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.

10 of 462 comments (clear)

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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 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.
  6. 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?

  7. 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.

  8. 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/
  9. 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.