attacks you envision, but attackers work out easy ways to get you that you didn't think of.

      So making the wall nigh impossible for a team of special forces soldiers to climb is not really such a convincing demonstration. What about stopping a bunch of braseros with crane truck? Or a team of terrorists with explosives?

      Of course the ultimate thing to do is to just go around the wall, which is what most people in this country illegally *already* do. The natural barrier of the desert is a better wall than the government will ever build.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    14. Re: Well you'd need one anyway. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Just about anything will make short work of structural steel. Abrasive disc cutters, cold saws, reciprocating saws with a bimetal blade...

      ...hack saw and some bacon grease...

      (I just did some googling around, and discovered that the best cutting fluid you can have is bacon fat with 5% flower of sulfur... take and be healthy)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  27. How about Republicans learn to read instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Conservatives have simply been roped into a dumb idea again, you're morons who can't think for yourselves. I remember when you used to pretend to be about fiscal responsibility, now you're just a joke.

    *Most arrive in airports
    *7 times more terrorist suspects caught at northern border
    *Trump the traitor will be in prison sucking cock before it's built even if they began today
    *Only Republican inbred morons were ever fooled by Trump's lie about Mexico paying for it.

  28. Analysis fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has never been established to my satisfaction that there is a crisis involving the southern border of the U.S. Illegal immigrants have a lower crime rate (other than illegal entry) than others. There are more people from the southern hemisphere in general seeking asylum, both in the Americas and attempting to enter Europe from Africa. From the nonpartisan reports I have read, the backlog of asylum-seekers can be reduced by increasing the number of government workers who process those asylum applications. Drugs come in through normal ports of entry more often than across the remote parts of the border, from what I have read. So, if crime and drugs cannot be solved through building a wall, the adults in Washington need to do like adults elsewhere when confronted with a child throwing a tantrum--ignore or set limits. "Just say no" as Nancy Reagan said.

  29. Re:That's why Canada needs a wall too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chris is busy applying 2 years worth of highly critical security patches in his highly secured government IT job. Previous government shutdowns weren't long enough to allow Chris to apply those needed patches.

    Chris didn't even have time to put his last Sunday video online,

    Come again later.

  30. How to build a wall by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Study walls and fence systems that work legally around the world.
    Make sure the wall cant be climbed physically without effort and that all legal attempts to stay in the USA after such attempts fail.
    Make sure any illegal migrant who attempts the get over the wall has no legal rights to the stay in the USA after that attempt.
    That stops years and decades of legal court work in the USA after each and every attempt to get over the wall.
    The illegal migrant is set back to there side of the wall and never allowed back into the USA.
    Attempt to get over the wall and that is a crime and no further access to the US is ever permitted for any reason for that illegal migrant.
    That will force all illegal migrants to have to buy fake random documents. Such new documents are now more easy to detect at any legal crossing location.
    Wondering int the USA at some random location is no longer an option.
    Demanding US legal protection later after wondering into the USA will not work.
    Use all detection methods the US mil has to detect any new deeper tunnel attempts.

    That removes the legal and easy attempts to cross into the USA illegally. All later US court and legal attempts to stay in the USA after getting over the wall.
    That then allows more enfacement at ports, airports and all other legal entry locations.
    Crime, illegal migration and drug imports are reduced.

    Win, win, win.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So in addition to the 45-75 BILLION dollar wall, you also want to spend to deploy military personnel there INDEFINITELY in violation of existing US law, eh moron? Who pays for that, MEXICO AGAIN? Derp, idiot.

      THEY COME VIA AIRPORTS MORE THAN ANYTHING, YOU ARE A MORON!

    2. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you're just monumentally naive.

    3. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On this topic, I don't understand why we can refuse anyone entry if we don't have the border marked in some way. Legally, at a minimum you need to post "No Trespassing" otherwise the encroaching party can claim ignorance of the boundaries. Yes, this seems stupid but it is necessary to let people know their actions are illegal.

    4. Re:How to build a wall by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Wandering into the USA at some random location is no longer an option.

      The 'wall' plan really has a big hole: Canada. Seriously, if you were a terrorist, which would be easier to cross?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know this is a russian troll account but for god's sake spell "wandering" properly, idiot

    6. Re:How to build a wall by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      The 'wall' plan really has a big hole: Canada. Seriously, if you were a terrorist, which would be easier to cross?

      Also sea and air travel. These "build the wall" people are like flat-earthers, blissfully ignorant of the times we're living in.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    7. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Vladimir .... you gotta learn to spell more better. The Americanz will get suspicious.

    8. Re:How to build a wall by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      We had typed support update about results of linguistic analysis AC.
      Great grammar and spelling could give away all the decades of winning anthropologist work done.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    9. Re:How to build a wall by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Thats what the wall will offer.
      People who want to enter the USA will be directed to a location along the wall where they can present their documents and be allowed into the USA.
      A task for a US embassy in another nation.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    10. Re:How to build a wall by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Decades without a wall resulted in decades of crime and illegal immigration AC.
      The wall will at least stop the flow of criminals and illegal migrants into the USA.
      The cost and risk to creating quality fake documents will be something many illegal migrants and criminals cant risk.
      Once they are on CCTV and in federal databases entering the USA, they have to have a legal reason to stay in the USA.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    11. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two words: Tunnels. Drones.

      (Bonus 4 more words: You are an idiot.)

    12. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canada has this thing called winter. They only need to monitor the border for about 2 weeks of summer. If you don't think winter can stop an invasion, just read some WW2 German/Russian history.

    13. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Illegal immigration happens mostly from legal visitors crossing at points of entry who overstay their visas. Drugs mostly flow through vehicles crossing at legal points of entry. The crime rate from illegal immigrants is lower than that of citizens.

      Care to try again?

    14. Re:How to build a wall by c · · Score: 1

      The 'wall' plan really has a big hole: Canada.

      I think you meant "Saudi Arabia". From some strange reason, Saudi's entering the US don't seem to get anywhere near as much scrutiny you'd expect given the number of terrorist attacks in the US perpetrated by people from that country.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    15. Re:How to build a wall by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      AC the US mil can detect and stop drones. So can most nations with a modern mi.
      Tunnels are also now easy to detect given a few nations need to detect such efforts.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    16. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most foreign nationals whom are in our country illegally are here due to overstaying their visas. A wall will not help this.

      Under US law, foreign nationals whom are seeking asylum only need to present themselves to border agents. A wall will not help there be less people seeking asylum.

    17. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the record, I haven't seen a "snow on the ground for 6 months" winter in the southern tip of Canada for decades. OTOH, it's probably the best guarded area of the border overall.

    18. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are a terrorist, which country do you think would be easier to get in to on the way to the US, Canada or Mexico?

    19. Re:How to build a wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are a few more gaping holes to point out, as well:

      1. The Gulf of Mexico
      2. The Atlantic Ocean
      3. The Pacific Ocean

      Good luck building the dikes...

  31. Re:Mueller laughs last. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Not to mention, almost ALL illegal immigrants are coming via airports comparatively. And SEVEN TIMES as many terrorism suspects are caught at the NORTHERN border than the Southern.

    Republicans are ideological morons by choice. Kick them to the curb, let them be in whatever swamp they want to run, but they suck at governance. The shutdown over BS proves it undeniably.

  32. Con man ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... he is.

    NBC News reported that Kolfage, who was associated with websites that published false stories and had pages shut down by Facebook, claims to have gathered 3.5 million email addresses through his border wall campaign.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  33. Re:Yes! Socialism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They don't need a wall, just automated guns. If anyone crosses the border, they're dead. No people to pay, no people to bribe, illegals just die.

  34. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by quantaman · · Score: 1

    If you didn't read the news, you wouldn't know there is a federal shutdown.

    There is literally no impact on regular Americans outside of DC.

    As long as the taxes are removed from my paycheck, the government is not shut down.

    I don't even feel sorry for the nonessentials. Go look for a new job not funded by taxpayers if you want to avoid political gridlock delaying your paycheck.

    Unless you're a government employee who isn't receiving a paycheck.

    Or planning to go to a National Park and noticed it's either closed or opened and trashed.

    Or flying and dealing with longer lines due to pissed off and absent TSA screeners.

    Or you'll just be dealing with some bureaucratic BS in a few months time and whining about lazy government employees not realizing the BS you're dealing with is because the department got way behind dealing with the shutdown caused by your hero's temper tantrum.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  35. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny. Should all the people in the military get "real jobs"? Oh, right, their job is "real" and they still are funded by a separate DoD bill that Trump signed, unlike the Coast Guard, Border and Customs, and FBI. Oh, and the VA is still open (although whether they're still being paid? Got me.). I've an idea: since we've already funding the military, why not just reassign them to cover those 800,000 jobs? Or we can just get rid of protecting the borders, investigating crimes at a federal level, and let our coastal waters be a haven for pirates.

    Seriously, the US government shutting down repeatedly *shouldn't happen*. The lack of funding is a direct result of an unwillingness for politicians to properly govern. The people who should be "laid off" aren't the rank and file. But, yea, let's just fire 800,000 people and then try to rehire to fill those jobs when the people in charge of your funding are so unstable they actively fight against paying you. That's the only way in which it's not "real jobs". I'm sure, though, you'd be happy if the government just lost those 800,000 people. Well, while we're at it, let's get rid of the military too.

  36. IT dumbfucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its clear IT has its own load of dumbfucks reading these posts.

    If you don't know Trump is slime by now, you're slime.

  37. No IGW, YOU should get a real job, faggot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No IGW, YOU should get a real job, faggot. You know nothing about this.

    1. Re:No IGW, YOU should get a real job, faggot. by zidium · · Score: 1

      Respect the man with a 6 digit user ID, AC biyatch!

      --
      Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
  38. Nothing to see here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Move along.

  39. Virtual / Tech border walls are lousy by Amigori · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Virtual walls are expensive to buy and maintain. Its not like the cameras will be simple IR illuminated CCD style you buy at a big box store. They'll be high resolution with thermal imaging. They have to survive difficult environmental conditions. Hundreds of miles of fiber optics and fiber switchgear. Expensive servers and front-end clients. Federal contractors to maintain it all.

    Versus a physical barrier CBP can drive by and inspect for damage on occasion.

    Versus a Virtual Fence, they're not much of a deterrent. "Woooo, I'm so scared of being caught on video. OMG! What if they use facial recognition that isn't used in my home country?" vs "Hmm... 30ft wall, spikes and/or barbwire... Maybe I should just use an actual border crossing?"

    If your donors include many defense contractors, which system are you going to pitch?

    --
    "The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
    1. Re:Virtual / Tech border walls are lousy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Effectively patrolling a border with people is much more expensive, in fact. The 45-75 billion the wall is going to cost will be wasted without another similar chunk to patrol it. This whole idea is retarded and being forced.

    2. Re:Virtual / Tech border walls are lousy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Virtual walls are stupid, and it's easy to point out why. Take an example from the migrant caravans:

      Line up 1000 people and have them rush:
      1) A 30ft high physical wall
      2) A "virtual" wall
      Now how many of those 1000 people do you think will get through each?

    3. Re:Virtual / Tech border walls are lousy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if they used facial recognition, illegal immigrants are a protected class in Democrat cities, so why would they care? Hell, with facial recognition tech NYC could have their city ID ready for them before they even arrive! DeBlasio will love it!

    4. Re:Virtual / Tech border walls are lousy by Orgasmatron · · Score: 1

      Also, we've had a virtual fence before. Janet Napolitano decided that it wasn't working, and turned it off. A physical wall can't be turned off on a whim.

      --
      See that "Preview" button?
    5. Re:Virtual / Tech border walls are lousy by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      Without surveillance, how will you know whether the wall is working? How do you expect to find and catch anyone after they've hopped the wall?

      How will migrating animals get through? Are you going to shuttle them through somehow?

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    6. Re:Virtual / Tech border walls are lousy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They dig tunnels, no border wall of any type will ever be effective.

    7. Re:Virtual / Tech border walls are lousy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Everything you said is wrong except the conclusion. A physical wall is a jobs program, but it's a stupid one.

      "Virtual walls are expensive to buy and maintain."

      They are cheap when compared to real walls hundreds of miles long, which is what we're comparing to.

      "not like the cameras will be simple IR illuminated CCD style you buy at a big box store. They'll be high resolution with thermal imaging."

      If you get near a point, make it.

      " They have to survive difficult environmental conditions. Hundreds of miles of fiber optics and fiber switchgear."

      Drones aren't connected with fiber, noob. They're wireless. Otherwise they'd have a hard time reaching altitude. And you would use wireless back haul as well.

      "Versus a physical barrier CBP can drive by and inspect for damage on occasion."

      You don't even have to drive by and inspect drones. They will let you know if they require maintenance.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Virtual / Tech border walls are lousy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pelosi's virtual wall isn't aimed at the hundreds of miles of unmanned border because almost no illegal immigration, drugs etc come by way of those stretches. It's aimed at the legal points of entry because that's where most of the actual problems come through. Sure a wall might stop a few hundred illegal entries in a given year, but it'll do nothing to prevent terrorists or drugs or fugitives from the law. You know, actual problems.

      Read TFA or at least the summary. This isn't a suggestion to replace a proposed physical wall with cameras and sensors. It's a proposal to increase the effectiveness of CBP at the legal points of entry which are already the source of most of the illegal immigration and criminal activity.

  40. You're a moronic fag fag fag. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You keep lying, fail fail fail. They come via airport, you stop nothing with a wall. You're a moronic faggot.

  41. False Dichotomy by Etcetera · · Score: 4, Informative

    The most bizarre thing about this is that all of this technical funding (well, at least a lot of it) is already in the request that the Trump Administration is making. Border walls do work (ask any resident of San Diego), and technology can be used in places where the border fencing is not necessary. (As an example, the border wall ends about 20 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean here as the urbanized portion of Tijuana ends and the mountain terrain on both sides provides a good deterrent.)

    Here's more detail on the request from a few days ago. Really not sure what Pelosi is yelling about at this point, since a comprehensive mixed-focus border strengthening is ostensibly what both sides want:

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/white-house-asks-for-billions-of-dollars-to-fund-border-operations/

    Washington — As negotiations between lawmakers to reopen the government continue to be locked in a stalemate, the White House is standing firm on its $5.7 billion demand to construct a "steel barrier" along the U.S.-Mexico frontier. It is also asking for billions of dollars in additional funding for immigration judges and border security.

    The administration's negotiating team, led by Vice President Mike Pence, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and White House senior adviser Jared Kushner, have provided Democrats with an outline of their demands for a deal to end the partial shutdown.

    In addition to President Trump's unwavering $5.7 billion request for border barrier funds, the White House is demanding $563 million for 75 additional immigration judges and support staff, $211 million to hire 750 additional Border Patrol officers, $571 million to deploy 2,000 law enforcement personnel, $4.2 billion for 52,000 detention beds, $675 million for inspection technology at ports of entry and $800 million for "humanitarian needs," which include funds for medical support, transportation, supplies and temporary facilities along the southwestern border.

    1. Re:False Dichotomy by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      the White House is demanding $563 million for 75 additional immigration judges and support staff,

      Woah, those people are making a lot of money.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:False Dichotomy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "Border walls do work (ask any resident of San Diego)"

      What? Who told you that? And why do you think asking any resident of San Diego is a valid approach to information gathering on this subject?

      "the urbanized portion of Tijuana ends and the mountain terrain on both sides provides a good deterrent."

      They don't go to the mountains because they can stay on the flat land and build tunnels. The wall might keep out refugees, but it won't keep out drugs. Only legalization and treatment can fix the drug problem, no wall will do that. Everything else overwhelmingly goes the other direction across the border, like money or guns. Meanwhile our foreign policy and our drug policy both actively create refugees...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:False Dichotomy by ScentCone · · Score: 0

      Really not sure what Pelosi is yelling about at this point

      It's very simple. She's pandering the TDS contingent in her base, and doing all of this in the interests of positioning for the next election cycle. It has nothing to do with her actual policy wishes or understanding. It's 100%, entirely, about denying Trump the ability to deliver on the main thing that got him elected. She's failing to understand that the people who voted for Trump are seeing who it is that's blocking the effort. They aren't all going to suddenly change their minds about it because Pelosi and Schumer have scolded them over it. They haven't learned a thing from Clinton losing huge ground when she stopped worrying about calling millions Americans irredeemable deplorables if they wouldn't support quest for a return to power. Pelosi's utterly disingenuous, phony objections are purely about 2020, nothing more or less.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    4. Re:False Dichotomy by Etcetera · · Score: 1

      They don't go to the mountains because they can stay on the flat land and build tunnels. The wall might keep out refugees, but it won't keep out drugs. Only legalization and treatment can fix the drug problem, no wall will do that. Everything else overwhelmingly goes the other direction across the border, like money or guns. Meanwhile our foreign policy and our drug policy both actively create refugees...

      That's a pretty odd rebuttal. Tunnels exist, but they are major capital investments by cartels. They are also limited in area and can be detected by throwing tech at the areas where they occur. Walls are not impenetrable and aren't designed to be. They're designed to be deterrent, not defend against an army. With crossing reduced down significantly, CBP can focus their efforts on other issues, such as tracking down tunnels and tracking cartel members back to the point of origin.

      The arguments that walls and fences shouldn't be built because there are very expensive ways to breach them is rather ludicrous. Reducing traffic and making it more difficult is *why* you build one.

    5. Re:False Dichotomy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The arguments that walls and fences shouldn't be built because there are very expensive ways to breach them is rather ludicrous.

      The tunnels are much cheaper than the wall. If you can defeat a security measure with a much cheaper tool, then it's worthless.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:False Dichotomy by Etcetera · · Score: 1

      The arguments that walls and fences shouldn't be built because there are very expensive ways to breach them is rather ludicrous.

      The tunnels are much cheaper than the wall. If you can defeat a security measure with a much cheaper tool, then it's worthless.

      That makes no sense, and wouldn't even be relevant if it was true. If you have to spend a month of effort and a lot of money building into a capital resource like an underground tunnel as opposed to the trivial effort of walking 100 meters because there's no barrier, that's a significant cost balance in favor of a deterrent.

  42. Whichever one generates more clicks for /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Kind of like OP's post!

  43. Tired of political posts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would be nice if we could just go back to talking about technology and not seeing another fucking kvetch fest about the president and politics bullshit.

  44. Trumps imported whore wife is an illegal immigrant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump's own imported whore wife is an illegal immigrant, you're a moron.

  45. Easy Solution by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

    +sarcasm

    I think I now what we can do with all those surplus landmines laying around. Cheap and very effective.

    -sarcasm

  46. Re:Who pays for that additional money, Mexico agai by AHuxley · · Score: 0

    Airports in the USA have advanced passport controls AC and illegal migrants/criminals have to risk the use their fake documents AC.
    Very different from just wondering to some random location AC and crossing into the USA.
    Criminals and illegal migrants will have to change their movements AC as a new wall is in the way.
    They will have to attempt to move past legal crossing points and their new fake documents will have to work every time :)
    Airports can be secured by looking at the documents presented by illegal migrants AC.
    Are the fake documents from a US embassy? Does the story told when questioned seem real given the fake documents presented.
    Facile recognition, voice prints, fingerprints and a reason why they are entering the USA have to be correct.
    One lie at a US airport to the US gov and its time to return to their own nations AC.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  47. Re: Trump will hang from his faggot neck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tears so salty but so sweet!!

  48. MOST ILLEGALS COME HERE VIA AIRPORT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MOST ILLEGALS COME HERE VIA AIRPORT. ALMOST ALL DRUGS COME VIA CONTAINER. Your faggot blathering act does not change that fact, moron! You're seriously too stupid to have any position here!

  49. #Firewood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    #Firewood

    I know what we can do with all these useless lying Republican faggots lying around.

    #Firewood

  50. You must be new by Latent+Heat · · Score: 1

    around here.

  51. You're a moron. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People stop burglars. People stop illegals. Walls stop neither. Locks stop neither. A delay is only as good as the responding force. Fund the border PATROL, let Trump the traitor rot behind PRISON WALLS.

    And yes, we GUARD prison walls, moron.

    1. Re:You're a moron. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Dogs do as well. Why do we have locks at all if it never stops anything if you're not home? Generally it takes more skill, time and preparation to penetrate any defense, typically your locks, doors and walls give you enough time to respond when someone does break in and increases the risk to get caught. It takes about 1h to cross the view distance of a border patrol officer without wall. If a wall delays a group about 1-2 hours, this doubles or quadruples the effectiveness of the same number of border patrol agents.

      Given we pay $2B in salaries per year just to patrol the border wall, a wall over doubling the presence of border patrol would save money 2-3 years down the line.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  52. Oh Yeah! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

    The Kool-Aid Man says, "fuck your wall".

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  53. neither. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    previous and currently-employed border controls on the southern border are more than adequate.

    trump is correct about one thing.... there IS a national security emergency... it resides, part time, at the white house; and has been frequently spotted in a dodgy country club in florida...

    so maybe that 'impenetrable' wall should be built around the master suite bathroom in the residence at the white house around the time that the 'president' goes on one of his twitter tantrums.

  54. Wall is STUPID by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 3, Funny

    In 2019 we've got much better technologies to detect border crossings than some stupid-ass wall that has to be patrolled anyway because they will get over it or tunnel under it regardless of how high or how deep it goes! Just like everything else Trump does he's trying to use 1940's """technology""" to solve a problem; how can anyone be behind this, are you all dumb, too? For fuck's sake for what his retarded-ass wall would cost we could put a surveillance satellite in geosync orbit that would watch the entire border and not have to take any private citizens' land, and be so much more effective because you wouldn't have to have an entire army of people to physically patrol some damned wall.

    1. Re:Wall is STUPID by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      A modern mil can detect any such tunnel efforts.
      The over part is also something a modern mil can detect as they face drones all over the world.
      A "surveillance satellite" still needs US efforts to get to the illegal migrant groups in time.
      Once the illegal migrants are in the USA they can demand access to the US legal system.
      The wall ensures any person trying to enter the USA has to face a legal crossing location.
      Their documents can be looked at. Questions asked.
      One lie to the US gov and they not going to enter the USA.
      The use of fake documents, shared documents gets mote difficult. The illegal migrant is also on CCTV at a legal crossing location.
      Creating new fake US documents once in the USA gets more difficult due to that first image of the face from that crossing attempt.
      Walls work very well in other nations that have used a wall to stop the flow of illegal migrants, drugs and criminals.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:Wall is STUPID by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 0

      Yeah sure I get modded 'funny' because myopic so-called 'conseratives' can't see past the end of their own noses.

    3. Re:Wall is STUPID by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 0

      Stop making excuses for Trump and START THINKING WITH YOUR BRAIN.

    4. Re:Wall is STUPID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't come crying to me when you figure out that your wall is pretty much ineffective...

    5. Re:Wall is STUPID by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Unless someone in Mexico invents the ladder - then we're screwed

    6. Re:Wall is STUPID by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The use of a ladder would be a crime.
      Upon entering the USA the illegal migrant would be deported for that crime.
      Thats the legal part of the wall that makes a wall so attractive legally.
      People seeking to enter the USA legally would have to use approved locations to show their documents.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    7. Re:Wall is STUPID by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      But that's the same situation as we have now. It's already a misdemeanor to enter outside of a legal port of entry.

    8. Re:Wall is STUPID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG people, we have to defend against Ladder Migration now! Get out the fire arrows and boiling oil! To the catapults!!

  55. Sounds like another scam by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Informative

    CNN also reports on a GoFundMe campaign started by an Air Force veteran [Brian Kolfage] to simply crowdfund the construction of the wall. Though 340,747 people pledged over $20 million, it failed to reach its $1 billion goal, and is now pointing supporters to a newly-formed non-profit corporation -- named "We Build the Wall."

    Guess who sits on the Board of Directors of this new non-profit and will probably get paid to do so? Yup, Brian Kolfage, along with his team including:

    Erik Prince, an American businessman known for founding the security firm Blackwater (he is also Education Secretary Betsy DeVos' brother), David Clarke, the former Wisconsin sheriff known for expressing controversial views on immigration, and Kris Kobach, the former Kansas secretary of state.

    Business Insider (and others) also note:

    Kolfage's previous endeavors, which included stints running conspiracy-theory websites and a related Facebook page that was kicked off the platform in October.

    People getting refunds from the GoFundMe campaign will be contacted via email and offered the opportunity to donate to this new "501(c)(4) non-profit Florida Corporation named 'We Build the Wall, Inc.'" -- which will probably *not* be refundable (which will be nice for Brian and his team).

    In addition, this Business Insiderarticle Man behind 'Build the Wall' GoFundMe has reportedly made a potentially lucrative contact list thanks to a shadowy email-harvesting operation notes (from interviews with former employees and public records):

    NBC News reported that Kolfage, who was associated with websites that published false stories and had pages shut down by Facebook, claims to have gathered 3.5 million email addresses through his border wall campaign.

    Those addresses, NBC News reported, have allegedly been used to encourage people to support Kolfage's websites, to buy a coffee brand he owns, or to be stored for future use by conservative campaigns.

    Lindsey Lowery, a former staff writer at the now-defunct conservative website FreedomDaily, shared a text message with NBC News in which Kolfage discussed his email harvesting plans.

    In the texts, Kolfage told Lowery in September 2017 that "we can make our own [petition] through the website to steal/collect emails."

    So... this guy sounds great. /sarcasm

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Sounds like another scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See if you can get Israel to have a "virtual wall" instead of a real one.

      I bet Chuckie ((Schumer)) can't.

      I propose to introduce this new "Israel" test for public policy.

      Diversity is good for the West?
      Is a border wall needed for the US?

      Example:
      Israel is a walled ethnostate. Yet Jewish intellectuals demand western nations import massive numbers of violent Africans and Arabs.. because diversity.

      Why is that?

  56. Re:Another lying Republican faggot? Throw on the p by Etcetera · · Score: 3, Interesting

    San Diego is an urban area where walls EXIST. Yes, they work there - at slowing people slightly - because THEY ARE MANNED AND PATROLLED NEARBY. That is not happening along the entire border, nor proposed.

    The 2006 study on GK's effectiveness noted a 76% drop from 1992-2004 in San Diego County, so I'd put it at more than "slowing people slightly". It's a fair argument that some/many of the would-be crossers tried crossing more East instead (not just into Imperial County, but much further east... past Yuma in AZ, NM, and TX). One doesn't need to build an entire wall everywhere and Trump's proposal doesn't do that. CBP knows where walls are needed and where they're not, and they're fully capable of allocating resources accordingly.

    The technology in the budget requests goes to a lot of IR, drones, and the like... Exactly the kind of smart allocation of resources everyone on all sides appears to claim to want.

    So, again... What's the problem?

  57. THEY COME VIA AIRPORT, MORON. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    San Diego is an urban area where walls EXIST. Yes, they work there - at slowing people slightly - because THEY ARE MANNED AND PATROLLED NEARBY. That is not happening along the entire border, nor proposed.

    Hey look, another lying Republican faggot. Throw it on the pile.

  58. The WALL will not stop it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There is also the human cost to consider.

    Rep. Brooks outlines the cost of not having a wall:

    “With the southern border, we have the loss of at least 15,000 Americans a year. You have 2,000 that are homicides by illegal aliens, according to federal government data. You’ve got another 15,000, 16,000 that die each year from heroin overdoses, 90 percent of which comes across our porous southern border. That’s not counting the 55,000 additional deaths that are caused by overdoses, a significant amount of which comes across the southern border,” Brooks stated."

    I've looked into this, and the numbers are accurate. The GAO estimates for 2009 show that Arizona had 240 illegal immigrant inmates incarcerated in federal prison for homicide related charges. California had 2430, Florida had 480, New York had 1350, and Texas had 900.

    "Taking the data only from these five states, and assuming that each person incarcerated for a homicide-related offense is responsible for only one death, yields 5,400 people killed by illegal aliens."

    For comparison, automobile deaths in the US is around 35,000 annually.

    Total non-medical deaths in the US is about 161,000 annually. Deaths due to illegals is more than 2% of that, possibly as much as 10%, depending on where you put the blame for overdosing.

    All of this is fact, and should be the basis for any political arguments about the wall.

    The human cost of not having a wall is very high.

    The wall will NOT stop any of that. Zero. Nada.
    NONE of it. Do you understand that we have THOUSANDS of miles of coastline that is barely guarded?
    Do you understand that most of those drugs come in from regular checkpoints?
    And let's deal with the REASONS why there are so many drugs coming into the country - THERE IS A DEMAND FOR THEM! Let's deal with that!

    The wall is NOTHING but a distraction issue that will solve NOTHING.
    And WHY are there so many migrants? Let's look at America's policies shall we?! We CAUSED the immigrant problem!

    So let's take some responsibility for OUR actions on the World stage!

    Jesus Fucking Christ! How the fuck did Americans get so stupid!! Oh wait! Newt Gingrich and Fox News......

    GO ahead, get your fucking wall and "win". Go right ahead!

    I am so disgusted now ... Trump is a total moron and yet, my fellow Americans STILL support him?! They'd sooner drop their football team for being less of a loser.
    This is unbelievable. The Founding Fathers were morons for not giving us a Parliamentary system. This two-party system is broken and from what I see, it's the Republicans who have jumped the rails into retard land first.
    It's a good thing that most of them are old and about to die. The sooner the better and let's fix this country when the Fox News audience is dead.

  59. MAKE THE GALLOWS GREAT AGAIN! HANG DRUMPF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rope so strong and tight around the obese traitor's neck!! MAKE THE GALLOWS GREAT AGAIN!

  60. Dafuq? by Hugh+Jorgen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Taxes are crowdfunding v 1.0

    1. Re:Dafuq? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This.

    2. Re:Dafuq? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So is charity. Feel like donating 50% of your salary to starving children in ? No? Well too bad, you have to give it to us or go to prison. The difference between being a willing vs an unwilling participant cannot be understated.

    3. Re:Dafuq? by Hugh+Jorgen · · Score: 1

      I would rather sterilize the irresponsible fucks that keep having kids they cannot feed in an already overpopulated world.

  61. Perhaps a bit misleading... by xlsior · · Score: 1

    ...Because we already HAVE ONE?

    Much of the border has a physical walls and fences today, and there's already 'virtual fences' monitored by motion-triggered remote cameras and such.

    1. Re:Perhaps a bit misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Much" of the border = not a measure. "Some" = less than 25%. This is like 12 or 15%. NO BARRIER does shit without a patrol. Otherwise they wouldn't need prison guard, derp.

    2. Re:Perhaps a bit misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...Much of the border ...

      Citation needed.

    3. Re:Perhaps a bit misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A citation explaining "much" vs "some" vs "a small bit of the total, like where we actually have barriers currently"? No. Google can't fix retards like you.

  62. Re:Yes! Socialism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'll shoot your inbred traitor's eye out, kid.

  63. The Majority of illegals enter legally by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and overstay their visit. But even if the goal is no longer to stop the flow of illegals (which is how The Wall was sold to me) but instead of make border patrol's life easier it's no good. For one thing there's ladders. For another it's pretty easy to climb a fence.

    As others have pointed out Israel doesn't have a lot of wall or fence. Unless you're gonna station somebody at every inch of fence they're just gonna go over it. Israel's solution is snipers and a willingness to kill. I suppose we could do that.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:The Majority of illegals enter legally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and overstay their visit

      A visit? Is that what you think Mexicans are doing? Visiting? In soviet Russia Mexico visits you!

  64. 4.5 Trillion dollars needed for CO2 catastrophe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bringing the global CO2 increase to a standstill needs 4.5 trillion dollars per year.
    That is a 904 times bigger problem than the ticky tacky border wall.
    Gasoline CO2 in the air. 4.5 Trillion dollars per year needed to fund not emitting CO2 programs.
    https://www.lowco2america.com/2018/10/gasoline-co2-in-air-what-are-some-of.html

    1. Re:4.5 Trillion dollars needed for CO2 catastrophe by Chas · · Score: 1

      Yep. But you're presenting it as an either-or problem.

      It isn't, therefore you're being a dishonest bullshitter.

      The country can tackle BOTH simultaneously.

      And, if the Chicken Little Brigade would actually come up with a viable solution, we could.
      Screaming "Hottest *INSERT HERE* EVARRRR!" or trying to implement some gamified social engineering scheme DOES NOT GET IT DONE.

      Right now, we're talking about a border barrier that costs 1/1000th of the total US budget.
      Meanwhile, foreign aid, and other pork projects will cost us several hundred times that.

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    2. Re:4.5 Trillion dollars needed for CO2 catastrophe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile, foreign aid, and other pork projects will cost us several hundred times that.

      So one more won't hurt at all! Just give the screaming toddler whatever he wants, without even requiring him to identity what his plan is about.

      Sorry, but you need to clean up your own mess.

    3. Re:4.5 Trillion dollars needed for CO2 catastrophe by Chas · · Score: 1

      The plan is already there.
      We have data that shows border barriers SIGNIFICANTLY (unless 80-90% reduction isn't "significant" enough for you) reduce overland illegal immigration, human trafficking and drug trafficking.
      The plan is to erect a barrier over most of the southern border in conjunction with natural barriers to funnel most human traffic to legitimate ports of entry.
      Combine that with human patrols and technology (cameras, drones, etc).

      A border barrier and the illegal immigration coming across is NOT some "new" or "sudden" issue.
      It's been a problem FOR DECADES. And people are SICK of it.
      The "screaming toddler" in this scenario are the DEMOCRATS They won't negotiate. They don't give a crap if it throws their constituencies (including the DACA recipients) under the bus.

      Basically all the stuff being talked about was PERFECTLY acceptable to the Dems when Obama or anyone named "Clinton" talked about it.

      This is pure, malicious political sabotage by the Democrats. And this is why they aren't arguing FACTS. They're arguing "feelings".

      How is a wall "immoral"? Do YOU live in a gazebo on a golf course?

      And if you want to talk about immoral? How moral is it that some of these industries "can't work without illegal immigration"?
      You're essentially creating a permanently near-slave economic sub-class based on the argument of "Who will pick our cotton?"

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
  65. Pork! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's see... A politician representing a disttict near silicon valley proposes a technology solution to a physical access problem.

    I guess i shouldn't be surprised.

  66. Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A country needs a border by definition if it starts having a welfare safety net. You don't want your citizens paying into the welfare system for years only to be displaced by cheaper newcomers at the convenience of the corporations which are laying them off.

    That being said, I'm somewhat empathetic to these people who state that having a surveillance network is harmful. Before 9/11, I was constantly arguing with people who wanted more surveillance of the population. Then it seems that the people who put that together took advantage of all they learned in that debate to go on the attack.

    I do think we need a wall. Mexico's crime has gone off the charts, they do not have working law and order there, and the entire system is massively corrupt.

  67. Re:A WALL STOPS PEOPLE ARRIVING BY PLANE, EH MORON by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1, Insightful

    When you fly into the US, you come through the border (immigration), and your identification, papers, and more are scrutinized. Would you support doing so for everyone who enters across a border? If they can bypass that check - should we let them do so?

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  68. Re:A WALL STOPS PEOPLE ARRIVING BY PLANE, EH MORON by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Would you support doing so for everyone who enters across a border?" YES. I'm a Democrat because I don't support GOP nazism. And that's a fine use of tax dollars IMHO, to staff customs appropriately. Absolutely.

    Airports and shipping container security, I'd easily support giving reasonable money to operate effectively. That would be useful as experts agree an unmanned wall is not. The numbers alone, they come through airports.

    Walls are for prisoners like Trump will be shortly, and we guard those.

  69. Re:A WALL STOPS PEOPLE ARRIVING BY PLANE, EH MORON by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 0

    OK, so what should we do to people who arrive in the US at the airport and refuse to provide identification? What should we do with people who arrive at the foreign airport and refuse to provide - or even apply - for a Visa to the US? Should we say "well, OK" and just let them in?

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  70. Kimmel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    had a great solution. Tell trump we are building a wall. Send some dump trucks to penn ave, and let trump watch them go south. Then tell him they are going to build the wall. Take some photos of existing wall and show it to dumbass after a couple of months and say "All done, your wall is soooo pretty, best wall EVER".

  71. Just build a wall around trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Much cheaper and a result the people actually want.

  72. Read these first then lying faggot. Carefully! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reality check: More terror suspects have entered the U.S. from Canada than from Mexico

    https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2019/01/07/us/politics/ap-us-trump-terrorism-fact-check.html

    https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2018/12/13/trumps-10-terrorists-where-are-they/

    To be honest, I don't give a fuck about finding stats to satisfy your dishonest little faggot ass lol, the fact is I have all the facts on my side and you back a lying traitor everyone is watching head to prison.

    Go find your own stats, but they're all going to say the vast mega-majority of illegals are coming via airports. Now run along, find a spot to grow some balls ya dishonest little cunt. You lose bitch.

    Trump will die in prison long before any wall is ever built even if he did get funding. Go suck Putin's cock, run along now traitor.

  73. Automated turrets by Nocturrne · · Score: 2

    Towers spaced every 200m with .50cal automated machine guns, shooting anything that approaches the border. Problem solved

    1. Re:Automated turrets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Towers spaced every 200m with .50cal automated machine guns, shooting anything that approaches the border. Problem solved

      Been there. Done that. Maintenance stopped sending people out to work on the equipment for the obvious reasons.

  74. You're nominated for dumbest person in Los Angeles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ask a dumber question please. Seriously, I know you'll have to dig deep. Give me something so dumb I just bust out laughing at your incompetent petulant faggot dance involuntarily. You're close, I'm right there.

  75. Re:Yes! Socialism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was that grammatically nonsensical non-sequitur supposed to convey an actual message? If so, you failed.

    Try again, junior.

  76. Re: When did this shutdown happen? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2

    Air Traffic Control is a Federal/FAA service, and the workers are going unpaid now.

  77. Re:Yes! Socialism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The US is a mixture of capitalism and socialism. "Capitalism" creates inequities that end up concentrating wealth to a relatively small percentage of the public. Government regulations, taxes, and laws are tasked with reigning in run away capitalism.

    "Socialism" run into problems because tit is based on the premise that everyone is equal. You have people who contribute to society and you have people who do not contribute to society but expect society to provide for them. We are approaching the point where being successful is being penalized.

  78. um by Pitt64 · · Score: 1

    wouldn't a dome be better? asking like i'm 5

  79. Re: Yes! Socialism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Socialism is government forcing collectivism. The crowdfunded wall is individuals VOLUNTEERING to contribute to a project.

    Socialism always results in government use of force against the people...and millions dead.

  80. Far more important... by doom · · Score: 2

    Far more important would be a wall to keep drugs from entering the White House.

    1. Re:Far more important... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Wall is merely a monument to Trump's ego. He has 2000 mile penis envy and he won't let up until he dies or leaves office.

      Just the same, the US need not stroke Trump's ego. The Republican Party used to be fiscal conservatives, but now they say with a straight face, "just give him the wall, it's only $5 billion!"

      These people are liars and hypocrites. Remember "tax and spend liberals?" That is now the Republican Party. Remember the Tea Party conservatives? Remember the Log Cabin Republicans? Where are those groups now? Lining up to waste money, to bolster the fragile ego of their leader.

      And the idea that this will cost $5 billion is also a lie. $5 billion is a stalking horse for another $5 billion later, then another $5 billion, then another $5 billion... This will all be sold as, "well we started building the Wall, but it's not complete, and you don't want to waste the money we already spent!"

      Colbert brought together a group of actual, you know, plausible wall experts. Not Trump in other words. The estimate they came up with was $2 trillion dollars. Not exactly a hard budget estimate I'll grant you, but I'll bet that $2 trillion is a whole lot closer to the real number than $5 billion is. $5 billion is just dishonest politicking.

      And having build a White Elephant, the Wall will instantly begin degrading. Wind, water, sand, rust, sun, people attacking sections, foundations that weaken, materials that break. Build the White Elephant and now you are on the hook for maintaining it. Forever.

      Of course, "all Trump has to do" is get Mexico to cut him a cheque. That's what he said he'd do, so what's stopping him? I know, Trump not getting Mexico to pay for the Wall is one of Trump's "promises kept". Just like he promised every one of his wives that he'd never leave them.

  81. Re: When did this shutdown happen? by Pitt64 · · Score: 1

    that one is dumb

  82. Re:Read these first then lying faggot. Carefully! by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 0
    You failed.

    Go figure, you're a constantly obfuscating moron trying to forget that almost all illegals come via airports. Again

    Citation requested - you provided none. You switched the discussion - because you're wrong. But being an AC, you have nothing but insults to distract from your failure. Sad.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  83. Re:Republicans can't read, news at 11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You really should have stayed in school, because you clearly don't understand context (or lack thereof) or how the English language works.

    That's too bad for you. With McDonald's moving toward automation, combined with the obvious crippling effect of your handicap, it is likely that you will be living with mommy and daddy, fabricating meaning for your life by inventing reasons to feign e-outrage and jacking off to Japanese cartoons for the rest of your life.

    Have fun, junior.

  84. Re:Read these first then lying faggot. Carefully! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nope, turns out it is overstayed Visas according to DHS.

    Now if you want to make the US a Jewish totalitarian police state, well, take your Zionism and shove it.

    This is a Secular Nation.

  85. Re:800,000 federal employees w/o paychecks this we by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    You must be too young to remember all the bombings and hijackings of the 60's and 70's.

    Those occurred when there was NO screening. Then the airlines implemented security screening, and the problem mostly disappeared.

    Then 9/11 happened, and the feds took over. The cost doubled, and the delays tripled. Yet the TSA does no better on penetration tests than the private security firms they replaced.

    The TSA should be abolished, and airport security should be re-privatized.

  86. Sorry Lyingfag, you can't keep Trump off the noose by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, you failed. They arrive via airport more than anything, and reality check: More terror suspects have entered the U.S. from Canada than from Mexico [globalnews.ca]

    https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2019/01/07/us/politics/ap-us-trump-terrorism-fact-check.html

    https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2018/12/13/trumps-10-terrorists-where-are-they/

  87. Citation is not needed, you can google it faggot. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Citation is not needed, you can google it faggot. Furthermore you can't refute it, so that's 2 nooses around your neck, traitor.

  88. Cite it yourself, prove it wrong Lyinwig faggot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cite something saying more cross the border walking than arriving at airports. Put up or shut up moronic treasonous faggot. You can't do shit about facts, and the fact is they come via airports.

    You failed. Hang next to Drumpftard the traitor, nobody cares that you can't google.

  89. In addition to a physical barrier. by Chas · · Score: 2

    Not INSTEAD of one.

    Because, in the end, the default for a physical impediment is "use the door".

    The default for a virtual impediment (drones, patrols, etc) is "No cop. No crime."

    A wall forces you to breach, surmount or tunnel under.

    All of which take progressively more time, take more resources and generally force the crosser to get "noisy" in some way, increasing the likelihood of being caught.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  90. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

    They should get real jobs then. You know, like all the peasants. Us peasants who don't merely get paid vacations when our employer runs out of money. Everyone who not a government aristocrat just gets laid off. Cry me a fucking river.

    There likely isn't enough jobs in the private sector for all these people. Trivia time: What do you call it when the government invents government jobs for people, so they have some form of employment?

    --

    ---
    DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  91. Re:800,000 federal employees w/o paychecks this we by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

    Oh, and anyone who goes to public parks.

    That is a problem of this adminstration's own doing. The unstaffed parks should've been closed. It is absolutely idiotic that the Republicans worried about the potential bad press resulting from the national parks being closed, but not the fallout from literally thousands of government employees getting a goose-egg on their paystub.

    --

    ---
    DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  92. Re:This administration is retarded. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Might want to learn how to use a computer you dumb fucking retard.

  93. Ask the guys who walk the walk by mnemotronic · · Score: 1

    Let the Border Patrol guys point out where physical deterrents make sense. They know the territory and traffic. Have them work with construction & technology experts to arrive at a practical solution for each of the 1900 miles. Some folks want 90 ft tall concrete slabs or steel curtains for the entire border. I acknowledge that. Emotional satisfaction based in concrete. However, logistically and logically something like that would be difficult to construct, and extremely expensive. Compromise is needed. I'd like to think that technology could provide efficient, practical, reliable and cost-effective solutions, but unfortunately I know technology. Amazonian tribesman armed with poison-tipped darts would work better, but I can't see this administration hiring anyone from south of El Paso.

    I see the biggest hurdle being that of lowering peoples expectations. No barrier, be it solid walls, razor-wire fences, autonomous killer robots or sharks with lasers on their heads is impermeable. I predict that "the wall", whatever form it takes, wont keep out undocumented workers, asylum seekers or drugs, it will just change the method and point of entry. When that happens we have 1900 miles of ungodly expensive obsolescence.

    I still believe George S Patton was right when he said "Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man", but I think we really do need to take CBP's recommendations into account.

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
  94. Re:This administration is retarded. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see you know how to win friends and influence people.

  95. I'm not reading nor moderating by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 0

    You lot are off your nut. All of you. I expect an error rate around 2%, but within that margin, you have preconceived notions and genetically expressed predisposition With which I cannot argue. Nor compete. So fuck the lot of you with rakes until you have evidence based reasoning.

  96. Violent Hispanic Aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    We need a border wall to protect us from violent Hispanic aliens.

    At 17% of the overall population, Hispanics commit 22% of all murders in the United States.

    Suppose that we calculate the percentages after omitting non-Hispanic Africans from the overall population. Then, Hispanics constitute 20% of the overall population but commit 37% of all murders. Hispanics commit murder at 3 times and 6 times the rate at which European-Americans and Asian-Americans, respectively, commit murder.

    The countries in Latin America have high rates of violent crime and are the source of Hispanic emigration to the United States.

    Get more info about this issue.

    1. Re:Violent Hispanic Aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm white, born here, and I can't wait to kill your entire extended inbred traitor family.

    2. Re: Violent Hispanic Aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copy paste much?

      We have 16,000 border patrol agents on the southern border. If this $100,000,000,000+ wall is somehow 90% effective, what percentage of them can we fire? What is the ROI on that investment?

      Will building the wall let us fire ten thousand agents, saving... 40,000*10,000=$400m a year? If yes, it would still take two hundred and fifty years to pay off. Will this wall last 250 years without maintenance? If not, ROI gets worse.

      If you want Idaho to pay for a wall in Texas, better up those corn subsidies another hundred billion a year.

  97. Violent Hispanic Aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need a border wall to protect us from violent Hispanic aliens.

    At 17% of the overall population, Hispanics commit 22% of all murders in the United States.

    Suppose that we calculate the percentages after omitting non-Hispanic Africans from the overall population. Then, Hispanics constitute 20% of the overall population but commit 37% of all murders. Hispanics commit murder at 3 times and 6 times the rate at which European-Americans and Asian-Americans, respectively, commit murder.

    The countries in Latin America have high rates of violent crime and are the source of Hispanic emigration to the United States.

    Get more info about this issue.

  98. We need to build around stupid politicians' mouths by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That I will support!

  99. Around the White House, you Dolts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Build the damn wall around the White House, tell him Mexico is just on the other side, he'll be happy and stay inside minimizing the damage he's causing, and we can go on being economically oppressed and pretending we have freedom.

  100. I voted for Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But I am absolutely against the wall. Walls are meant to come down.

    I would prefer open borders - IF AND ONLY IF - we also end the welfare state.

  101. Violent Hispanic Aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need a border wall to protect us from violent Hispanic aliens.

    At 17% of the overall population, Hispanics commit 22% of all murders in the United States.

    Suppose that we calculate the percentages after omitting non-Hispanic Africans from the overall population. Then, Hispanics constitute 20% of the overall population but commit 37% of all murders. Hispanics commit murder at 3 times and 6 times the rate at which European-Americans and Asian-Americans, respectively, commit murder.

    The countries in Latin America have high rates of violent crime and are the source of Hispanic emigration to the United States.

    Get more info about this issue.

  102. Bought and Paid for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A wall will stop illegal aliens from entering. A train will deport their asses if they sneak in. Abolishing welfare will stop them from coming here to begin with. Putting judges in GITMO will stop this shit once and for all. Notice how demoncrats and reptilians are working for foreigners and NOT Americans.

  103. Yes it can by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    Cokain warrior you really are overhigh if you think a wall stops people arriving at airports,

    Well it could if you built it across the middle of the runway.

  104. You forgot... by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    ...or don't live in the US. This concept of a government shutdown is a bizarre one for those of us living in other countries.

    In countries with a UK-style parliament the budget is regarded as a confidence motion and if it fails then the government automatically falls and there is an election. In addition, the budget usually only deals with changes and specific investments so if one fails to pass normal operations just carry on as they were before but there are no new projects or changes in taxes or benefits. You guys should try it some time.

    1. Re:You forgot... by quantaman · · Score: 1

      ...or don't live in the US. This concept of a government shutdown is a bizarre one for those of us living in other countries.

      In countries with a UK-style parliament the budget is regarded as a confidence motion and if it fails then the government automatically falls and there is an election. In addition, the budget usually only deals with changes and specific investments so if one fails to pass normal operations just carry on as they were before but there are no new projects or changes in taxes or benefits. You guys should try it some time.

      I'm Canadian. I get enough of their news but don't actually have to live in the madness.

      First-past-the-post parliamentary democracies get a bad rap for handing out majority governments with 30-40% of the vote, but they have a big advantage when it comes to dealing with this BS. When you have a majority government the PM has both the power to run the country and is held solely accountable for making it work.

      American politicians dealing with the "division of power" have invented a strategy of throwing a wrench into the machine and blaming the other side when things break.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    2. Re:You forgot... by zidium · · Score: 1

      In the United States, we only have two options for a Lack of Confidence:

      1. Leave the United States, which is what I did for several years until Trump won.
      2. Viva La Revolution!!

      Yeah, those are the only two options, sadly.

      --
      Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
    3. Re:You forgot... by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

      All political systems have failure points -- Belgium had trouble forming a government for some time (months) due to conflicts between the Flemish and the Walloon. Italy has had dozens of governments due to party fragmentation. Proportional representation countries wind up with minor parties acting as kingmakers, warping policy or even politics.

      All of those things seem "weird" in the US. You old an election and once elected, there's not enough majority to form a government? That seems weird from a US perspective, even though the political explanations make sense.

    4. Re:You forgot... by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Too bad you don't have the freedom to change your government by electing people not in one of the 2 wings of the official party.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    5. Re:You forgot... by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      You old an election and once elected, there's not enough majority to form a government? That seems weird from a US perspective

      Really? I thought that happened quite frequently in the US just differently when a president from one party cannot get his government approved by a congress controlled by the other.

    6. Re:You forgot... by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

      The rejection rate for Presidential cabinet appointees is extremely low and unusual, mostly because I believe the president has the ability to appoint interim appointees and the idea that the President needs a cabinet.

      I can't remember a single example where the President wasn't able to appoint cabinet members as a whole, or even faced that much opposition. It's not at all like 3+ parties being unable to name a parliamentary cabinet and prime minister.

  105. Already happened by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    I guess we should just strike through that "give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free" crap, eh?

    Based on my experience getting a green card 20 years ago you already did. I had to show that I was not too tired to get a job, had enough money to support myself and did not, nor had ever, belonged to the wrong sort of political party (communist) or thought polygamy was a good idea (which is usually a religious belief).

    If you want to update it to the modern reality I would suggest: "give us your energetic, your reasonably well-off, your huddled masses yearning to pay fees".

  106. Re: When did this shutdown happen? by zidium · · Score: 1

    I am pretty sure that airports could rehire them, probably just offer them $10k more for the same job and see who jumps.

    If not, well, that type of dictatorship needs to be stopped.

    --
    Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
  107. Re:You're nominated for dumbest person in Los Ange by zidium · · Score: 1

    This is why I have no hope for either my generation (Millennials), the next generation, or the near future.

    You're such an idiot.

    --
    Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
  108. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by zidium · · Score: 0

    You're such a state bootlicker, it's sick.

    You wouldn't survive Day 1 of a real civilization collapse scenario.

    --
    Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
  109. Re: When did this shutdown happen? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

    Air Traffic Controller isn't a real job?

  110. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by zidium · · Score: 1

    If the U.S. military ever wasn't paid for a month THEN maybe we'd see REALLY POSITIVE SOCIETAL CHANGE for the first time in my life! (born in 1981).

    I couldn't imagine a more happy scenario than vast swaths of the U.S. military AWOLing and reducing our huge budget expense by 50% or something. It'd be AMAZING!

    Actually, I hope the entire frickin feds shut down for 3 months and prove to all the statist boot lickers and common rabble that we just don't need them and do much better without them!

    --
    Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
  111. Build a smaller wall by VeryFluffyBunny · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it be easier to build a smaller wall around the crusty old white-supremacists? I'm sure they'd feel a lot safer behind a protective wall. I think millions of the rest of us would feel safer if those crusties were behind a wall too. I for one would feel safer among Mexican immigrants & central American refugees than racist 2nd amendment NRA nut-jobs.

    It's a win-win! :)

    BTW, I hear Canada's doing really well with getting lots of highly educated, highly skilled immigrants to work there because of the hostile environment that the current US administration is cultivating. Between that, the trade wars, incompetent elected representatives, & the shamefully bad diplomatic relations the US has, you'd think the USA was trying to drive itself into irrelevance & bankruptcy.

    --
    Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
    1. Re:Build a smaller wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice to see you wearing your tribalism on your sleeve.

      Seriously, though, this is an apples and oranges case when it comes to Canada. Canada has a piddling 37 million people in comparison to the U.S.' 327 million. We literally have more space and more resources.

      I also worry that we're taking too many well-educated Indian medical workers from India, though the "brain drain" of doctors from Canada to the U.S. was (is?) also a thing.

      It's more a question of numbers and services for the people you intend to bring in than humanitarian good will when you accept people into your country. When Syrian refugees were accepted, many of them went to smaller towns and villages. I'm still a little leery of a big city like Toronto accepting any refugees at all because they've had an affordable housing shortage for the people who are already living there and have for decades. It is fair to presume that most refugees aren't going to have a family/friend safety net in Canada, so they'll be starting at a place that might be even worse than a kid without a high school diploma.

      If we could take care of all the immigrants/refugees, get them jobs, help them to be happy citizens, I wouldn't hesitate to bring 'em all on at once. Realistically, we have to integrate slowly, carefully. Borders are important because a shift in population means greater burdens on already existing public and private infrastructure. This is about money, not racism.

      The grass may appear greener north of the U.S., but it isn't by a lot if you're a poor person in Canada.

  112. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by zidium · · Score: 1

    The math is that every week it goes on costs the economy $2 Billion. So just one more week and it will cost more than the $6 Billion he asks for.

    I hope he vetoes EVERY SINGLE BILL they pass until they get a 2/3rds majority or a rock-solid 15 foot concrete wall.

    --
    Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
  113. Re:This administration is retarded. by zidium · · Score: 1
    --
    Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
  114. How far gone are the editors here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go read a newspaper and check out how many people have physically died with illegals inside your country. Maybe its the media blackouts but there have been many who've died on American soil. A virtual wall is as good as the virtual connection between the chimney and the "ovens" at Auschwitz: it works as long as you dont try it out.

    Talk about getting distracted with semantics. People have died. Get your heads back on and start thinking logically!

  115. Applause for this by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    It will be good, for once, to see people mostly from Red States paying for something they want, and actually contributing financially in a meaningful way to all the stuff they normally expect sensible, Blue State, taxpayers to fund for them.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  116. Re: The experts agree on this, and no, you aren't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The people on those patrols (who are 52% Hispanic, 11% black) say literally the opposite of what you said.

    You are a fucking moron.

  117. It's called "virtual" for a reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because it's NOT REAL.

    A real wall keeps people out.

    A "virtual wall" does no such thing - it's a fraud. There are two reasons Democrats want this:
    1. It can be switched off by any future president and the public will not notice.
    2. It does not stop anybody getting their feet onto American soil, where the ACLU and leftists judges can then claim they have a "right" to a court hearing, and then claim the courts are too overcrowded and it would be too unfair to hold them in jail until their hearings --- so they must be allowed to move into the country and disappear into the population.

    With a wall, all would-be immigrants are either going to come via LEGAL entry points to be properly vetted and processed, or they will be much more likely to be blocked from getting a foot in. If processed as the millions of white Europeans who passed through Ellis Island were, then the new waves of immigrants reguardless of color would be prevented from entering if they were sick or unable to provide for themselves and places like California would not be spending over $20 BILLION per year on illegals (freeing up all that money for things like better healthcare, better schools, bullet trains, and more).

    The Democrats have lost influence with WASPs (White Anglo Saxon Protestants), so they need to change the nature of the population if they are not going to change their policies. They need to import as many non-whites and as many non-protestant-Christians into the nation as fast as possble to ensure their future in power. They seem to be a bit short-sighted in not realizing that by importing people from all the non-functional cultures (skin color does not matter, but CULTURE does and they are importing people from disfunctional third world cultures without the rule-of-law) they are also altering the American culture in a direction they will ultimately regret.

  118. Pics of Pelosi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just post a row of pictures of Pelosi along the border. The migrants will run away screaming.

  119. Here is the solution to stop illegal stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For illegals goods :
    1) Research the reason for drugs. They are mostly societal. Thus more helps are needed for the person most vulnerable
    2) that include new center for mental illness and better follow up on mentally ill persons, addiction, cheaper treatment, and far more importantly researching pain killing method which are not addictive/killing the way opiod are: e.g. research cannabinoid
    3) allow some of those drugs, to be sold like marijuannah, maybe even MDMA, to any consenting adult as long as manufcaturing process are checked, for bacteria/fungus/known composition/no mixing.
    4) some activities are more hit by drug usage : e.g. prostitute female and male are more drug abuser than non-prostitute. Make more counseilling, help people find different jobs, or stop fighting the prostitute themselves, or the john (fighting either make prostitute go underground which in both case make their life harder without making a fucking dent in the market). Allow bordels, with medical free survey for the prostitute, free education, gratis counseilling, etc...
    5) check that docs prescribe pain killer at a lower dosis, and survey their patient more on follow up. Especially for signs of addiction.
    6) stop imprisoning drug user dammit.

    I even have a solution For illegal immigration since we are onto walls :
    1) have all ICE officer stop arresting illegals.
    2) retrain those ICE officer to massively check people hiring illegals e.g. farming, contruction
    3) have huuuuuuge ;-) fines for people hiring illegals , such as , 1% of the firm earning (not profit) for that period per illegals 1% of the workforce, so if your workforce is 90% illegals over 3 years, you lose 90% of earning you reported for the last 3 years.
    4) long penalty for CEO / people at the top for hiring illegals. Minimum 5 years.
    5) make sure tricks can be detected , e.g. "we did not knew he was illegal he had some paper honest" e.g. may require to associate a photo with social security number. May be actually the most difficult steps.
    6) prepare for some huge protest from people seeing grocery, cleaning and building cost increase 10 fold or more.


    Any other solution is crap.

  120. Except such a wall is lousy by aepervius · · Score: 1

    For all practical intent and purpose unless you have somebody watching it hourly, you don't need much time or construction equipment to destroy such a wall or go under/over it , at least for the cost of construction cited (to make solid far more solid you would have to increase cost by a manifold). So you would need a lot of fuel/car or heli/personal to go over that border and check it very regularly, or have a huge electric surveillance of that wall. And even then you catch at best only 50% of illegals (half of illegals overstay legal entry, and only part of the other half is using coyote, some do use train/board/truck transportation). Walls are lousy when it comes to stop stuff. All places which had working "walls" have actually dead zone , sniper, mines to make it work (Korea even if it is not a wall is a good example of that, another famous example is east germany and the mines and dead zones, then there is Israel where they use a wall ONLY when they can't have a dead zone and armed people). There is no good example of a working wall "alone".

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  121. It is only 200 miles heavily patrolled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And it is in area which are easily accessible. In other word it isn't comparable to the rest of the border.

  122. he doesn't actually want to get the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not right now actually. If he wanted the money he would have worked on it hard right from taking office and certainly worked on getting it done before the mid-terms.

    What he wants to be able to do is go to the 2020 elections wringing his hands about how unfair it is that the deep state and evil democrats are keeping him from doing the will of his beloved base and that's why they should give him 4 more years.

    Because what he knows is even if he got the money over a year ago, it will take many years for the wall to be even remotely completed. Heck they may have to work on the planning and engineering stages for years. The imminent domain cases (95% of the land on the border is privately owned) could take many years, possibly decades to resolve entirely.

    So he was never going to be able to point at the wall and say "looky looky knuckledraggers, Pappa Trump brought it!" and listen to their slackjawed hoots of adulation. And that's all he cares about, how the publicity plays. So for him, NOT building the wall is the best publicity he'll get on a timeline that is useful to him.

    And of course the side benefit is that no doubt the vast majority of the money will go to construction and engineering firms that he has dealings with. As a tangent, I always scoffed at the idea of Trump as a political outsider. The industry that is possibly most closely aligned with politics and corruption is real estate development. He may not have been an elected politician, but he was always a politician and a crooked one at that.

  123. The ultimate wall by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 2

    Make it a felony to employ an illegal immigrant (and as a small business owner, I'd totally support this 100%). Require everyone including asylum seekers to declare at a legit port of entry and stay there on their side of the border in a secure facility waiting for their hearing. Anyone else gets kicked out and permanently banned. These simple legal changes would be way more effective than any physical barrier.

  124. wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you can pass tax cuts for wealthy when you have house and senate but not wall. shut the fuck up racist.

  125. No and no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The border wall problem is a made-up political issue. Immigration is down. Drug smuggling happens most often at legal ports of entry. Most illegal immigrants started here with legal visas but then overstayed their visas. The crime rate from illegal immigrants is lower than the crime rate among legal residents.

    So it would be more effective to put effort into inspecting vehicles, people, and containers at legal ports of entry and find and deport visa over-stayers rather than to keep obsessing over this stupid wall nonsense.

  126. Things that happen virtually.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....don't happen in reality.

    A virtual wall isn't.

  127. Re: When did this shutdown happen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They will eventually be paid. They aren't being paid right now. Don't be an ass. If your job missed paying you a check, and it looked likely that the next would be missed too, and you've got bills to pay.. you wouldn't be talking about how you're "getting paid"

  128. Better solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    \Build a minefield. We might have some exploding cattle and deer, but at least that can feed the stupid invading fucks flooding across the border. Consider it a humanitarian act.

    1. Re:Better solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or we could just poison the water depots liberals keep putting in Texas and Arizona. Put a sign on it in English saying that it's poison. If they can't read it, serves them right for trying to invade.

  129. Wish we'd debate immigration itself by LostMyAccount · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wish we would debate immigration itself and not get stuck in the weeds discussing walls, whether drugs or illegal immigrants come over the border frontier or airports and shipping containers, or whether they're all criminals, and all the other fringe elements of the debate.

    I think there are serious questions about the economic impact of high levels of impoverished immigrants. They burden school districts, local social welfare systems, low-income housing, etc. Does their very low wage employment, even in an ideal situation where they are W-2 workers, actually pay off their added economic burden, or are they actually subsidized, perhaps even for a long time -- like a generation. Or even longer, since we know that escaping poverty is hard.

    Our social welfare system does a very marginal job of serving US citizens, it seems unlikely to expand sufficiently to cover significant numbers of poor migrants and serve US citizens. This seems like a real issue to me.

    Then there are real questions about the US job market and corporate hiring policies for non-impoverished immigrants. Very few of them are "rock star" types, most of them are cheap filler for corporate jobs that actually seems to harm skilled US workers.

  130. Fuck government employees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The IRS seized my entire bank account over a payment being a few days late (payment was in the mail... got extra fees after the check bounced when the account was raped). Fuck them all

  131. Engineering and cost by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    The funny thing is that if the federal government announced a highway from San Diego to Laredo nobody would be batting an eye about the engineering, cost, or construction route (well, some environmentalists would, but they bitch about literally everything).
    Curiously, though, a wall is an ending financial/engineering challenge?

    --
    -Styopa
  132. Laser Beams motion IR sensors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Laser Beams motion IR sensors. Robots, drones. A dynamic barrier. Good tech for defense dept to test. Animals will adapt or not.

  133. Have Christo build the wall by DulcetTone · · Score: 1

    The Democrats should provide some funding for the wall, but stipulate that it be constructed of colorful, diaphanous material.

    Point made!

    --
    tone
  134. Re:Another lying Republican faggot? Throw on the p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $5,700,000 is too expensive to spend on a physical wall. Most analysts claim it would cost a minimum of $20,000,000 to $23,000,000 just for construction not to mention maintenance. There are better things we'd like to spend that much money on. The republicans just cut taxes but now they're wanting to increase spending. Don't you agree that's a problem? What ever happened to fiscal conservatives?

  135. Looks like the border patrol opposed the wall by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    right up until this month.

    That makes sense. There's only 2 outcomes for them and The Wall, neither of them good:

    1. Wall works, they're out of the job. And yes, the various private security Unions think about this. One of the big reasons we can't get marijuana decriminalized is the prison guard union campaigns heavily against it (which as a pro-Union lefty kinda breaks my mind, but such is reality).
    2. Wall doesn't work, we just wasted $25-$50 billion dollars and they look like idiots.

    So yeah, Wall is bad juju if you make your living catching illegals.

    What's interesting is the change. It's not like the two points above have gone away. If I had to guess the GOP promised their leadership something.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  136. Remembering the virtual fence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just remembering the last time a large virtual wall project was undertaken. Why do I suspect a similar headline might be in the future for a future wall project, whether virtual or physical?

    https://www.zdnet.com/article/boeing-virtual-fence-30-billion-failure/

  137. names.. names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    should the US*

    Both Mexico and the USA are American countries.

  138. Modest proposals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Dig a big-ass moat and stock it with alligators. Dump truckloads of male baby chicks fornerly mulched after hatching. Two birds with one stone.

    2. Grant permits to registered Republicans and NRAmembers to assassinate illegals. Kinda like duck season.

    3. Make living in USA economically and politicallt worse than the countries they from which they are emigrating... wait, thatone is actually happening.

  139. Canadian wall first! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Canadians are filling up expensive private hospital beds that rich Americansare are entitled to. Also, they are taking good-payung Hollywood and pro hockey jobs that rightfully belong to us. Plus a Canadian wall would be cheap, Just stack blocks of already available ice all along the 49th parallel, no problem.

  140. The Great Wall of Trump by SenseiTim · · Score: 1

    Some 800 years ago the Han Chinese built the Great Wall of China to keep out Genghis Khan and the Mongols. It was a thunderous failure--the Mongols simply rode their horses around it. The Great Wall of Trump will be equally ineffective.

    1. Re:The Great Wall of Trump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the Great Wall is pretty long, there's not much chance of riding around it. My understanding is that the Mongols either bribed the guards to get through, or they overwhelmed the defenders.

      During the time of the Great Khans the Mongols had enough numbers and cohesiveness to perform full-on frontal assaults. Even organized and forewarned Chinese armies weren't enough to stop the Mongols in their heyday. The Mongols conquered the Song dynasty in China and founded the Yuan dynasty.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_conquest_of_the_Song_dynasty

      Outside of the glory days of the Mongols, the Mongols were persistent raiders. It's likely that the wall prevented a lot of attacks and occasionally failed, just like any system. However you cannot overcome the reputational loss of the fall of the Song. Thus the Great Wall is chalked up as a failure.

  141. Re: When did this shutdown happen? by guruevi · · Score: 1

    Where in the constitution did that happen? ATC on private/state property (airports) should be handled private/state.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  142. The Big Trench by kackle · · Score: 1

    Since most of you guys are smart, I was wondering whether this would be a better idea: a very big, deep trench. Since it would at least slow people down, it could be monitored 24/7 by drones (way) overhead, where border police could deal with people trying to cross. It would be cheaper to make, I would think.

    1. Re: The Big Trench by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and we could flood the big trench. Maybe call it the river big river Grande, and sell Starbucks some ad space..

    2. Re: The Big Trench by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... that would be the Rio Venti, with soy, extra foam, and a flavor shot?

  143. Tunnels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just a reminder that the issue is that all the bad stuff can and is being trafficked under any wall.

  144. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    I hope he vetoes EVERY SINGLE BILL they pass until they get a 2/3rds majority or a rock-solid 15 foot concrete wall.

    Thank goodness they don't make 16-foot ladders.

    But I admit, the Maginot Line held the Germans at bay for nearly half an hour so it wasn't completely ineffective.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  145. Outsourcing the Wall to Mexico by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it would be cheaper to contract all these wannabe illegal border crossers to build the wall themselves, for a lower wage, than hiring US workers. Maintenance and patrolling can also be outsourced to Mexico

  146. Re: Mueller laughs last. by karmatic · · Score: 2, Informative

    Visa overstays are between 25 and 40 percent of illegal aliens in the US. Most come across the border illegally, hence the wall.

  147. Re: When did this shutdown happen? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 1

    Regardless of the legal/Constitutional issues, fact is that ATC workers are going unpaid for now. This is not a good thing.

  148. Yep, they come by plane. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep, they come by plane.

  149. Drumpftard traitor HANGS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    96% come by air, you don't know what you're blathering about Trumptard faggot and you will be raped to pieces while the Drumpftard traitor HANGS FROM HIS FAGGOT TRAITOR NECK.

  150. Re: When did this shutdown happen? by edris90 · · Score: 1

    Isn't there some kind of compromise that can be reached where when can you give the wall launchers some sort of symbolic gesture that helps them with their chronic psychological insecurity issues, it keeps their mental distress out of national policy? Should we be paying for therapist for the fearful instead of walls 2 reinforce their paranoia? It's a lot more proficient to treat and contain their paranoia, then to make country dance to the tune I'm paranoid incompetence. Drug dealers only a problem because there is no oversight due to their business being illegal. as soon as you prohibit something completely you lose all control over it. Because then it goes on your Ground. and we are just as many problems with us born citizens raping other us born citizens. You can't distinguish based on rape, because rape is common in any society of people. The more accurate the documentation the higher the reported incidence of rape. The actual occurrences of rape are just as stable as they ever were because it's a natural effect of allowing humans to exist. It's in conflict with our existing conscious morals, but still common to anywhere people exist

  151. Re: When did this shutdown happen? by guruevi · · Score: 0

    So they should walk out then. Force dems to pass a bill or remain stuck in Hawaii.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  152. build the wall by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or go and open up all the ports on your firewalls your fucking idiots.

  153. Virtual walls only keep out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...virtual Mexicans, stupid!

  154. Virtual wall tried, failed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    W and Obama tried a virtual fence project. A billion dollars was spent with boing and it was later cancelled as ineffective, insufficient and too costly.

    https://www.zdnet.com/article/boeing-virtual-fence-30-billion-failure/

    https://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/us/politics/15fence.html

  155. Pussy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have locks on my door. I do NOT use them. I also leave my keys in all my cars and in the summer the windows are usually down. Where the fuck do you live where you need to be so paranoid? I live in TN, home of the methhead and I ain't skeer'd. Grow a set of balls, ya bleeding vagina.

  156. Visa overstays are documented by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is the distinction between someone who crosses a border illegally.

    Also, it is easy to kick down a door or use a crowbar or smash a window or cut through a roof using an angle grinder... but we still have doors and windows and roofs.

  157. Re: Mueller laughs last. by tbannist · · Score: 2

    Your estimate appears to be low. According this fact check, around 40-45% of illegal immigrants were overstays during the 90s. There is no real current reporting on the source of illegal immigration right now, the department that previous published that report no longer exists. However, that was near the peak of illegal border crossings, they peaked in 2000, and since then border crossings have dropped by around 70% (they are now the lowest they have been since 1971), and it seems the best estimate is that around two thirds (or more) of new illegal immigrants are overstays.

    --
    Fanatically anti-fanatical
  158. Re:Mueller laughs last. by Shotgun · · Score: 1

    How do you know the comparative numbers? All you can possibly compare is the numbers that are caught. As usual, the Left promoting stinky brown statistics.

    --
    Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
    Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  159. Re:When did this shutdown happen? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    If you didn't read the news, you wouldn't know there is a federal shutdown.

    If you didn't read the news you also wouldn't know who is president, if we were at war with anyone, or if your favourite football team won the game last night (unless you happened to be at the game).

    That's why it's called the news.

    There is literally no impact on regular Americans outside of DC.

    And that is literally the dumbest and most ignorant statement I've seen on slashdot, and I browse at -1. Maybe you should actually read the news at some point. You'll see the affects of the shutdown are significant and go well beyond the people who have missed a paycheck right during peak credit card repayment season.