Why would you Oppose a wall on our Border? Lets find out.

That seems too low. In fact, it doesn't make sense that its not 100%! I don't see how opinion could change much when they're all doing the same job.

 

Of course they don't. It doesn't fit the agenda and it comes from those best suited to know what is actually going on so they ignore it. Look at this thread even. Left wingers were quoting the policies of border patrol union from a decade ago even though the leadership that has been in place for many years has explicitly rejected that old, archaic rhetoric. The left cannot win on this one. This is when they resort to lies, gross misrepresentations, and emotions. Facts no longer matter. When someone can come on a forum and claim that border policies that 9 out of 10 border agents support is wrong, immoral, and a waste of money you know these people are mentally ill. No other way around it.

 

There is always a nut or two in the crowd. Even that 10% know it's needed but they hate Trump so badly they can't bring themselves to admit it.

 

Even in an anonymous survey!

 

What was that that "old, archaic rhetoric?"

I haven't come across anyone on here who has shared wacky Pelosi's sentiment that it is "immoral", but have you?

 

Do you think it would be effective?

Well you're not actually being serious about the shooting people part are you?

 

Not enough to justify its construction.

Absolutely! That's where the part about people coming in to the U.S. illegally comes into play. It is a violation of U.S. law to come into our country by simply crossing our border. People who are not U.S. citizens who try and cross the border are not entitled to anything here. They are invading our nation and as foreign invaders we have a right and an obligation to shoot them.

 

Forget about its construction, just admit that it would be EFFECTIVE. You can say that it would be effective while at the same time saying that it shouldn't be built.

No human rights violations here?

 

I thought I did. I stated it would not be effective enough to justify being built. That indicates some effectiveness yet still maintains that I don't feel it is worth spending the money on.

Shooting foreign invaders is not a human rights violation it is national defense.

 

"Why would you Oppose a wall on our Border? Lets find out."

no one opposes walls on the border, what they oppose is a great wall of China across the entire border

 

the crack down on cocaine has switched most drug users to Crystal Meth as it can be made in the USA

if Americans want the drugs or alcohol, they will get them, the war on drugs has shown us that

 

We rescue our foreign invaders then give them full citizenship. That's how ****ing stupid we are!

 

What if it was free? Would its effectiveness increase?

Are you sure that it isn't only a defense matter if the invaders are armed and posing an imminent threat?

 

Most opposition to the wall comes from the fact that most immigration experts say that it won't have any real effect on illegal immigration. It would block the US-Mexican border, yes, but that wouldn't really do anything. It would still leave countless entry points open which are not along the border, and since these entry points are more scattered, it is harder to keep track of entries, and close them off. Some supporters claim that with a border wall in place more funding and manpower would be left to close off these other entry points, but that only works if no more funding is used to secure the wall. The wall itself would do nothing. It has to have hundreds, if not thousands of border agents to patrol it, and it would need millions of dollars a year for upkeep and repairs. Without a full staff of patrol agents, people could just climb over or dig under the wall in areas which are not fully patrolled, and we spend billions of dollars to build a useless wall. There isn't enough funding to allow both a wall to be fully manned and maintained, and for the entry points not along the border to be closed off. So, if we give Trump what he wants, we end up with Mexican and South American illegals simply coming into the country at points not along the border, and it would be harder to track them, let along stop them. Funding would also likely be taken away from battling human trafficking, one of the other main sources of illegal immigration (including forced immigration). In order to fully fund and man a border wall. while at the same time fully funding all other border security/national programs and requirements, we would have to raise the deficit drastically.

 

Who are these so called "immigration experts?"

Entry points such as what?

 

Perhaps if you read a legitimate newspaper you would see that millions did not bother to vote because they assumed Hillary was going to win. The proof of that is the number of people who voted in the mid term because they learn the lesson of not voting

 

Once you say that the mainstream media doesn’t know anything it lets me know that you are an extremist. Border agents are asking for more agents and for more technology. The Democrats are more than willing to do that. You would also learned that these same agents are aware that drugs are coming in through legitimate ways.

 

Airports! Canada

 

Denial is an ugly thing. Have you ever considered you may be part of the liberal progressive cult?

 

Yes I am in The cult of people who changed congress. I’m sure your believe that the millions more who voted for hillary are all part of a cult and of course all illegal immigrants the way trump told you. He insults your intelligence

 

Yes, I'm sure you are right. If it was free it would increase the effectiveness.
You are likely also correct that illegal immigrants don't pose any threat.

 

You mean you guys are the reason congress does not work and is very unpopular with the people?

 

Actually I am not a Republican. Most Americans are aware that the Republican Congress is the least effective

 

Maybe that is because they have not had as much control in Congress. Over the last 85 years the Democrats have controlled the House for 61 years and the Senate for 59 years.

Oh, and for good measures, over that 85 years the Democrats have also held the Presidency for 48 years.

 

The dems are not effective.