[tater]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Yes security is a good idea, but ineffective legislation and actions are not a good idea or a good way to spend tax revenue.

That is Arizona's choice.

Their taxpayers elected their state representatives who passed the bill a substantial majority of Arizonans wanted.

Why do you care, exactly?

Caps Lock strikes again, it was the federal law you were using as an example of just how effective enforcement was.
You cannot cite an example of how good the enforcement of immigration law is then suddenly change your mind because its not the law you thought it was.

Huh?

I said that any increase in enforcement is an increase in enforcement. The AZ law is very restrictive, but SOME perps will be asked, and some caught. Every one caught is one that would not have otherwise been caught. Perhaps they'll catch a guy like the man here in NM who was arrested a couple times, never deported, and went on to rape a 6 year old here in ABQ a few weeks ago. Stopping one violent crime would "pay for" the law IMO.

In short, the poorly enforced federal law catches X% of illegals in AZ now, and the new AZ law might catch Y% more. Under the nez AZ law, the feds will still catch some %, we'll call it Z%. If Y+Z > X, then the law is effective. If Y+Z=X (the State catches a few, but the feds catch fewer as a result) then the law is a wash. If Y+Z< X, then it is a failure.

As for "doing their jobs" resulting in a sealed border, yeah, there would always be SOME leakage, but it would require far more effort to get in. Given the fact that literally millions cross now, the number could be effectively zero if it was a priority. Simply walking across as it is easy to do now, should be impossible.

I live in a border State, I've been to the border, and if I lived on that border, I'd want a fence.

What has that got to do with the price of cheese?
Though if you want to explore that angle how many hundreds of recent incidents of armed men crossing the border happened, meaning of course Mexican and American border patrols accidentally crossing the line as it was discussed by your government and the Mexican government last week.

We are not equals. Mexico is our inferior as a nation. That Texas belongs to the US is proof, were we equals, the border would have moved back and forth (like the Rhineland, for example). It doesn't because the US is grossly more powerful. If they accidentally shoot our guys, they should be afraid. If we do it? <shrug> We apologize and move on.

I was not referring to border patrols, I was referring to armed mexican CRIMINALS. Drug smugglers, general criminals, coyotes, etc. Those are the armed men I refer to, not men in uniform. Ciudad Juarez (next to El Paso) is now the most violent city on Earth (and people thought it might be Baghdad, lol).

No the question I posed was about a very wide strip of land nearly 2000 miles long, which I am sure you can grasp is one hell of a lot of land.
A fence and a road alongside would be completely ineffective for what you proposed.

All you said was eminent domain. The fence is not a very wide strip of land. We're talking 40-50 yards wide for the doubled fence with a road in the middle type (others use less land).

Note that the feds already "own" the 60 feet north of the actual border anyway in most all cases.

Not seeing an issue here.