Better Solution For Border Security

[tazhorn 139]

We have an interstate that runs the length of the country in the South and Southwest from coast to coast.  Interstate 10.  Put a port of entry/ exit with law enforcement, scanners, drug dogs, facial recognition software on every highway that feeds into I10 from California to Texas...Also put them at strategic points along I10...Build a barrier/ smart wall in remote areas outside the cities and towns along I10 where needed...Im not saying forfeit the US soil south of I10 to Mexico.  Keep the historic border, and those citizens south of I10 would still have the protection of our border patrol, law enforcement, military, etc...The citizens South of I10  could still come and go freely through ports of entry/ exit along I10...Im also not saying block off every single exit on I10 with a barrier or put law enforcement at every single exit.  Obviously, you wouldnt want to do that in or around cities or towns....Im saying funnel all traffic that gets on or off I10 to a controlled port of entry/ exit  at some point where their is scanners, law enforcement, facial recognition, software,  etc...Why waste time building walls in remote areas that are hard to access? 

The benefits of this I see is we could deport criminals that are here illegaly and keep them from re-entering 90 plus percent of the country with the facial recognition software, scanners, etc...We could make it extremely difficult for the drug traffickers/ human smugglers to smuggle drugs and people north of I10..The government already owns the land around I10 and the highways that feed in and out of it, way less eminent domain issues...We would have way more control over who we allow into 90 plus percent of our country from the South.  No, Im not saying we should block asylum seekers from coming into the country, but we do need a better way to stop the flow of illegal drugs...

Edited February 2, 2019 by tazhorn

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Legalize drugs.  Invest in education and treatment facilities.

[tazhorn 139]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Legalize drugs.  Invest in education and treatment facilities.

Legalize all drugs?  

[Nice Guy Eddie 13411]

Is there actually a problem with the current solution?  

And I’m not saying that the current system is perfect. Zero systems are perfect but it’s also a fools errand to chase perfect.

[Junior Miller 1502]

13 minutes ago, tazhorn said:

We have an interstate that runs the length of the country in the South and Southwest from coast to coast.  Interstate 10.  Put a port of entry/ exit with law enforcement, scanners, drug dogs, facial recognition software on every highway that feeds into I10 from California to Texas...Also put them at strategic points along I10...Build a barrier/ smart wall in remote areas outside the cities and towns along I10 where needed...Im not saying forfeit the US soil south of I10 to Mexico.  Keep the historic border, and those citizens south of I10 would still have the protection of our border patrol, law enforcement, military, etc...The citizens South of I10  could still come and go freely through ports of entry/ exit along I10...Im also not saying block off every single exit on I10 with a barrier or put law enforcement at every single exit.  Obviously, you wouldnt want to do that in or around cities or towns....Im saying funnel all traffic that gets on or off I10 to a controlled port of entry/ exit  at some point where their is scanners, law enforcement, facial recognition, software,  etc...Why waste time building walls in remote areas that are hard to access? 

The benefits of this I see is we could deport criminals that are here illegaly and keep them from re-entering 90 plus percent of the country with the facial recognition software, scanners, etc...We could make it extremely difficult for the drug traffickers/ human smugglers to smuggle drugs and people north of I10..The government already owns the land around I10 and the highways that feed in and out of it, way less eminent domain issues...We would have way more control over who we allow into 90 plus percent of our country from the South.  No, Im not saying we should block asylum seekers from coming into the country, but we do need a better way to stop the flow of illegal drugs...

Except the feds make deals with certain cartels to allow drugs to come in exchange for information/help on other issues. 

Until you clean out Washington corruption nothing else will matter. 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11809]

9 minutes ago, tazhorn said:

Legalize all drugs?  

Possibly.  Don’t rule it out.  Don’t forget they were all legal ~100 years ago.   Some legalization and a smart guest worker program would reduce amnesty claims substantially, take tons of pressure off border and customs enforcement so that they could focus on real criminals and hard drugs.  Would also save shitloads of money and increase tax revenues.  Why don’t we do that? 

[tazhorn 139]

15 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Is there actually a problem with the current solution?  

And I’m not saying that the current system is perfect. Zero systems are perfect but it’s also a fools errand to chase perfect.

What is the current solution?  It changes with every single  President.  Im just saying we have an obvious easier way to control illegal immigration and drug smuggling to most of the country than the pipe dream of building a wall on the entire border with Mexico.  No solution is perfect for sure...

Edited February 2, 2019 by tazhorn

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

2 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Would also save shitloads of money and increase tax revenues.  Why don’t we do that? 

Have you seen the size of our prison industrial complex? 

How would Big Pharma feel if we tripled their competition overnight?

What about all the lawyers that prosecute and defend drug cases?  

Imagine all the wealth the population would retain if drugs were legal.

[tazhorn 139]

8 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

Possibly.  Don’t rule it out.  Don’t forget they were all legal ~100 years ago.   Some legalization and a smart guest worker program would reduce amnesty claims substantially, take tons of pressure off border and customs enforcement so that they could focus on real criminals and hard drugs.  Would also save shitloads of money and increase tax revenues.  Why don’t we do that? 

If you want to legalize Marijuana, sure I guess I could see that, and it would hurt the cartels for sure as they make a ton of money off of it...I just think it is dangerous to legalize the harder drugs....

[scottsins 1953]

Is the solution in the OP to just have guarded points of entry? I feel like i have seen that approach before.

[tazhorn 139]

1 hour ago, scottsins said:

Is the solution in the OP to just have guarded points of entry? I feel like i have seen that approach before.

Yes,  guarded/ high tech points of entry on all the state highways on and off I10 and strategically placed checkpoints on I10... Plus a smart wall/ barriers along I10 in remote areas  outside the cities and towns on I10 where needed...California through Texas.

Have you seen thousands of eyes going up and down an interstate day and night also watching the border before?

Edited February 3, 2019 by tazhorn

[Dahobbs 17444]

4 hours ago, tazhorn said:

If you want to legalize Marijuana, sure I guess I could see that, and it would hurt the cartels for sure as they make a ton of money off of it...I just think it is dangerous to legalize the harder drugs....

Possession of drugs for personal use should never have been made illegal. Totally pointless. Regulate the sale and distribution of drugs, yes. But personal use should be entirely legal. It isn't like the illegality of heroin is what keeps people from using it. 

[TexArcher 37508]

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Legalize drugs.  Invest in education and treatment facilities.

Sounds like one a them socialist northern Euro hellholes that we beat at everything but education, healthcare, quality of life, poverty rate, incarceration rate, murder rate, and overall mental health.  No thanks, this is America, buddy!

[tazhorn 139]

1 hour ago, scottsins said:

Is the solution in the OP to just have guarded points of entry? I feel like i have seen that approach before.

Basically make a pseudo hardcore border at I10, and still keep the US soil south of I10.  Those people south of I10 would still be our citizens and cities and towns south of I10 to the Mexico border would still be protected by our laws and government institutions...

Edited February 3, 2019 by tazhorn

[hobbes2702 12804]

5 hours ago, tazhorn said:

Legalize all drugs?  

Yes

[The People’s Elbow 707]

5 hours ago, tazhorn said:

What is the current solution?  It changes with every single  President.  Im just saying we have an obvious easier way to control illegal immigration and drug smuggling to most of the country than the pipe dream of building a wall on the entire border with Mexico.  No solution is perfect for sure...

What’s the current problem? Please expound with evidence. 

[hpslugga 4044]

6 hours ago, tazhorn said:

I just think it is dangerous to legalize the harder drugs

Based on what?

[tazhorn 139]

49 minutes ago, The People’s Elbow said:

What’s the current problem? Please expound with evidence. 

 

The current problem is building a border wall the entire length of the US border with Mexico in uneasily accessible places is a pipe dream. Not to mention all the eminent domain lawsuits would last for years.

The evidence would be a person like El Chapo, the biggest drug dealer the world has ever known...How do you stop a person like that who uses tunnels to smuggle instead of coming through common ports of entry like El Paso?  Don't make it easy for them to transport the drugs once they get within the interior US...

It is not a perfect solutuon, I know this.   The positives I see, it's easier than trying to build, control,  and maintain a border wall in remote areas of the desert.  Also, making a pseudo border at I10 would not have as huge an impact on ranchers and the environment..

Edited February 3, 2019 by tazhorn

[scottsins 1953]

Just wanted to note that the OP is proposing that we enhance border security, but make the border security exist on I-10, instead of just adding/improving stuff at the actual...border.

Also, he quoted a post by me twice and made two similar replies to it. Either mentally ill or troll.

[tazhorn 139]

6 minutes ago, scottsins said:

Just wanted to note that the OP is proposing that we enhance border security, but make the border security exist on I-10, instead of just adding/improving stuff at the actual...border.

Also, he quoted a post by me twice and made two similar replies to it. Either mentally ill or troll.

Someone you disagree with is either mentally ill or a troll? 

[scottsins 1953]

Also, fuck the entire idea of me being in East Texas and being forced to show my citizenship papers to pass through to get on the highway.

Seriously. That’s not even remotely acceptable.

[tazhorn 139]

13 minutes ago, scottsins said:

Also, fuck the entire idea of me being in East Texas and being forced to show my citizenship papers to pass through to get on the highway.

Seriously. That’s not even remotely acceptable.

Have you ever lived near a toll road?  They have an express pass type device you keep in your vehicle that gets scanned each time you get on the road.  Why would you have to carry citizenship papers around?  If Xray technology keeps improving for scanning vehicles, you will barely even have to slow down at a port of entry or checkpoint...It would be impossible to stop and question everyone...

[Helobious 9480]

17 minutes ago, scottsins said:

Also, fuck the entire idea of me being in East Texas and being forced to show my citizenship papers to pass through to get on the highway.

Seriously. That’s not even remotely acceptable.

You usually don't have to show papers, but on every highway out of the valley and Laredo there's an inland checkpoint where you have to stop and declare if you're an American citizen or not. Been that way for over 30 years at least I think.

If it's acceptable to do it to us it should be acceptable to do it to others.  

 

[Hornius Emeritus 12419]

Y'all are being trolled.

[Anastasis 23394]

This tread is proof that the war on drugs failed. 

[Spankytoes 1736]

8 hours ago, tazhorn said:

If you want to legalize Marijuana, sure I guess I could see that, and it would hurt the cartels for sure as they make a ton of money off of it...I just think it is dangerous to legalize the harder drugs....

Do you think heroin and cocaine being illegal is a deterrent for those that want to use it? 

[F250 28682]

24 minutes ago, Helobious said:

You usually don't have to show papers, but on every highway out of the valley and Laredo there's an inland checkpoint where you have to stop and declare if you're an American citizen or not. Been that way for over 30 years at least I think.

If it's acceptable to do it to us it should be acceptable to do it to others.  

 

I believe the checkpoints are limited to areas within 100 miles of the border which is why it's acceptable to have them on I-35 outside of Laredo and not on I-10 outside of Kerrville.

 

[tazhorn 139]

11 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

Do you think heroin and cocaine being illegal is a deterrent for those that want to use it? 

Not really...It's  just like guns.  You could make them illegal, but the crimjnals would still get them I suppose...I guess I just dont see the positives in legalizing hard drugs.  If the fact that they are illegal and their are legal consequences for using them is enough to scare some people from using them and ruining their lives, isn't that a positive?

[The People’s Elbow 707]

2 hours ago, tazhorn said:

 

The current problem is building a border wall the entire length of the US border with Mexico in uneasily accessible places is a pipe dream. Not to mention all the eminent domain lawsuits would last for years.

The evidence would be a person like El Chapo, the biggest drug dealer the world has ever known...How do you stop a person like that who uses tunnels to smuggle instead of coming through common ports of entry like El Paso?  Don't make it easy for them to transport the drugs once they get within the interior US...

It is not a perfect solutuon, I know this.   The positives I see, it's easier than trying to build, control,  and maintain a border wall in remote areas of the desert.  Also, making a pseudo border at I10 would not have as huge an impact on ranchers and the environment..

You’re discussing a problem with the solution. That wasn’t the ask. I want you to make a case beyond a shadow of a doubt using historical and empirical data there’s a problem at the border.

[tazhorn 139]

7 minutes ago, The People’s Elbow said:

You’re discussing a problem with the solution. That wasn’t the ask. I want you to make a case beyond a shadow of a doubt using historical and empirical data there’s a problem at the border.

People like El Chapo smuggling enough illegal drugs  to sink an aircraft carrier into our country over many years wasn't a big enough problem for you to say their is a problem at our border?  That's not historical evidence?  

I guess I don't understand what you are asking...

[hpslugga 4044]

El Chapo and his ilk couldn’t exist if drugs were legal. I don’t think you understand what horrible effects that hideous drug war has had over the years, but it’s not inconsiderable. To assume that criminalizing them has had any positive effect whatsoever is an exercise in Make Believe. As has been said many times before, drugs are a health concern and not a legal one. 

Edited February 3, 2019 by hpslugga

[HOOK'EMHOOAH 1606]

9 hours ago, tazhorn said:

Legalize all drugs?  

Yes. Legalization means it can be regulated and people dont have to import substances from outside the country to do what they are going to do anyway. This cuts down on crime within the country because things someone does privately wouldn't be illegal thus not subject to legal prosecution anymore. Furthermore, it kills the revenue for the cartels outside the country where we have no jurisdiction. Lastly, taxation of dispensaries would be a huge revenue boost to that can enable tax cuts elsewhere.

[tazhorn 139]

23 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

El Chapo and his ilk couldn’t exist if drugs were legal. I don’t think you understand what horrible effects that hideous drug war has had over the years, but it’s not inconsiderable. To assume that criminalizing them has had any positive effect whatsoever is an exercise in Make Believe. As has been said many times before, drugs are a health concern and not a legal one. 

You think legalizing very addictive hard drugs and selling them here at higher prices than the average junky could afford  over time so we could tax them is going to stop Cartels in Mexico and elsewhere from growing and selling them cheaper here? 

Their could be better ways to handle the legal concerns...Our jails are probably overloaded with people that didnt really  harm anyone but themselves and people close to them with their own personal drug use...

[Helobious 9480]

1 hour ago, F250 said:

I believe the checkpoints are limited to areas within 100 miles of the border which is why it's acceptable to have them on I-35 outside of Laredo and not on I-10 outside of Kerrville.

 

I know that's the law, I just don't understand it. Why is it ok to stop US citizens in a certain part of the country in order to find illegal immigrants? Why stop there? Why not set up checkpoints on highways in other parts of the country and look for people with active warrants, drugs, or stolen vehicles? 

[hpslugga 4044]

2 minutes ago, tazhorn said:

You think legalizing very addictive hard drugs and selling them here at higher prices than the average junky could afford  over time so we could tax them is going to stop Cartels in Mexico and elsewhere from growing and selling them cheaper here? 

Their could be better ways to handle the legal concerns...Our jails are probably overloaded with people that didnt really  harm anyone but themselves and people close to them with their own personal drug use...

It depends on how steeply it’s taxed. People who use drugs know that lifestyle is fucking dangerous as hell and they’d much rather get their junk from some sort of legal dispensary than from some shady black market people, and that’s especially true of the crack/heroin/PCP crowd. Why else do you think the black market for alcohol is a relative non-entity here?

[tazhorn 139]

4 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

It depends on how steeply it’s taxed. People who use drugs know that lifestyle is fucking dangerous as hell and they’d much rather get their junk from some sort of legal dispensary than from some shady black market people, and that’s especially true of the crack/heroin/PCP crowd. Why else do you think the black market for alcohol is a relative non-entity here?

I can see that...I never understood how people could put something that harmful in their body made by some very evil people that are not regulated in any way....I just don't think our country could make the drugs near as cheap as these other countries, and we would still have a drug smuggling problem, maybe not as bad as what we currently have..

[Mole 4320]

1 hour ago, The People’s Elbow said:

You’re discussing a problem with the solution. That wasn’t the ask. I want you to make a case beyond a shadow of a doubt using historical and empirical data there’s a problem at the border.

1

Nominalization is the worst.

[tazhorn 139]

49 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

It depends on how steeply it’s taxed. People who use drugs know that lifestyle is fucking dangerous as hell and they’d much rather get their junk from some sort of legal dispensary than from some shady black market people, and that’s especially true of the crack/heroin/PCP crowd. Why else do you think the black market for alcohol is a relative non-entity here?

If you really want to hurt the cartels, then legalize marijuana everywhere.  They make a boatload of money off of that...That is a drug we could easily get to the right price point to really hurt them and could be sold like tobacco in every corner store.

Edited February 3, 2019 by tazhorn

[F250 28682]

56 minutes ago, Helobious said:

I know that's the law, I just don't understand it. Why is it ok to stop US citizens in a certain part of the country in order to find illegal immigrants? Why stop there? Why not set up checkpoints on highways in other parts of the country and look for people with active warrants, drugs, or stolen vehicles? 

The 4th amendment, bro. Apparently SCOTUS thought border checks are reasonable to do it at or near the border.

[GotThatFire 166]

Most effective? A physical and "smart technology" wall. At the same time. 

Legal drugs would be acceptable as well. 

[thrillhammer 683]

On 2/2/2019 at 2:42 PM, tazhorn said:

We have an interstate that runs the length of the country in the South and Southwest from coast to coast.  Interstate 10.  Put a port of entry/ exit with law enforcement, scanners, drug dogs, facial recognition software on every highway that feeds into I10 from California to Texas...Also put them at strategic points along I10...Build a barrier/ smart wall in remote areas outside the cities and towns along I10 where needed...Im not saying forfeit the US soil south of I10 to Mexico.  Keep the historic border, and those citizens south of I10 would still have the protection of our border patrol, law enforcement, military, etc...The citizens South of I10  could still come and go freely through ports of entry/ exit along I10...Im also not saying block off every single exit on I10 with a barrier or put law enforcement at every single exit.  Obviously, you wouldnt want to do that in or around cities or towns....Im saying funnel all traffic that gets on or off I10 to a controlled port of entry/ exit  at some point where their is scanners, law enforcement, facial recognition, software,  etc...Why waste time building walls in remote areas that are hard to access? 

The benefits of this I see is we could deport criminals that are here illegaly and keep them from re-entering 90 plus percent of the country with the facial recognition software, scanners, etc...We could make it extremely difficult for the drug traffickers/ human smugglers to smuggle drugs and people north of I10..The government already owns the land around I10 and the highways that feed in and out of it, way less eminent domain issues...We would have way more control over who we allow into 90 plus percent of our country from the South.  No, Im not saying we should block asylum seekers from coming into the country, but we do need a better way to stop the flow of illegal drugs...

can i still go 80 on it?  it sounds like it's going to take me longer to get to santa fe now, so i vote no on this.  

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

On 2/3/2019 at 3:11 AM, F250 said:

The 4th amendment, bro. Apparently SCOTUS thought border checks are reasonable to do it at or near the border.

Go figure....  who'd have thought that most illegal immigrants cross at................wait for it .....  borders !!

[tazhorn 139]

5 hours ago, thrillhammer said:

can i still go 80 on it?  it sounds like it's going to take me longer to get to santa fe now, so i vote no on this.  

Sure, why not?  The hardcore check points would be strategically placed outside cities/ towns on any Highway/ Interstate coming into I10 from the South.  Once people are on I10 you dont need a bunch of checkpoints. To get North they have to exit somewhere to get on one of the Highways or Interstates going North so you strategically place 1 checkpoint on each of those Highways and Interstates also outside the Cities/ towns on the North side of I10..On I10 itself,  you only need them maybe just near state lines like they are now.  As technology improves, the whole process of going through the checkpoints would get faster and better.

Edited February 4, 2019 by tazhorn

[SquishMitten 10400]

OPs proposed solution could be better analogized by looking at air travel. The security isn’t at the physical border, but rather where the vast majority of air travel starts/ends. Obviously not as simple or consolidated as airports, but it seems like a better investment than a wall (at least in theory).

[Longhorn_Fan68 33841]

stack the corpses of all the supposed aborted fetuses. make them climb over piles of dead babies. that'll learn 'em.

[High Plains Drifter 10974]

 

On 2/2/2019 at 2:42 PM, tazhorn said:

We have an interstate that runs the length of the country in the South and Southwest from coast to coast.  Interstate 10.  Put a port of entry/ exit with law enforcement, scanners, drug dogs, facial recognition software on every highway that feeds into I10 from California to Texas...Also put them at strategic points along I10...Build a barrier/ smart wall in remote areas outside the cities and towns along I10 where needed...Im not saying forfeit the US soil south of I10 to Mexico.  Keep the historic border, and those citizens south of I10 would still have the protection of our border patrol, law enforcement, military, etc...The citizens South of I10  could still come and go freely through ports of entry/ exit along I10...Im also not saying block off every single exit on I10 with a barrier or put law enforcement at every single exit.  Obviously, you wouldnt want to do that in or around cities or towns....Im saying funnel all traffic that gets on or off I10 to a controlled port of entry/ exit  at some point where their is scanners, law enforcement, facial recognition, software,  etc...Why waste time building walls in remote areas that are hard to access? 

The benefits of this I see is we could deport criminals that are here illegaly and keep them from re-entering 90 plus percent of the country with the facial recognition software, scanners, etc...We could make it extremely difficult for the drug traffickers/ human smugglers to smuggle drugs and people north of I10..The government already owns the land around I10 and the highways that feed in and out of it, way less eminent domain issues...We would have way more control over who we allow into 90 plus percent of our country from the South.  No, Im not saying we should block asylum seekers from coming into the country, but we do need a better way to stop the flow of illegal drugs...

 

So basically create a Constitution-free zone south of I-10, instead of the Constitution-free zone we now have south of I-10 in some places, south of HW 90 in others. Brilliant!

 

On 2/2/2019 at 11:29 PM, Anastasis said:

This thread is proof that the war on drugs public education failed OP. 

fixy.

Edited February 4, 2019 by High Plains Drifter
mult quote failure

[tazhorn 139]

5 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

 

So basically create a Constitution-free zone south of I-10, instead of the Constitution-free zone we now have south of I-10 in some places, south of HW 90 in others. Brilliant!

 

fixy.

No.  All people south of I10 to the Mexico border that are in the country legally would still be US citizens subject to our protection and law...Ive said that like a hundred times now.  They could freely come and go into the interiror US North of I10 through a lawful port of entry/ exit....What would change for them?  They have to go through one checkpoint to get to I10?  If you live in any of the cities or towns on I10 already, you wouldn't go through a checkpoint at all to get on or off I10, only if you exited I10 to go north or south outside the city or town...

[F250 28682]

7 minutes ago, tazhorn said:

No.  All people south of I10 to the Mexico border that are in the country legally would still be US citizens subject to our protection and law...Ive said that like a hundred times now.  They could freely come and go into the interiror US North of I10 through a lawful port of entry/ exit....What would change for them?  They have to go through one checkpoint to get to I10?  If you live in any of the cities or towns on I10 already, you wouldn't go through a checkpoint at all to get on or off I10, only if you exited I10 to go north or south outside the city or town...

He is referring to the 4th Amendment. Making American citizens go through checkpoints to travel between cities and towns is unconstitutional.

Do you have any idea how many people traverse I-10 on a daily basis? The commute between San Antonio and Houston is bad as it is, I can't imagine the shit show it would be if everyone had to funnel through checkpoints?

This idea is ass.

[gmr548 16504]

On 2/2/2019 at 7:30 PM, tazhorn said:

Yes,  guarded/ high tech points of entry on all the state highways on and off I10 and strategically placed checkpoints on I10... Plus a smart wall/ barriers along I10 in remote areas  outside the cities and towns on I10 where needed...California through Texas.

Have you seen thousands of eyes going up and down an interstate day and night also watching the border before?

I could get behind this just to watch what happens at the Galleria during rush hour

[gmr548 16504]

On 2/2/2019 at 2:57 PM, tazhorn said:

Legalize all drugs?  

It would instantly stop the flow of illegal drugs.