6 ms·

The good news is that there aren't a lot of illegal crossings to worry about at those absolutely inhospitable "passable by neither man nor mule" locations. That

The good news is that there aren't a lot of illegal crossings to worry about at those absolutely inhospitable "passable by neither man nor mule" locations. That means that they can be electronically monitored but otherwise more or less left alone while the focus can be on those areas where people absolutely can and regularly do cross.

jncfhnb 2y ago
Or they could be ignored entirely and resources could be diverted into more effective measures Do you see the nonsense of your own argument? You’re advocating for surveillance installations into a place that you think is easily ignored
- autoexec 2y ago
  I think passive surveillance with cameras in areas that are vulnerable to crossings but far less likely than other areas where we might want a stronger presence is extremely reasonable. Without them you have massive blind spots which can be taken advantage of as soon as people realize that attempting illegal entry through the easier areas which are being monitored is likely to result in failure but there are locations which aren't being monitored in any way. The expected response to making it harder for people to cross illegally in one area is that they will try another place to do it. Keeping an eye on those areas in the most cost effective way possible is the ideal. Keep in mind that the people illegally crossing today are mostly looking for higher paying work and citizenship for their children. Still they've already demonstrated that they can be very determined. The people crossing illegally tomorrow will be much more desperate and looking to survive. Intentionally leaving yourself blind to huge areas to save a few bucks on cameras is basically setting out a welcome mat.
  - jncfhnb 2y ago
    The welcome mat is not the lack of cameras on a barren deathscape of desert. The welcome mat is the understaffed border control ports of entry where the majority of problems arise. Cameras in the desert address only the uninformed fantasy of how illegal immigration works.
    - autoexec 2y ago
      I'd agree that the lack of adequate enforcement at ports of entry is a major part of the problem and it would be good to correct that as well.

jncfhnb 2y ago

Or they could be ignored entirely and resources could be diverted into more effective measures Do you see the nonsense of your own argument? You’re advocating for surveillance installations into a place that you think is easily ignored

autoexec 2y ago
I think passive surveillance with cameras in areas that are vulnerable to crossings but far less likely than other areas where we might want a stronger presence is extremely reasonable. Without them you have massive blind spots which can be taken advantage of as soon as people realize that attempting illegal entry through the easier areas which are being monitored is likely to result in failure but there are locations which aren't being monitored in any way. The expected response to making it harder for people to cross illegally in one area is that they will try another place to do it. Keeping an eye on those areas in the most cost effective way possible is the ideal. Keep in mind that the people illegally crossing today are mostly looking for higher paying work and citizenship for their children. Still they've already demonstrated that they can be very determined. The people crossing illegally tomorrow will be much more desperate and looking to survive. Intentionally leaving yourself blind to huge areas to save a few bucks on cameras is basically setting out a welcome mat.
- jncfhnb 2y ago
  The welcome mat is not the lack of cameras on a barren deathscape of desert. The welcome mat is the understaffed border control ports of entry where the majority of problems arise. Cameras in the desert address only the uninformed fantasy of how illegal immigration works.
  - autoexec 2y ago
    I'd agree that the lack of adequate enforcement at ports of entry is a major part of the problem and it would be good to correct that as well.