Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

[WheelieAddict]

If Mexico pays for it as promised I am fine with it. Looks to be that was bs and it is more republican big govt deficit spending though.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Back on topic...
We should be building barriers with new technologies such as drones, electronic monitoring, smart fencing. Walls were great 5,000 years ago but they will be no match for the technologies of the future.

So what's wrong with a wall AND technology?

When you build a wall it will be there for a hundred years.

Why do you think the Democrats are so scared to death of a wall they are even willing to shutdown the government?

Yes, we could add technology to the cost of the wall and we it could be upgraded as new technology becomes available but adding 5 feet to the top or the foundation of a 1000 mile wall is another story.

My point is that we are not living in stagnation. More Mexicans are returning to Mexico than arriving. This trend started over 10 years ago and seems to be accelerating. The problems in the northern triangle are responsible for the large number of Central Americans arriving in the US. There have been proposals from both sides to increase aid and provide US personal to assist in clearing out the drug cartels and gangs that have made life a living hell for the people. Lastly, immigration reform is far from dead. It can't happen with Republican control of government but certain can and will happen with Democrat control. Even if democrats only control one House of congress, we can still get immigration reform because many republicans agree with democrats on a number of immigration issues. These changes will dramatically reduce illegal immigration without spending tens of billions of dollars on a wall, taking property away from hundreds of land owners, destruction of a fragile environment, and a sending a message to the world that the United States seeks to isolate itself by hiding behind a wall.

It is not the wall democrats fear. It is what it represents, isolationism and the victory of hate and racism over reason.

So they have you brainwashed too.......a damn shame.

Racism is what Democrats have used for many years to get their way. It has nothing to do with racism. This isn't a race issue. If it were Canadians or Europeans attacking our country, we would feel the same way. We don't need more uneducated diseased unskilled people in our country no matter who they are.

And what immigration reform do we need? There is nothing wrong with our immigration system now. Do you know what immigration reform means? It means surrendering to those who can't easily get in now.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You've admitted to being on drugs for what you think is a behavioral issue;

I did? When? Show me one post where I said I take drugs for behavior issues. I never wrote that. You are just listening to voices in your head.

you've admitted that you like to drink beer.

Yes I did. So what?

When the liberals get through, you will not be allowed to own a firearm - and possibly your own avatar will be your worst enemy.

How are they going to do that? They don't have nearly enough people to amend the Constitution.

What counts is what a person is doing today - and what they have been doing in the recent past. If you're saying people cannot be rehabilitated, then we should keep them locked up forever. What you're promoting is plain out stupidity.

What I am saying is that once you are a criminal, the people who deal with you have the right to know that.

A person gets a criminal record. They are locked out of society. The Americans who committed a crime are unemployable. A foreigner comes in and works the job the Americans get locked out of and you're unhappy. I propose to put those Americans back to work and you fight me tooth and nail. You are only consistent with inconsistency. And you're not going to appreciate what I've said to you until it's your ass that is on the chopping block.

If you don't want your ass on a chopping block, then don't be a criminal.

I am against all immigration. However I am not for employers being forced to hire anybody. I am not for hiding criminal records from employers, local governments or even landlords.

 

[Thinker101]

Thank you President Trump, thank you Democrats.

 

[oreo]

According to Trump--we're no longer talking about a WALL it's down to steel slats. Of course this is G.W. Bush's design that he installed on 700 miles of the border---

Trump now describes his border wall as "steel slats" - WDEF

Very easily compromised as this video shows.


And let's not forget about those tunnels

They have found 240 of these in the San Diego region alone, and they know there's more that they haven't found.

So House Republicans put on their last Hoorah yesterday by passing a bill that included 5.1 billion for the WAAAAALLL. Of course this is dead on arrival in the Senate. Republicans had a full house over the last 2 years, and all of a sudden up pops this bill as they're making their exit out of the back door. 5.7 BILLION is the equivalent of teaspoon of water thrown on a bonfire, as the wall would cost 47 BILLION dollars.

So up comes the steel slats. Democrats have stated they want more border security but want to use HIGH TECH to secure the border, stating that border patrol and border experts have told them it would work better than walls & fences. It would be much more effective and efficient for the above reasons. It's true. Anything they can see, can and will ALWAYS be compromised, something they can't see won't even be attempted.

So we will see who is more interested in border security. I imagine the Ass Clown--will turn down the HIGH TECH option and go with his POS wall (I mean slats now) and shut down the government over it.

 

[francoHFW]

The wall is stupid and will not work and is unamerican.

For the first time that I know of, I agree with you franco. I don't believe you, but I agree with you.

I never lie and I am always right. How do you mean you don't believe me LOL?

You sound just like your mentor in the White House.

I am pure Democrat old Bean
...

Back on topic...
We should be building barriers with new technologies such as drones, electronic monitoring, smart fencing. Walls were great 5,000 years ago but they will be no match for the technologies of the future.

So what's wrong with a wall AND technology?

When you build a wall it will be there for a hundred years.

Why do you think the Democrats are so scared to death of a wall they are even willing to shutdown the government?

Yes, we could add technology to the cost of the wall and we it could be upgraded as new technology becomes available but adding 5 feet to the top or the foundation of a 1000 mile wall is another story.

My point is that we are not living in stagnation. More Mexicans are returning to Mexico than arriving. This trend started over 10 years ago and seems to be accelerating. The problems in the northern triangle are responsible for the large number of Central Americans arriving in the US. There have been proposals from both sides to increase aid and provide US personal to assist in clearing out the drug cartels and gangs that have made life a living hell for the people. Lastly, immigration reform is far from dead. It can't happen with Republican control of government but certain can and will happen with Democrat control. Even if democrats only control one House of congress, we can still get immigration reform because many republicans agree with democrats on a number of immigration issues. These changes will dramatically reduce illegal immigration without spending tens of billions of dollars on a wall, taking property away from hundreds of land owners, destruction of a fragile environment, and a sending a message to the world that the United States seeks to isolate itself by hiding behind a wall.

It is not the wall democrats fear. It is what it represents, isolationism and the victory of hate and racism over reason.

So they have you brainwashed too.......a damn shame.

Racism is what Democrats have used for many years to get their way. It has nothing to do with racism. This isn't a race issue. If it were Canadians or Europeans attacking our country, we would feel the same way. We don't need more uneducated diseased unskilled people in our country no matter who they are.

And what immigration reform do we need? There is nothing wrong with our immigration system now. Do you know what immigration reform means? It means surrendering to those who can't easily get in now.

Brainwashing needs lying to be called brainwashing, super duper. The whole world of real journalism and law enforcement agrees with Democrats facts, not the garbage your high school grad ex cokehead DJ's parrot. Not a single one of your phony scandals has reached that world either.
We need a good ID card like every other modern country that has the problem. Now the Republicans have to bring it up, cuz they have burned the Democrats for it with commie bashing for the dopes....
The wall is useless.

 

[Thinker101]

The wall is stupid and will not work and is unamerican.

For the first time that I know of, I agree with you franco. I don't believe you, but I agree with you.

I never lie and I am always right. How do you mean you don't believe me LOL?

You sound just like your mentor in the White House.

I am pure Democrat old Bean
...

Back on topic...
We should be building barriers with new technologies such as drones, electronic monitoring, smart fencing. Walls were great 5,000 years ago but they will be no match for the technologies of the future.

So what's wrong with a wall AND technology?

When you build a wall it will be there for a hundred years.

Why do you think the Democrats are so scared to death of a wall they are even willing to shutdown the government?

Yes, we could add technology to the cost of the wall and we it could be upgraded as new technology becomes available but adding 5 feet to the top or the foundation of a 1000 mile wall is another story.

My point is that we are not living in stagnation. More Mexicans are returning to Mexico than arriving. This trend started over 10 years ago and seems to be accelerating. The problems in the northern triangle are responsible for the large number of Central Americans arriving in the US. There have been proposals from both sides to increase aid and provide US personal to assist in clearing out the drug cartels and gangs that have made life a living hell for the people. Lastly, immigration reform is far from dead. It can't happen with Republican control of government but certain can and will happen with Democrat control. Even if democrats only control one House of congress, we can still get immigration reform because many republicans agree with democrats on a number of immigration issues. These changes will dramatically reduce illegal immigration without spending tens of billions of dollars on a wall, taking property away from hundreds of land owners, destruction of a fragile environment, and a sending a message to the world that the United States seeks to isolate itself by hiding behind a wall.

It is not the wall democrats fear. It is what it represents, isolationism and the victory of hate and racism over reason.

So they have you brainwashed too.......a damn shame.

Racism is what Democrats have used for many years to get their way. It has nothing to do with racism. This isn't a race issue. If it were Canadians or Europeans attacking our country, we would feel the same way. We don't need more uneducated diseased unskilled people in our country no matter who they are.

And what immigration reform do we need? There is nothing wrong with our immigration system now. Do you know what immigration reform means? It means surrendering to those who can't easily get in now.

Brainwashing needs lying to be called brainwashing, super duper. The whole world that real journalism and law enforcement agrees with Democrats facts, not the garbage your high school grad ex cokehead DJ's parrot. Not a single one of your phony scandals has reached that world either.
We need a good ID card like every other modern country that has the problem. Now the Republicans have to bring it up, cuz they have burn the Democrats for it with commie bashing for the dopes....
The wall is useless.

Yup, we can smell the stench from here.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So up comes the steel slats. Democrats have stated they want more border security but want to use HIGH TECH to secure the border, stating that border patrol and border experts have told them it would work better than walls & fences. It would be much more effective and efficient for the above reasons. It's true. Anything they can see, can and will ALWAYS be compromised, something they can't see won't even be attempted.

So we will see who is more interested in border security. I imagine the Ass Clown--will turn down the HIGH TECH option and go with his POS wall and shut down the government over it.

Democrats want anything they can remove once in power. They can't remove a wall. That's why they are scared to death of it.

And saying that we should not build a will because people may dig under it is as ridiculous as saying we shouldn't have prisons or jails because some people broke out of them.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

What I'm doing is simply pointing out reality. And HTF am I a danger to society by not taking drugs for ADD? And what does beer have to do with it? It sounds like you don't know what you're talking about.

The Constitution protects you from GOVERNMENT searches and seizures which as I already explained, a violation that happens to us all the time. However the Constitution is limited to government only. You do not have the right to free speech at work. You do not have the right to vote on the administration of the healthcare facility that takes care of you. You do not have the right to take your gun into a church or various other places that restrict you from being armed. You do not have the right to free speech by your local newspaper. You do not have the right to free assembly at your doughnut shop.

People with ADD that consume alcohol have a much higher incidence to impulsive behaviors.

I guess we could split hairs, but the issue is, should the government be able to give up personal information on you or I without our consent?

It's bad enough that you nor I can look at what the government makes available and do a thorough quantitative and qualitative analysis of the information. It's that the information is available at all in the context that the government keeping records on us and there is no way for us to have any input in them.

In the private sector, if you have a bad credit rating, you can get misinformation removed; you can make a statement on a bad report giving your side of the dispute.

If we apply the principle to other Rights, you begin to develop a different picture of the situation. A man goes to a psychologist. His real reason for going is sexual dysfunction despite taking drugs like viaxxx (actual word banned LMAO) and having all physical issues eliminated. Because he went to the psychologist, should we then have laws that prohibit him from owning a firearm?

We're way off topic from the wall idea, but once you establish a bad precedent, then it follows in areas of the law that you cannot even begin to fathom. The worse that thing that culminates from your way of thinking is that a person is NEVER presumed innocent; that they do not have a Right to privacy; that the person never rises above their personal demons so that they can operate in a free society. I might be wrong, but reading between the lines, I'm beginning to sense that you would be okay with certain degrees of tyranny on the pretext that "they are already doing this or that now."

When you see a psychiatrist it's a private matter between you and your doctor. Doctors should not be briefing government on their patients. However when you commit a crime, that is between you and the government. Part of the penalty in committing a crime is public exposure to those who need that information.

Your stance is it's more important to protect the privacy of law breakers than those who will interact with the con and jeopardize their safety, safety of others, or property. I disagree. Landlords, employers and employees didn't do anything wrong to have dangers hidden from them. I didn't do anything wrong to have one of my apartments boarded up for a year because I unknowingly rented to a pusher who used the apartment as a place to sell drugs.

When you consciously break the law, you know full well what the penalties are. You may get locked up for some time. You may lose your house. Your name and picture may get publicized in the media or newspaper. You may not be able to find a job when you get out. You won't be able to vote. Your criminal record is on public file available to anybody that has the internet.

If you don't like the penalties of crime, then don't commit crimes. Penalties exist to provide a deterrent to crime.

You must be new to America. Let me be the first to welcome you in. Now, this how our de jure / constitutional / lawful / legal Republic works:

A person has the Right to be secure in their "papers." I'm positive that the founders would then apply that today to the records that are kept on you. You are not secure in your papers when the government can circumvent the Constitution by making your past available to any Tom, Slick, or Harry on God's green earth.

Next, one must be realistic. Yesterday, Hush Bimbo (er... Rush Limbaugh) made the point that the feds lured Michael Flynn into a situation whereby they lied to him and led him - even coaxed him into breaking the law. Then, the prosecutors tell him that he will plead guilty OR be convicted and serve the maximum amount of time. So, even if he were NOT guilty, he's going to follow the path of least resistance. Unless you have relatives by the last name of Jobs, Gates, or Trump you are NOT going to take on the system. No rational person is going to take a chance on prison when the government can LIE about you and all you're doing is making a statement about your personal convictions.

You want to take the government's word for things and condemn a person for life. Then you want to mislead people as to what I believe. Your safety is NOT probable cause to rummage around in a person's legal past. The government cannot be trusted. Neither can you interpret their documents. And you would not read a court transcript to find out if an individual got railroaded. MILLIONS do get the shaft.

The best indicators YOU need to avail yourself of are the following:

1) Where does the person work and how long have they been there?

2) What does their present and past employer have to say about them?

3) What is their credit score?

4) How many residences have they lived in over the last five years?

5) Who are their personal references and how long have they known your potential renter?

You will find that to be a HELL of a lot more relevant than what a corrupt government has to say. BTW, my parents owned rental homes and an 84 lot mobile home park when I was growing up. That was what they did and it worked more times than not. Fact is, the worse tenants the old man had were Section 8 renters that the government vouched for.

Wrong on so many levels.

If a person responds to my ad for an apartment and was a convicted child molester, do you think I want to rent to him if one of my other tenants was a frail single mother who lived alone? Should that very piece of important information be hidden from me and my tenant, and most importantly, her three year old daughter?

I have every right to know who I'm renting to and not just by their job or past rental history. I have tenants to protect, I have property to protect, I have myself to protect. I don't want to be put in a position of having to evict somebody who was a violent murderer.

Like myself, employers have the right to protect their workers and themselves as well.

Years ago our state had a program to help ex-cons work. They paid employers to hire them and give them a full-time job. The employer we worked with thought that was a great idea. So he loaded his floor with ex-cons. Next thing you know, fist fights were breaking out, so he hired a security guard. Then the security guard got hurt so he hired a team of security guards.

After a while, his other employees quit their job; some with the company for many years because of threats and assaults. Some even had their vehicles broken into and stolen. After a while, he quit the program. Even though he was making a killing by paying them low wages (nobody else would hire them) getting a kickback from the state, his workman's compensations claims were killing him. Nobody else wanted to work there and a reputation of the company grew. The security team was very costly. It just didn't work out.

There are very few zebras you can change the stripes on. And one of the responsibilities the government has is to protect their citizens. Keeping dangers hidden from them is not protecting innocent people.

Your only problem is listening to garbage propaganda Non-Stop... Rush Limbaugh during the day and Fox at night?

The wall is stupid and will not work and is unamerican. Very happy to see the ten billion for Mexico and Central America which will do more good. This problem will of illegals will go on forever until the GOP comes out for national ID card like every other modern country that has this problem. Democrats no longer will do it because the GOP just caused the Communist and fear-mongers it..

Was that a joke? The Tea Party Republicans passed the National ID / REAL ID Act - E Verify YEARS ago. Who have here? Rip Van Winkle? LOL.

The wall is a done deal. Then, when Pelosi gets total gun control, the Democrats can laugh all the way to the voting booth when they take over in 2020.

Too bad e verify is a joke doesn't work... I think the GOP Masters love illegal workers because they are cheap and easily bullied... GOP voters only care during a GOP depression or recession anyway. They like the cheap maids and Gardeners.

Republicans are about corporate profit. It's a concept lost on Tea Party Republicans.

Infringe on corporate profit and you cause the corporations to load up and move to another country - again that's a concept lost of those who hate the word Liberty.

There is an answer, just not one the wall advocates will listen to.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

You've admitted to being on drugs for what you think is a behavioral issue;

I did? When? Show me one post where I said I take drugs for behavior issues. I never wrote that. You are just listening to voices in your head.

you've admitted that you like to drink beer.

Yes I did. So what?

When the liberals get through, you will not be allowed to own a firearm - and possibly your own avatar will be your worst enemy.

How are they going to do that? They don't have nearly enough people to amend the Constitution.

What counts is what a person is doing today - and what they have been doing in the recent past. If you're saying people cannot be rehabilitated, then we should keep them locked up forever. What you're promoting is plain out stupidity.

What I am saying is that once you are a criminal, the people who deal with you have the right to know that.

A person gets a criminal record. They are locked out of society. The Americans who committed a crime are unemployable. A foreigner comes in and works the job the Americans get locked out of and you're unhappy. I propose to put those Americans back to work and you fight me tooth and nail. You are only consistent with inconsistency. And you're not going to appreciate what I've said to you until it's your ass that is on the chopping block.

If you don't want your ass on a chopping block, then don't be a criminal.

I am against all immigration. However I am not for employers being forced to hire anybody. I am not for hiding criminal records from employers, local governments or even landlords.

You could be very right. I'm not willing to look through the posts when we're approaching 1100 of them to find where you said something positive about drugs and ADD ADHD, claiming you had that very condition.

There are other ways of changing laws without amending the Constitution. The United States Supreme Court has done it; Obama did it; Trump tries to do it on a regular basis... and the people have many ways of changing the laws WITHOUT amending the Constitution. If it's good enough for the government, it's good enough for the people.

In a de jure / lawful / constitutional / legal Republic you do NOT have a Right to government records. It's simply NOT in the Constitution. Just because someone has the POWER to declare something "legal" does not make it so.

If you were not for telling employers who they can and cannot hire, you'd quit hiding behind the pretext of this crap being legal or illegal. Simply put, if the farmer down the road can hire 100 Mexicans, but I can't due to some unconstitutional quota system, it puts me, as an employer in an UNEQUAL position, denying to me the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed in the 14th Amendment... UNLESS you want to join in with me in dismantling it.

You hide behind the POWER of Democracy shielded by "it's legal" regardless of its unconstitutionality. So, who are you really trying to convince - me or you? You like BIG GOVERNMENT.

I can give you options that give everyone involved something. You're going to reject them because you are part of a political movement that smells blood. You're going to get your wall so I can't imagine what you're crying about. It's just that you cannot face the fact that you got played and when it comes time to pay - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of lost Liberties, I'm still going to come back and tell you I told you so. You don't get something for nothing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You've admitted to being on drugs for what you think is a behavioral issue;

I did? When? Show me one post where I said I take drugs for behavior issues. I never wrote that. You are just listening to voices in your head.

you've admitted that you like to drink beer.

Yes I did. So what?

When the liberals get through, you will not be allowed to own a firearm - and possibly your own avatar will be your worst enemy.

How are they going to do that? They don't have nearly enough people to amend the Constitution.

What counts is what a person is doing today - and what they have been doing in the recent past. If you're saying people cannot be rehabilitated, then we should keep them locked up forever. What you're promoting is plain out stupidity.

What I am saying is that once you are a criminal, the people who deal with you have the right to know that.

A person gets a criminal record. They are locked out of society. The Americans who committed a crime are unemployable. A foreigner comes in and works the job the Americans get locked out of and you're unhappy. I propose to put those Americans back to work and you fight me tooth and nail. You are only consistent with inconsistency. And you're not going to appreciate what I've said to you until it's your ass that is on the chopping block.

If you don't want your ass on a chopping block, then don't be a criminal.

I am against all immigration. However I am not for employers being forced to hire anybody. I am not for hiding criminal records from employers, local governments or even landlords.

You could be very right. I'm not willing to look through the posts when we're approaching 1100 of them to find where you said something positive about drugs and ADD ADHD, claiming you had that very condition.

There are other ways of changing laws without amending the Constitution. The United States Supreme Court has done it; Obama did it; Trump tries to do it on a regular basis... and the people have many ways of changing the laws WITHOUT amending the Constitution. If it's good enough for the government, it's good enough for the people.

In a de jure / lawful / constitutional / legal Republic you do NOT have a Right to government records. It's simply NOT in the Constitution. Just because someone has the POWER to declare something "legal" does not make it so.

If you were not for telling employers who they can and cannot hire, you'd quit hiding behind the pretext of this crap being legal or illegal. Simply put, if the farmer down the road can hire 100 Mexicans, but I can't due to some unconstitutional quota system, it puts me, as an employer in an UNEQUAL position, denying to me the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed in the 14th Amendment... UNLESS you want to join in with me in dismantling it.

You hide behind the POWER of Democracy shielded by "it's legal" regardless of its unconstitutionality. So, who are you really trying to convince - me or you? You like BIG GOVERNMENT.

I can give you options that give everyone involved something. You're going to reject them because you are part of a political movement that smells blood. You're going to get your wall so I can't imagine what you're crying about. It's just that you cannot face the fact that you got played and when it comes time to pay - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of lost Liberties, I'm still going to come back and tell you I told you so. You don't get something for nothing.

There is no constitutional protection of criminal records. Search and Seizure is in regards to a persons personal records--not government records. Furthermore there is a huge difference between supporting medications for certain conditions and using them.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

You've admitted to being on drugs for what you think is a behavioral issue;

I did? When? Show me one post where I said I take drugs for behavior issues. I never wrote that. You are just listening to voices in your head.

you've admitted that you like to drink beer.

Yes I did. So what?

When the liberals get through, you will not be allowed to own a firearm - and possibly your own avatar will be your worst enemy.

How are they going to do that? They don't have nearly enough people to amend the Constitution.

What counts is what a person is doing today - and what they have been doing in the recent past. If you're saying people cannot be rehabilitated, then we should keep them locked up forever. What you're promoting is plain out stupidity.

What I am saying is that once you are a criminal, the people who deal with you have the right to know that.

A person gets a criminal record. They are locked out of society. The Americans who committed a crime are unemployable. A foreigner comes in and works the job the Americans get locked out of and you're unhappy. I propose to put those Americans back to work and you fight me tooth and nail. You are only consistent with inconsistency. And you're not going to appreciate what I've said to you until it's your ass that is on the chopping block.

If you don't want your ass on a chopping block, then don't be a criminal.

I am against all immigration. However I am not for employers being forced to hire anybody. I am not for hiding criminal records from employers, local governments or even landlords.

You could be very right. I'm not willing to look through the posts when we're approaching 1100 of them to find where you said something positive about drugs and ADD ADHD, claiming you had that very condition.

There are other ways of changing laws without amending the Constitution. The United States Supreme Court has done it; Obama did it; Trump tries to do it on a regular basis... and the people have many ways of changing the laws WITHOUT amending the Constitution. If it's good enough for the government, it's good enough for the people.

In a de jure / lawful / constitutional / legal Republic you do NOT have a Right to government records. It's simply NOT in the Constitution. Just because someone has the POWER to declare something "legal" does not make it so.

If you were not for telling employers who they can and cannot hire, you'd quit hiding behind the pretext of this crap being legal or illegal. Simply put, if the farmer down the road can hire 100 Mexicans, but I can't due to some unconstitutional quota system, it puts me, as an employer in an UNEQUAL position, denying to me the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed in the 14th Amendment... UNLESS you want to join in with me in dismantling it.

You hide behind the POWER of Democracy shielded by "it's legal" regardless of its unconstitutionality. So, who are you really trying to convince - me or you? You like BIG GOVERNMENT.

I can give you options that give everyone involved something. You're going to reject them because you are part of a political movement that smells blood. You're going to get your wall so I can't imagine what you're crying about. It's just that you cannot face the fact that you got played and when it comes time to pay - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of lost Liberties, I'm still going to come back and tell you I told you so. You don't get something for nothing.

There is no constitutional protection of criminal records. Search and Seizure is in regards to a persons personal records--not government records. Furthermore there is a huge difference between supporting medications for certain conditions and using them.

Criminal records ARE government records. Nothing in the Constitution gives the government the authority to give out the information for the general public to go on a fishing expedition. You shouldn't argue this as one day, you or a loved one WILL be denied a constitutional protection and it will because of people just like you.

One last time: the government can lie to you and they can lie about you... AND THEY DO. By their own estimates 30 percent of the people in jails and prisons never actually committed a crime.

You were given an alternative, so if you choose to be a subject of the NEW WORLD ORDER, that is your prerogative. It's mine not to subject myself to a foreign jurisdiction just because a de facto government makes a false claim against me.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Back on topic...
We should be building barriers with new technologies such as drones, electronic monitoring, smart fencing. Walls were great 5,000 years ago but they will be no match for the technologies of the future.

So what's wrong with a wall AND technology?

When you build a wall it will be there for a hundred years.

Why do you think the Democrats are so scared to death of a wall they are even willing to shutdown the government?

Yes, we could add technology to the cost of the wall and we it could be upgraded as new technology becomes available but adding 5 feet to the top or the foundation of a 1000 mile wall is another story.

My point is that we are not living in stagnation. More Mexicans are returning to Mexico than arriving. This trend started over 10 years ago and seems to be accelerating. The problems in the northern triangle are responsible for the large number of Central Americans arriving in the US. There have been proposals from both sides to increase aid and provide US personal to assist in clearing out the drug cartels and gangs that have made life a living hell for the people. Lastly, immigration reform is far from dead. It can't happen with Republican control of government but certain can and will happen with Democrat control. Even if democrats only control one House of congress, we can still get immigration reform because many republicans agree with democrats on a number of immigration issues. These changes will dramatically reduce illegal immigration without spending tens of billions of dollars on a wall, taking property away from hundreds of land owners, destruction of a fragile environment, and a sending a message to the world that the United States seeks to isolate itself by hiding behind a wall.

It is not the wall democrats fear. It is what it represents, isolationism and the victory of hate and racism over reason.

Hush Bimbo (Rush Limbaugh), the NWO lackey, won't allow Ray to see both sides of the issue. Personally, if the U.S. declares against Mexico and every country south of there all the way through Colombia, I couldn't care less. But wall or no wall, as long as we keep breeding drug users, there will be people willing to meet the demand.

 

[dblack]

I. Dee. Uh

We could build the wall out of the metal we recycle from the Statue of Liberty when we tear it down.

 

[deanrd]

According to Trump--we're no longer talking about a WALL it's down to steel slats. Of course this is G.W. Bush's design that he installed on 700 miles of the border---

Trump now describes his border wall as "steel slats" - WDEF

Very easily compromised as this video shows.


And let's not forget about those tunnels

They have found 240 of these in the San Diego region alone, and they know there's more that they haven't found.

So House Republicans put on their last Hoorah yesterday by passing a bill that included 5.1 billion for the WAAAAALLL. Of course this is dead on arrival in the Senate. Republicans had a full house over the last 2 years, and all of a sudden up pops this bill as they're making their exit out of the back door. 5.7 BILLION is the equivalent of teaspoon of water thrown on a bonfire, as the wall would cost 47 BILLION dollars.

So up comes the steel slats. Democrats have stated they want more border security but want to use HIGH TECH to secure the border, stating that border patrol and border experts have told them it would work better than walls & fences. It would be much more effective and efficient for the above reasons. It's true. Anything they can see, can and will ALWAYS be compromised, something they can't see won't even be attempted.

So we will see who is more interested in border security. I imagine the Ass Clown--will turn down the HIGH TECH option and go with his POS wall (I mean slats now) and shut down the government over it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Back on topic...
We should be building barriers with new technologies such as drones, electronic monitoring, smart fencing. Walls were great 5,000 years ago but they will be no match for the technologies of the future.

So what's wrong with a wall AND technology?

When you build a wall it will be there for a hundred years.

Why do you think the Democrats are so scared to death of a wall they are even willing to shutdown the government?

Yes, we could add technology to the cost of the wall and we it could be upgraded as new technology becomes available but adding 5 feet to the top or the foundation of a 1000 mile wall is another story.

My point is that we are not living in stagnation. More Mexicans are returning to Mexico than arriving. This trend started over 10 years ago and seems to be accelerating. The problems in the northern triangle are responsible for the large number of Central Americans arriving in the US. There have been proposals from both sides to increase aid and provide US personal to assist in clearing out the drug cartels and gangs that have made life a living hell for the people. Lastly, immigration reform is far from dead. It can't happen with Republican control of government but certain can and will happen with Democrat control. Even if democrats only control one House of congress, we can still get immigration reform because many republicans agree with democrats on a number of immigration issues. These changes will dramatically reduce illegal immigration without spending tens of billions of dollars on a wall, taking property away from hundreds of land owners, destruction of a fragile environment, and a sending a message to the world that the United States seeks to isolate itself by hiding behind a wall.

It is not the wall democrats fear. It is what it represents, isolationism and the victory of hate and racism over reason.

Hush Bimbo (Rush Limbaugh), the NWO lackey, won't allow Ray to see both sides of the issue. Personally, if the U.S. declares against Mexico and every country south of there all the way through Colombia, I couldn't care less. But wall or no wall, as long as we keep breeding drug users, there will be people willing to meet the demand.

Correct, because we have such ability to control drug users. Duh!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You've admitted to being on drugs for what you think is a behavioral issue;

I did? When? Show me one post where I said I take drugs for behavior issues. I never wrote that. You are just listening to voices in your head.

you've admitted that you like to drink beer.

Yes I did. So what?

When the liberals get through, you will not be allowed to own a firearm - and possibly your own avatar will be your worst enemy.

How are they going to do that? They don't have nearly enough people to amend the Constitution.

What counts is what a person is doing today - and what they have been doing in the recent past. If you're saying people cannot be rehabilitated, then we should keep them locked up forever. What you're promoting is plain out stupidity.

What I am saying is that once you are a criminal, the people who deal with you have the right to know that.

A person gets a criminal record. They are locked out of society. The Americans who committed a crime are unemployable. A foreigner comes in and works the job the Americans get locked out of and you're unhappy. I propose to put those Americans back to work and you fight me tooth and nail. You are only consistent with inconsistency. And you're not going to appreciate what I've said to you until it's your ass that is on the chopping block.

If you don't want your ass on a chopping block, then don't be a criminal.

I am against all immigration. However I am not for employers being forced to hire anybody. I am not for hiding criminal records from employers, local governments or even landlords.

You could be very right. I'm not willing to look through the posts when we're approaching 1100 of them to find where you said something positive about drugs and ADD ADHD, claiming you had that very condition.

There are other ways of changing laws without amending the Constitution. The United States Supreme Court has done it; Obama did it; Trump tries to do it on a regular basis... and the people have many ways of changing the laws WITHOUT amending the Constitution. If it's good enough for the government, it's good enough for the people.

In a de jure / lawful / constitutional / legal Republic you do NOT have a Right to government records. It's simply NOT in the Constitution. Just because someone has the POWER to declare something "legal" does not make it so.

If you were not for telling employers who they can and cannot hire, you'd quit hiding behind the pretext of this crap being legal or illegal. Simply put, if the farmer down the road can hire 100 Mexicans, but I can't due to some unconstitutional quota system, it puts me, as an employer in an UNEQUAL position, denying to me the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed in the 14th Amendment... UNLESS you want to join in with me in dismantling it.

You hide behind the POWER of Democracy shielded by "it's legal" regardless of its unconstitutionality. So, who are you really trying to convince - me or you? You like BIG GOVERNMENT.

I can give you options that give everyone involved something. You're going to reject them because you are part of a political movement that smells blood. You're going to get your wall so I can't imagine what you're crying about. It's just that you cannot face the fact that you got played and when it comes time to pay - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of lost Liberties, I'm still going to come back and tell you I told you so. You don't get something for nothing.

There is no constitutional protection of criminal records. Search and Seizure is in regards to a persons personal records--not government records. Furthermore there is a huge difference between supporting medications for certain conditions and using them.

Criminal records ARE government records. Nothing in the Constitution gives the government the authority to give out the information for the general public to go on a fishing expedition. You shouldn't argue this as one day, you or a loved one WILL be denied a constitutional protection and it will because of people just like you.

One last time: the government can lie to you and they can lie about you... AND THEY DO. By their own estimates 30 percent of the people in jails and prisons never actually committed a crime.

You were given an alternative, so if you choose to be a subject of the NEW WORLD ORDER, that is your prerogative. It's mine not to subject myself to a foreign jurisdiction just because a de facto government makes a false claim against me.

Wow, you really are off your rocker. Public records equate to a New World Order? And let me see this evidence that 30% of inmates never did anything wrong to be imprisoned; not that I believe you have any credible link (but it will be fun if you try to post something) however I just want to see where you make this stuff up from.

Yes, criminal records are government records, and nothing in the Constitution "prohibits" government from sharing those records with the people. It would be an injustice to not warn people of potentially dangerous people. But I'm sure in the name of privacy, you wouldn't mind a rapist to move in next door to your mother or sister without your knowledge.

 

[Flopper]

Back on topic...
We should be building barriers with new technologies such as drones, electronic monitoring, smart fencing. Walls were great 5,000 years ago but they will be no match for the technologies of the future.

So what's wrong with a wall AND technology?

When you build a wall it will be there for a hundred years.

Why do you think the Democrats are so scared to death of a wall they are even willing to shutdown the government?

Yes, we could add technology to the cost of the wall and we it could be upgraded as new technology becomes available but adding 5 feet to the top or the foundation of a 1000 mile wall is another story.

My point is that we are not living in stagnation. More Mexicans are returning to Mexico than arriving. This trend started over 10 years ago and seems to be accelerating. The problems in the northern triangle are responsible for the large number of Central Americans arriving in the US. There have been proposals from both sides to increase aid and provide US personal to assist in clearing out the drug cartels and gangs that have made life a living hell for the people. Lastly, immigration reform is far from dead. It can't happen with Republican control of government but certain can and will happen with Democrat control. Even if democrats only control one House of congress, we can still get immigration reform because many republicans agree with democrats on a number of immigration issues. These changes will dramatically reduce illegal immigration without spending tens of billions of dollars on a wall, taking property away from hundreds of land owners, destruction of a fragile environment, and a sending a message to the world that the United States seeks to isolate itself by hiding behind a wall.

It is not the wall democrats fear. It is what it represents, isolationism and the victory of hate and racism over reason.

So they have you brainwashed too.......a damn shame.

Racism is what Democrats have used for many years to get their way. It has nothing to do with racism. This isn't a race issue. If it were Canadians or Europeans attacking our country, we would feel the same way. We don't need more uneducated diseased unskilled people in our country no matter who they are.

And what immigration reform do we need? There is nothing wrong with our immigration system now. Do you know what immigration reform means? It means surrendering to those who can't easily get in now.

Uneducated, diseased, unskilled people, is this how you see immigrants to the US? If so, I feel sorry for you because you are delusional.

Just because these people are poor does not mean they are uneducated, diseased, and unskilled. Many of these people are skilled and can be an asset to the country. Plus many of them have more intestinal fortitude than a dozen native born American. With the right kind of immigration reform we can bring these people into the country and keep out those that mean us harm.

Our immigration system is incredibly fucked up. We select immigrants based on country of origin and having some relative living in the US. Immigration agents spend 10 mins selecting who is allowed to immigrate and months on deportation. We deny people the right to work in the US even if they have skills we need. Our laws would deport people who have lived in this country for decades and have been an asset to their community. Those same laws would also deport people who were brought to the US as children and raised as Americans. We force people to break our laws in order apply for asylum. We were instrumental in creating the international refugee system and protocols and we violate the very rules we created. The biggest problem in illegal immigration is not people coming into the country illegally but overstaying visa and our immigration laws don't even consider this a crime in most cases and there is no provision for tracking these people. Our E-Verify system is completely voluntary and it's data is as much as 6 months out of date. Employers that use contract labor are shielded from immigration law that forbids employing of undocumented immigrants.
And you say there's nothing wrong with our immigration system

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Back on topic...
We should be building barriers with new technologies such as drones, electronic monitoring, smart fencing. Walls were great 5,000 years ago but they will be no match for the technologies of the future.

So what's wrong with a wall AND technology?

When you build a wall it will be there for a hundred years.

Why do you think the Democrats are so scared to death of a wall they are even willing to shutdown the government?

Yes, we could add technology to the cost of the wall and we it could be upgraded as new technology becomes available but adding 5 feet to the top or the foundation of a 1000 mile wall is another story.

My point is that we are not living in stagnation. More Mexicans are returning to Mexico than arriving. This trend started over 10 years ago and seems to be accelerating. The problems in the northern triangle are responsible for the large number of Central Americans arriving in the US. There have been proposals from both sides to increase aid and provide US personal to assist in clearing out the drug cartels and gangs that have made life a living hell for the people. Lastly, immigration reform is far from dead. It can't happen with Republican control of government but certain can and will happen with Democrat control. Even if democrats only control one House of congress, we can still get immigration reform because many republicans agree with democrats on a number of immigration issues. These changes will dramatically reduce illegal immigration without spending tens of billions of dollars on a wall, taking property away from hundreds of land owners, destruction of a fragile environment, and a sending a message to the world that the United States seeks to isolate itself by hiding behind a wall.

It is not the wall democrats fear. It is what it represents, isolationism and the victory of hate and racism over reason.

So they have you brainwashed too.......a damn shame.

Racism is what Democrats have used for many years to get their way. It has nothing to do with racism. This isn't a race issue. If it were Canadians or Europeans attacking our country, we would feel the same way. We don't need more uneducated diseased unskilled people in our country no matter who they are.

And what immigration reform do we need? There is nothing wrong with our immigration system now. Do you know what immigration reform means? It means surrendering to those who can't easily get in now.

Uneducated, diseased, unskilled people, is this how you see immigrants to the US? If so, I feel sorry for you because you are delusional.

Just because these people are poor does not mean they are uneducated, diseased, and unskilled. Many of these people are skilled and can be an asset to the country. Plus many of them have more intestinal fortitude than a dozen native born American. With the right kind of immigration reform we can bring these people into the country and keep out those that mean us harm.

Our immigration system is incredibly fucked up. We select immigrants based on country of origin and having some relative living in the US. Immigration agents spend 10 mins selecting who is allowed to immigrate and months on deportation. We deny people the right to work in the US even if they have skills we need. Our laws would deport people who have lived in this country for decades and have been an asset to their community. Those same laws would also deport people who were brought to the US as children and raised as Americans. We force people to break our laws in order apply for asylum. We were instrumental in creating the international refugee system and protocols and we violate the very rules we created. The biggest problem in illegal immigration is not people coming into the country illegally but overstaying visa and our immigration laws don't even consider this a crime in most cases and there is no provision for tracking these people. Our E-Verify system is completely voluntary and it's data is as much as 6 months out of date. Employers that use contract labor are shielded from immigration law that forbids employing of undocumented immigrants.
And you say there's nothing wrong with our immigration system

Immigration reform for the anti-white party means getting more foreigners into this country. They don't care who they are: unskilled, scientists, diseased, uneducated, they don't care, just as long as they are wiping out the white vote in this country.

People who are here illegally being model citizens, paying taxes, being here since children is no reason to let them stay. They are still here breaking our laws. They are still here illegally. I don't know what you on the left don't understand about that. You think being here illegally is okay in most cases.

We don't need to set the precedent that if you come here illegally and be a good boy for X amount of years, you won't be bothered the least. That's a blanket invitation to the other 7.2 billion people in the world that America is weak on immigration which we really are. But we don't need to amplify that.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

You've admitted to being on drugs for what you think is a behavioral issue;

I did? When? Show me one post where I said I take drugs for behavior issues. I never wrote that. You are just listening to voices in your head.

you've admitted that you like to drink beer.

Yes I did. So what?

When the liberals get through, you will not be allowed to own a firearm - and possibly your own avatar will be your worst enemy.

How are they going to do that? They don't have nearly enough people to amend the Constitution.

What counts is what a person is doing today - and what they have been doing in the recent past. If you're saying people cannot be rehabilitated, then we should keep them locked up forever. What you're promoting is plain out stupidity.

What I am saying is that once you are a criminal, the people who deal with you have the right to know that.

A person gets a criminal record. They are locked out of society. The Americans who committed a crime are unemployable. A foreigner comes in and works the job the Americans get locked out of and you're unhappy. I propose to put those Americans back to work and you fight me tooth and nail. You are only consistent with inconsistency. And you're not going to appreciate what I've said to you until it's your ass that is on the chopping block.

If you don't want your ass on a chopping block, then don't be a criminal.

I am against all immigration. However I am not for employers being forced to hire anybody. I am not for hiding criminal records from employers, local governments or even landlords.

You could be very right. I'm not willing to look through the posts when we're approaching 1100 of them to find where you said something positive about drugs and ADD ADHD, claiming you had that very condition.

There are other ways of changing laws without amending the Constitution. The United States Supreme Court has done it; Obama did it; Trump tries to do it on a regular basis... and the people have many ways of changing the laws WITHOUT amending the Constitution. If it's good enough for the government, it's good enough for the people.

In a de jure / lawful / constitutional / legal Republic you do NOT have a Right to government records. It's simply NOT in the Constitution. Just because someone has the POWER to declare something "legal" does not make it so.

If you were not for telling employers who they can and cannot hire, you'd quit hiding behind the pretext of this crap being legal or illegal. Simply put, if the farmer down the road can hire 100 Mexicans, but I can't due to some unconstitutional quota system, it puts me, as an employer in an UNEQUAL position, denying to me the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed in the 14th Amendment... UNLESS you want to join in with me in dismantling it.

You hide behind the POWER of Democracy shielded by "it's legal" regardless of its unconstitutionality. So, who are you really trying to convince - me or you? You like BIG GOVERNMENT.

I can give you options that give everyone involved something. You're going to reject them because you are part of a political movement that smells blood. You're going to get your wall so I can't imagine what you're crying about. It's just that you cannot face the fact that you got played and when it comes time to pay - not in terms of dollars and cents, but in terms of lost Liberties, I'm still going to come back and tell you I told you so. You don't get something for nothing.

There is no constitutional protection of criminal records. Search and Seizure is in regards to a persons personal records--not government records. Furthermore there is a huge difference between supporting medications for certain conditions and using them.

Criminal records ARE government records. Nothing in the Constitution gives the government the authority to give out the information for the general public to go on a fishing expedition. You shouldn't argue this as one day, you or a loved one WILL be denied a constitutional protection and it will because of people just like you.

One last time: the government can lie to you and they can lie about you... AND THEY DO. By their own estimates 30 percent of the people in jails and prisons never actually committed a crime.

You were given an alternative, so if you choose to be a subject of the NEW WORLD ORDER, that is your prerogative. It's mine not to subject myself to a foreign jurisdiction just because a de facto government makes a false claim against me.

Wow, you really are off your rocker. Public records equate to a New World Order? And let me see this evidence that 30% of inmates never did anything wrong to be imprisoned; not that I believe you have any credible link (but it will be fun if you try to post something) however I just want to see where you make this stuff up from.

Yes, criminal records are government records, and nothing in the Constitution "prohibits" government from sharing those records with the people. It would be an injustice to not warn people of potentially dangerous people. But I'm sure in the name of privacy, you wouldn't mind a rapist to move in next door to your mother or sister without your knowledge.

If you would not believe it, then there is no point in posting a link. It would be wasted verification.

One thing is for sure. You live on this board to argue the wall as if it were your lifeblood - your religion. Yet you fail to comprehend simple truths. For example:

Not too long back the liberals wanted to declare that any veteran who had been diagnosed with PTSD be denied the Right to keep and bear Arms. You won't believe that either, but it's true. The point is, the liberals would use your mental health records to deny you the Right to keep and bear Arms.

You argued against ADD / ADHD, claiming you are afflicted with such, but then denying that you are not on the drugs for it. Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but, if you have a real condition, you either have it or you don't. If you're born with juvenile diabetes, you have it. You don't wake up one morning and say I feel fine so I must be cured.

You cannot understand that I'm sometimes on YOUR side for IF ADD / ADHD were real conditions and IF you were not on your meds, the liberals would most assuredly pass legislation to address people like you. IF you think a person's criminal record is something the public should know about, then ditto for their mental health records.

WHEN mental health records become fair game, then you can be denied the Right to keep and bear Arms as well as be turned down for a job because you have a "mental health record." Does it matter that you went to see the psychologist because you lost interest in sex or that you needed a referral from a psychologist to go out of network and be hypnotized so that you could quit smoking? HELL NO. It will be just like a "criminal record." Nobody is going to read the transcripts nor weigh the value of the treatment nor more than they read court transcripts to find out that you were threatened with pleading guilty or facing a maximum prison sentence when the facts clearly dictate you were innocent. I leave you with the wisdom of Thomas Paine:

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

Read more at: Thomas Paine Quotes