3 ms·
That's a conflict of interest if there ever were one. If you are paid to catch violators, you want more violators. Also, you're conflating "illegal immigrants"
by tropo 8y ago
That's a conflict of interest if there ever were one. If you are paid to catch violators, you want more violators.
Also, you're conflating "illegal immigrants" with "immigrant populations". When mentioning crime, you suddenly switch to discussing a group of people who have patiently followed the immigration law and paid all the fees.
- asdff 8y agoThink about the mechanics of how a wall might even work, the logic isn't really there to even invest in it. The only way a wall would be a practical deterrent would be if someone didn't even know it was there. One rope and you are on the other side. You'd still need border patrol to monitor the wall just like if there wasn't one. On top of that, the landscape is wide. Wouldn't it be far far cheaper to just fly a drone, maybe even with AI, and scan miles of desert at a time for anything that isn't miles of desert, and have a border patrol agent show up with a pickup truck? Because wall or not, you are gonna have to fly a drone or have that same border patrol agent cover the same area anyway to see if there's anyone crossing that stretch of desert to begin with. For illegal immigrants vs. native born population, it still holds true that the immigrant population has a lower crime rate (1). 1. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/trump-border-crisis-reality.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/11/us/politics/t...