CDZ Wall Will do nothing to stop drugs

[DandyDonovan]

Again you have not been able to explain how a wall will stop:

The tunnels
the narco subs
the HDD drillers.

We're not here to debate illegals, we are debating the false claim that the wall will stop drugs. The wall will not stop the drugs and you are avoiding the issue.

Look ace, tell me you don't lock your car, lock your house. I HAVE explained, you're just refusing to read. Walls are on land, junior. Subs are in the ocean. They put subs in the ocean because it is getting too hard to go the easier route on land (walls work). Tunnels and drillers happen. Why? Because the wall was stopping them, so they try to go around. You install listening devices, vibration devices, then you start catching them as well. If tunnels were truly working, we wouldn't KNOW they were making them!

I'll try to get through your thick head again: if walls weren't effective, they wouldn't be used everywhere for 10,000 years. You wouldn't be protesting them. They cut down on illegals. They cut down on drugs. They reduce the likelihood of terrorist invasion. They cut down on costs related to illegals. Combined with all our other tools, they help fight crime. If the damn wall wasn't so effective, Nancy Pelosi wouldbn't be holding the nation hostage fighting it telling Trump it is immoral.

This thread is not to debate illegals entering the country, it's to debate whether or not a wall will stop drugs.

A wall will stop the unsophisticated smugglers, TOO BAD the cartels are highly sophisticated with billions of dollars. A wall will do nothing to disrupt the cartels drug smuggling and they will continue to flood the country with as much drugs as they can sell. The narco subs bring in 6 TONS at a time... 6 TONS...

Sophisticated thieves can still easily break into a locked car or house, it's just a matter of the profitability to do so. Cartels make billions a year so the profitability is there for them to use increasingly sophisticated means to do so.

You still can't address my argument that the wall will do nothing to stop the narco subs and HDDs, and regular tunnels for that matter.

Your non-sequitir arguments about stopping illegals are not the point of the thread, and weaken your argument on drugs.

In 1970 your side stupidly thought a war on drugs would reduce the drugs,
in 1980 your side stupidly thought taking the fight to S. America would reduce the drugs,
in 1990 your side stupidly thought mandatory minimums would reduce drug dealing,
in 2001 your side stupidly thought the increased border security would reduce the drugs,
in 2018 your side stupidly thinks a wall will reduce the drugs.

Your side has been 100% wrong on everything to do with drugs and we know this because America is AWASH with drugs.

But but but but but but but this time will be different.... Another stupid assumption from the people that have been incorrect since 1970.

Do you truly not understand this simple concept, or are you just being dishonest?

The purpose of a wall is simply to eliminate the very easy method of walking into the US from Mexico , or driving in, so that Border Patrol can focus their resources on other methods.

It's no different than saying "having the Coast Guard patrol the ocean isn't going to to stop people from tunneling into the country" well no shit, but that's not why the Coast Guard is there.

Your entire premise is dishonest.

 

[Leo123]

Again you have not been able to explain how a wall will stop:

The tunnels
the narco subs
the HDD drillers.

We're not here to debate illegals, we are debating the false claim that the wall will stop drugs. The wall will not stop the drugs and you are avoiding the issue.

Look ace, tell me you don't lock your car, lock your house. I HAVE explained, you're just refusing to read. Walls are on land, junior. Subs are in the ocean. They put subs in the ocean because it is getting too hard to go the easier route on land (walls work). Tunnels and drillers happen. Why? Because the wall was stopping them, so they try to go around. You install listening devices, vibration devices, then you start catching them as well. If tunnels were truly working, we wouldn't KNOW they were making them!

I'll try to get through your thick head again: if walls weren't effective, they wouldn't be used everywhere for 10,000 years. You wouldn't be protesting them. They cut down on illegals. They cut down on drugs. They reduce the likelihood of terrorist invasion. They cut down on costs related to illegals. Combined with all our other tools, they help fight crime. If the damn wall wasn't so effective, Nancy Pelosi wouldbn't be holding the nation hostage fighting it telling Trump it is immoral.

This thread is not to debate illegals entering the country, it's to debate whether or not a wall will stop drugs.

A wall will stop the unsophisticated smugglers, TOO BAD the cartels are highly sophisticated with billions of dollars. A wall will do nothing to disrupt the cartels drug smuggling and they will continue to flood the country with as much drugs as they can sell. The narco subs bring in 6 TONS at a time... 6 TONS...

Sophisticated thieves can still easily break into a locked car or house, it's just a matter of the profitability to do so. Cartels make billions a year so the profitability is there for them to use increasingly sophisticated means to do so.

You still can't address my argument that the wall will do nothing to stop the narco subs and HDDs, and regular tunnels for that matter.

Your non-sequitir arguments about stopping illegals are not the point of the thread, and weaken your argument on drugs.

In 1970 your side stupidly thought a war on drugs would reduce the drugs,
in 1980 your side stupidly thought taking the fight to S. America would reduce the drugs,
in 1990 your side stupidly thought mandatory minimums would reduce drug dealing,
in 2001 your side stupidly thought the increased border security would reduce the drugs,
in 2018 your side stupidly thinks a wall will reduce the drugs.

Your side has been 100% wrong on everything to do with drugs and we know this because America is AWASH with drugs.



But but but but but but but this time will be different.... Another stupid assumption from the people that have been incorrect since 1970.

Well since subs don't travel underground, t

Again you have not been able to explain how a wall will stop:

The tunnels
the narco subs
the HDD drillers.

We're not here to debate illegals, we are debating the false claim that the wall will stop drugs. The wall will not stop the drugs and you are avoiding the issue.

Look ace, tell me you don't lock your car, lock your house. I HAVE explained, you're just refusing to read. Walls are on land, junior. Subs are in the ocean. They put subs in the ocean because it is getting too hard to go the easier route on land (walls work). Tunnels and drillers happen. Why? Because the wall was stopping them, so they try to go around. You install listening devices, vibration devices, then you start catching them as well. If tunnels were truly working, we wouldn't KNOW they were making them!

I'll try to get through your thick head again: if walls weren't effective, they wouldn't be used everywhere for 10,000 years. You wouldn't be protesting them. They cut down on illegals. They cut down on drugs. They reduce the likelihood of terrorist invasion. They cut down on costs related to illegals. Combined with all our other tools, they help fight crime. If the damn wall wasn't so effective, Nancy Pelosi wouldbn't be holding the nation hostage fighting it telling Trump it is immoral.

This thread is not to debate illegals entering the country, it's to debate whether or not a wall will stop drugs.

A wall will stop the unsophisticated smugglers, TOO BAD the cartels are highly sophisticated with billions of dollars. A wall will do nothing to disrupt the cartels drug smuggling and they will continue to flood the country with as much drugs as they can sell. The narco subs bring in 6 TONS at a time... 6 TONS...

Sophisticated thieves can still easily break into a locked car or house, it's just a matter of the profitability to do so. Cartels make billions a year so the profitability is there for them to use increasingly sophisticated means to do so.

You still can't address my argument that the wall will do nothing to stop the narco subs and HDDs, and regular tunnels for that matter.

Your non-sequitir arguments about stopping illegals are not the point of the thread, and weaken your argument on drugs.

In 1970 your side stupidly thought a war on drugs would reduce the drugs,
in 1980 your side stupidly thought taking the fight to S. America would reduce the drugs,
in 1990 your side stupidly thought mandatory minimums would reduce drug dealing,
in 2001 your side stupidly thought the increased border security would reduce the drugs,
in 2018 your side stupidly thinks a wall will reduce the drugs.

Your side has been 100% wrong on everything to do with drugs and we know this because America is AWASH with drugs.

But but but but but but but this time will be different.... Another stupid assumption from the people that have been incorrect since 1970.

The Coast Guard is capturing narco-subs. HDD drilling has many failures depending on the length, angle and depth. HDD drilling can be detected especially if we know where it will be used...(like next to a wall). The wall will stop some drugs and is needed. You can say all you want that walls are ineffective but it is one part of border security we need. No borders, no common language, no common culture, no country.

Why would you promote an open border (no wall) when a wall WILL cause drug smugglers to have to purchase, set up, get expertise and avoid many failures already experienced in HDD drilling? Why would you NOT want drug smugglers to have to make a DIY submersible, spend all the money, risk their lives and risk arrest by the Coast Guard? Would you rather they could just walk across anywhere along our border?

 

[toobfreak]

Well since subs don't travel underground,

You never know. Maybe they do for the Banker.

 

[The Banker]

Again you have not been able to explain how a wall will stop:

The tunnels
the narco subs
the HDD drillers.

We're not here to debate illegals, we are debating the false claim that the wall will stop drugs. The wall will not stop the drugs and you are avoiding the issue.

Look ace, tell me you don't lock your car, lock your house. I HAVE explained, you're just refusing to read. Walls are on land, junior. Subs are in the ocean. They put subs in the ocean because it is getting too hard to go the easier route on land (walls work). Tunnels and drillers happen. Why? Because the wall was stopping them, so they try to go around. You install listening devices, vibration devices, then you start catching them as well. If tunnels were truly working, we wouldn't KNOW they were making them!

I'll try to get through your thick head again: if walls weren't effective, they wouldn't be used everywhere for 10,000 years. You wouldn't be protesting them. They cut down on illegals. They cut down on drugs. They reduce the likelihood of terrorist invasion. They cut down on costs related to illegals. Combined with all our other tools, they help fight crime. If the damn wall wasn't so effective, Nancy Pelosi wouldbn't be holding the nation hostage fighting it telling Trump it is immoral.

This thread is not to debate illegals entering the country, it's to debate whether or not a wall will stop drugs.

A wall will stop the unsophisticated smugglers, TOO BAD the cartels are highly sophisticated with billions of dollars. A wall will do nothing to disrupt the cartels drug smuggling and they will continue to flood the country with as much drugs as they can sell. The narco subs bring in 6 TONS at a time... 6 TONS...

Sophisticated thieves can still easily break into a locked car or house, it's just a matter of the profitability to do so. Cartels make billions a year so the profitability is there for them to use increasingly sophisticated means to do so.

You still can't address my argument that the wall will do nothing to stop the narco subs and HDDs, and regular tunnels for that matter.

Your non-sequitir arguments about stopping illegals are not the point of the thread, and weaken your argument on drugs.

In 1970 your side stupidly thought a war on drugs would reduce the drugs,
in 1980 your side stupidly thought taking the fight to S. America would reduce the drugs,
in 1990 your side stupidly thought mandatory minimums would reduce drug dealing,
in 2001 your side stupidly thought the increased border security would reduce the drugs,
in 2018 your side stupidly thinks a wall will reduce the drugs.

Your side has been 100% wrong on everything to do with drugs and we know this because America is AWASH with drugs.

But but but but but but but this time will be different.... Another stupid assumption from the people that have been incorrect since 1970.

Do you truly not understand this simple concept, or are you just being dishonest?

The purpose of a wall is simply to eliminate the very easy method of walking into the US from Mexico , or driving in, so that Border Patrol can focus their resources on other methods.

It's no different than saying "having the Coast Guard patrol the ocean isn't going to to stop people from tunneling into the country" well no shit, but that's not why the Coast Guard is there.

Your entire premise is dishonest.

You seem to have a hard time grasping the basics of this debate, here it is in simplest form:

Whether we do or don't have a border wall a same or larger quantity of drugs will be smuggled into the US year after year. This is a simple concept that you can't seem to grasp.

Since 1970, when the war on drugs started, this has been the case. Nothing your side has proposed has reduced the amount of drugs coming into the US. I have 50 years that supports my side of the argument, you have nothing to support your side.

The only way to reduce the amount of drugs coming into the US is to reduce the demand for the drugs, reduce the number of users and then finally less drugs will enter our country.

 

[Leo123]

You seem to have a hard time grasping the basics of this debate, here it is in simplest form:

Whether we do or don't have a border wall a same or larger quantity of drugs will be smuggled into the US year after year. This is a simple concept that you can't seem to grasp.

Since 1970, when the war on drugs started, this has been the case. Nothing your side has proposed has reduced the amount of drugs coming into the US. I have 50 years that supports my side of the argument, you have nothing to support your side.

The only way to reduce the amount of drugs coming into the US is to reduce the demand for the drugs, reduce the number of users and then finally less drugs will enter our country.

You'd be more honest sounding if you were for legalized drugs. Decades of wars against drugs has not reduced the number of users and never will. I am actually for legalizing, regulating (potency and content) of these drugs and making them available to any US adult citizen to buy. That being said, I still disagree with your assumption that a wall 'does nothing' to stop the flow of drugs.

 

[The Banker]

Again you have not been able to explain how a wall will stop:

The tunnels
the narco subs
the HDD drillers.

We're not here to debate illegals, we are debating the false claim that the wall will stop drugs. The wall will not stop the drugs and you are avoiding the issue.

Look ace, tell me you don't lock your car, lock your house. I HAVE explained, you're just refusing to read. Walls are on land, junior. Subs are in the ocean. They put subs in the ocean because it is getting too hard to go the easier route on land (walls work). Tunnels and drillers happen. Why? Because the wall was stopping them, so they try to go around. You install listening devices, vibration devices, then you start catching them as well. If tunnels were truly working, we wouldn't KNOW they were making them!

I'll try to get through your thick head again: if walls weren't effective, they wouldn't be used everywhere for 10,000 years. You wouldn't be protesting them. They cut down on illegals. They cut down on drugs. They reduce the likelihood of terrorist invasion. They cut down on costs related to illegals. Combined with all our other tools, they help fight crime. If the damn wall wasn't so effective, Nancy Pelosi wouldbn't be holding the nation hostage fighting it telling Trump it is immoral.

This thread is not to debate illegals entering the country, it's to debate whether or not a wall will stop drugs.

A wall will stop the unsophisticated smugglers, TOO BAD the cartels are highly sophisticated with billions of dollars. A wall will do nothing to disrupt the cartels drug smuggling and they will continue to flood the country with as much drugs as they can sell. The narco subs bring in 6 TONS at a time... 6 TONS...

Sophisticated thieves can still easily break into a locked car or house, it's just a matter of the profitability to do so. Cartels make billions a year so the profitability is there for them to use increasingly sophisticated means to do so.

You still can't address my argument that the wall will do nothing to stop the narco subs and HDDs, and regular tunnels for that matter.

Your non-sequitir arguments about stopping illegals are not the point of the thread, and weaken your argument on drugs.

In 1970 your side stupidly thought a war on drugs would reduce the drugs,
in 1980 your side stupidly thought taking the fight to S. America would reduce the drugs,
in 1990 your side stupidly thought mandatory minimums would reduce drug dealing,
in 2001 your side stupidly thought the increased border security would reduce the drugs,
in 2018 your side stupidly thinks a wall will reduce the drugs.

Your side has been 100% wrong on everything to do with drugs and we know this because America is AWASH with drugs.



But but but but but but but this time will be different.... Another stupid assumption from the people that have been incorrect since 1970.

Well since subs don't travel underground, t

Again you have not been able to explain how a wall will stop:

The tunnels
the narco subs
the HDD drillers.

We're not here to debate illegals, we are debating the false claim that the wall will stop drugs. The wall will not stop the drugs and you are avoiding the issue.

Look ace, tell me you don't lock your car, lock your house. I HAVE explained, you're just refusing to read. Walls are on land, junior. Subs are in the ocean. They put subs in the ocean because it is getting too hard to go the easier route on land (walls work). Tunnels and drillers happen. Why? Because the wall was stopping them, so they try to go around. You install listening devices, vibration devices, then you start catching them as well. If tunnels were truly working, we wouldn't KNOW they were making them!

I'll try to get through your thick head again: if walls weren't effective, they wouldn't be used everywhere for 10,000 years. You wouldn't be protesting them. They cut down on illegals. They cut down on drugs. They reduce the likelihood of terrorist invasion. They cut down on costs related to illegals. Combined with all our other tools, they help fight crime. If the damn wall wasn't so effective, Nancy Pelosi wouldbn't be holding the nation hostage fighting it telling Trump it is immoral.

This thread is not to debate illegals entering the country, it's to debate whether or not a wall will stop drugs.

A wall will stop the unsophisticated smugglers, TOO BAD the cartels are highly sophisticated with billions of dollars. A wall will do nothing to disrupt the cartels drug smuggling and they will continue to flood the country with as much drugs as they can sell. The narco subs bring in 6 TONS at a time... 6 TONS...

Sophisticated thieves can still easily break into a locked car or house, it's just a matter of the profitability to do so. Cartels make billions a year so the profitability is there for them to use increasingly sophisticated means to do so.

You still can't address my argument that the wall will do nothing to stop the narco subs and HDDs, and regular tunnels for that matter.

Your non-sequitir arguments about stopping illegals are not the point of the thread, and weaken your argument on drugs.

In 1970 your side stupidly thought a war on drugs would reduce the drugs,
in 1980 your side stupidly thought taking the fight to S. America would reduce the drugs,
in 1990 your side stupidly thought mandatory minimums would reduce drug dealing,
in 2001 your side stupidly thought the increased border security would reduce the drugs,
in 2018 your side stupidly thinks a wall will reduce the drugs.

Your side has been 100% wrong on everything to do with drugs and we know this because America is AWASH with drugs.

But but but but but but but this time will be different.... Another stupid assumption from the people that have been incorrect since 1970.

The Coast Guard is capturing narco-subs. HDD drilling has many failures depending on the length, angle and depth. HDD drilling can be detected especially if we know where it will be used...(like next to a wall). The wall will stop some drugs and is needed. You can say all you want that walls are ineffective but it is one part of border security we need. No borders, no common language, no common culture, no country.

Why would you promote an open border (no wall) when a wall WILL cause drug smugglers to have to purchase, set up, get expertise and avoid many failures already experienced in HDD drilling? Why would you NOT want drug smugglers to have to make a DIY submersible, spend all the money, risk their lives and risk arrest by the Coast Guard? Would you rather they could just walk across anywhere along our border?

Wait wait wait, you don't seem to comprehend that the cartels have: already set up, gotten the expertise, and avoided the failures in HDD tunneling (clearly you haven't read or researched any of the links I provided). The cartels have already spent the money for the narco submarines and are sucessfully using them.

You don't seem to comprehend that drug smuggling is INSANELY profitable so the cartels have an abundance of cash on hand to do all these things and more.

You don't seem to understand the whether we do or don't have a border wall a same or larger quantity of drugs will be smuggled into the US year after year.

Since 1970, when the war on drugs started, this has been the case. Nothing your side has proposed has reduced the amount of drugs coming into the US. I have 50 years that supports my side of the argument, you have nothing to support your side.

Now you are going to try and argue that narco subs aren't flooding our country with TONS (literally) of drugs because the Coast Guard captures a few of them? DO you really think that we are winning the battle against narco subs? Do you really think we are winning the battle against HDD? Do you really think we are winning the battle against the tunnels?

 

[The Banker]

You seem to have a hard time grasping the basics of this debate, here it is in simplest form:

Whether we do or don't have a border wall a same or larger quantity of drugs will be smuggled into the US year after year. This is a simple concept that you can't seem to grasp.

Since 1970, when the war on drugs started, this has been the case. Nothing your side has proposed has reduced the amount of drugs coming into the US. I have 50 years that supports my side of the argument, you have nothing to support your side.

The only way to reduce the amount of drugs coming into the US is to reduce the demand for the drugs, reduce the number of users and then finally less drugs will enter our country.

You'd be more honest sounding if you were for legalized drugs. Decades of wars against drugs has not reduced the number of users and never will. I am actually for legalizing, regulating (potency and content) of these drugs and making them available to any US adult citizen to buy. That being said, I still disagree with your assumption that a wall 'does nothing' to stop the flow of drugs.

I don't know what the answer to the problem is. Legalizing would definitely shut down the cartels completely, and all the many many problems associated with them and the illegal black market. Legalizing could also create other problems.

Maybe I should modify my statement:
At the end of the year the same amount of drugs will enter our country with or without a border wall. I will cite 50 years of our "war on drugs" to substantiate this as year after year an increasing amount of drugs has entered our country regardless of any means we employ to reduce them.

 

[MarathonMike]

Trump's speech... wow what a fool.

The drugs come into the country by submarine, tunnel, by car/truck, shipping.

The amount of drugs walked over the border is very small.

Stopping that will have no effect on drugs in our country.

If you think "it's better than nothing" you are completely wrong because the price tag of a wall is high and it would be better to spend the money on more effective means.

Right now we stop such a minor amount of drugs coming into the country that it has no effect at all. A border wall will be the same, it will have no effect. If you want to stop drugs you need a better idea than a border wall, if you can't understand that I feel sorry for you.

You nor anyone else knows what percentage of drugs comes walking or wading across our unprotected border. We do know it is NOT a trivial percentage. Secondly a wall is an important tool of control for border agents to manage drug smugglers, human traffickers, illegals, etc. since a wall tends to funnel the riff raff toward the ports of entry if there is a barrier. You and the rest of the open borders crowd pretends like it's THE WALL and nothing else. You need THE WALL plus all the rest of border security: agents, dogs, overhead surveillance, drones, port of entry scanning equipment, the whole 9 yards.

Or are you saying let's just take down the wall because "walls don't work"? Come on I keep waiting for a Liberal to have the balls to say "Tear down that wall, it doesn't work!!" Will you be the first?

 

[Flopper]

Of the 17 largest drug busts in the US history exactly zero were the result of illegal crossing of barrier walls or fences. Two resulted from tunnels both of which could easily pass under the Trump proposed wall. The 15 remaining drug busts resulted from drugs entering or attempted entrance on boats, private and commercial air craft, ship containers and trucks coming through border stations. Not one was the result of people climbing walls or fences carrying drugs.
17 of the Biggest Drug Busts in U.S. History Took Billions of Dollars in Drugs

That tends to suggest walls work.

Really? Out of 2000 miles of border, today there are only about 100 miles of what you might call walls.

 

[saveliberty]

Of the 17 largest drug busts in the US history exactly zero were the result of illegal crossing of barrier walls or fences. Two resulted from tunnels both of which could easily pass under the Trump proposed wall. The 15 remaining drug busts resulted from drugs entering or attempted entrance on boats, private and commercial air craft, ship containers and trucks coming through border stations. Not one was the result of people climbing walls or fences carrying drugs.
17 of the Biggest Drug Busts in U.S. History Took Billions of Dollars in Drugs

That tends to suggest walls work.

Really? Out of 2000 miles of border, today there are only about 100 miles of what you might call walls.

Yes, it does. Imagine if we add more.

 

[Flopper]

I get it, you'll never admit reality, but you should try it- the truth shall set you free.

You have not presented reality. The reality is that walls do stop invasions and that includes drugs. No wall is going to stop 100% but it is meant to deter. I don't understand why some would deny that a wall is a deterrent while living behind them themselves. No, the only objection to the wall is that Democrats hate Trump and will not give him even 1 iota. They put their political ambitions and hatred for one man above everyone in the country and outside the country.

REALITY!!!! that's not a word you can use. Again, nobody on your side has addressed my facts.

How is a wall going to stop the tunnels?
How is a wall going to stop the HDD?
How is a wall going to stop the narco subs?

It will not and for that reason they will not reduce the drugs in anyway. Any reduction in unsophisticated groups walking drugs over the border will be offset by the more sophisticated means. You don't seem to comprehend that the big cartels have billions of dollars and can easily move drugs across the border at will by the methods I have just listed. If the demand for drugs increases then the cartels will easily import more drugs into the country using their sophisticated, unstoppable methods. It's simple economics...

The profit on illegal drugs is so high, drug transporters can afford just about any means needed to get them in the country. Stopping drug use by interrupting the flow into the country will never work. If you seal the Southern border, they'll use the northern border, seal the northern border they will use our 88,000 miles of shore.

Right now most of the drugs come through legal points of entry because it's the safest and cheapest way to bring in drugs. Walls are irrelevant when we talk about drugs coming into the country. It's just something Trump made up because it sounds good.

 

[Leo123]

I don't know what the answer to the problem is. Legalizing would definitely shut down the cartels completely, and all the many many problems associated with them and the illegal black market. Legalizing could also create other problems.

Maybe I should modify my statement:
At the end of the year the same amount of drugs will enter our country with or without a border wall. I will cite 50 years of our "war on drugs" to substantiate this as year after year an increasing amount of drugs has entered our country regardless of any means we employ to reduce them.

That statement seems fair. While I still believe a wall would help with illegal aliens and human trafficking, I would also posit that if these drugs were legal and regulated as to strength and content, deaths from overdoses would most likely plummet. IMO the 'right' has this wrong. There is a lot of money and energy going to law enforcement for drug abatement and fighting the crime that comes along with the illegality of substances. IMO law enforcement could have much better things to do. There is a lesson to be learned from alcohol prohibition.

 

[Flopper]

Again you have not been able to explain how a wall will stop:

The tunnels
the narco subs
the HDD drillers.

We're not here to debate illegals, we are debating the false claim that the wall will stop drugs. The wall will not stop the drugs and you are avoiding the issue.

Look ace, tell me you don't lock your car, lock your house. I HAVE explained, you're just refusing to read. Walls are on land, junior. Subs are in the ocean. They put subs in the ocean because it is getting too hard to go the easier route on land (walls work). Tunnels and drillers happen. Why? Because the wall was stopping them, so they try to go around. You install listening devices, vibration devices, then you start catching them as well. If tunnels were truly working, we wouldn't KNOW they were making them!

I'll try to get through your thick head again: if walls weren't effective, they wouldn't be used everywhere for 10,000 years. You wouldn't be protesting them. They cut down on illegals. They cut down on drugs. They reduce the likelihood of terrorist invasion. They cut down on costs related to illegals. Combined with all our other tools, they help fight crime. If the damn wall wasn't so effective, Nancy Pelosi wouldbn't be holding the nation hostage fighting it telling Trump it is immoral.

This thread is not to debate illegals entering the country, it's to debate whether or not a wall will stop drugs.

A wall will stop the unsophisticated smugglers, TOO BAD the cartels are highly sophisticated with billions of dollars. A wall will do nothing to disrupt the cartels drug smuggling and they will continue to flood the country with as much drugs as they can sell. The narco subs bring in 6 TONS at a time... 6 TONS...

Sophisticated thieves can still easily break into a locked car or house, it's just a matter of the profitability to do so. Cartels make billions a year so the profitability is there for them to use increasingly sophisticated means to do so.

You still can't address my argument that the wall will do nothing to stop the narco subs and HDDs, and regular tunnels for that matter.

Your non-sequitir arguments about stopping illegals are not the point of the thread, and weaken your argument on drugs.

In 1970 your side stupidly thought a war on drugs would reduce the drugs,
in 1980 your side stupidly thought taking the fight to S. America would reduce the drugs,
in 1990 your side stupidly thought mandatory minimums would reduce drug dealing,
in 2001 your side stupidly thought the increased border security would reduce the drugs,
in 2018 your side stupidly thinks a wall will reduce the drugs.

Your side has been 100% wrong on everything to do with drugs and we know this because America is AWASH with drugs.

But but but but but but but this time will be different.... Another stupid assumption from the people that have been incorrect since 1970.

Do you truly not understand this simple concept, or are you just being dishonest?

The purpose of a wall is simply to eliminate the very easy method of walking into the US from Mexico , or driving in, so that Border Patrol can focus their resources on other methods.

It's no different than saying "having the Coast Guard patrol the ocean isn't going to to stop people from tunneling into the country" well no shit, but that's not why the Coast Guard is there.

Your entire premise is dishonest.

If Trump's wall actually covered the southern border or at least most of it, I might agree with you but the wall he's building will cover less than 10% of the border. By the time it's complete, assuming congress ever gives him the money, Trump's term will be over and there will be a new congress, all of which may be controlled by democrats. Starting a project of this size that will eventually cost over 40 billion and take at least 10 years without strong support of both parities and the general public is foolish.

 

[Leo123]

The profit on illegal drugs is so high, drug transporters can afford just about any means needed to get them in the country. Stopping drug use by interrupting the flow into the country will never work. If you seal the Southern border, they'll use the northern border, seal the northern border they will use our 88,000 miles of shore.

Right now most of the drugs come through legal points of entry because it's the safest and cheapest way to bring in drugs. Walls are irrelevant when we talk about drugs coming into the country. It's just something Trump made up because it sounds good.

Lots of politicians say things because it 'sounds good' to their constituents. (Kinda like 'RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA!!!!) Frankly with the way Trump seems to have a lot of energy at his age, I have always thought that he has some pretty 'killer' stuff.

 

[Flopper]

The profit on illegal drugs is so high, drug transporters can afford just about any means needed to get them in the country. Stopping drug use by interrupting the flow into the country will never work. If you seal the Southern border, they'll use the northern border, seal the northern border they will use our 88,000 miles of shore.

Right now most of the drugs come through legal points of entry because it's the safest and cheapest way to bring in drugs. Walls are irrelevant when we talk about drugs coming into the country. It's just something Trump made up because it sounds good.

Lots of politicians say things because it 'sounds good' to their constituents. (Kinda like 'RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA!!!!) Frankly with the way Trump seems to have a lot of energy at his age, I have always thought that he has some pretty 'killer' stuff.

'killer' stuff??

 

[beautress]

The profit on illegal drugs is so high, drug transporters can afford just about any means needed to get them in the country. Stopping drug use by interrupting the flow into the country will never work. If you seal the Southern border, they'll use the northern border, seal the northern border they will use our 88,000 miles of shore.

Right now most of the drugs come through legal points of entry because it's the safest and cheapest way to bring in drugs. Walls are irrelevant when we talk about drugs coming into the country. It's just something Trump made up because it sounds good.

Lots of politicians say things because it 'sounds good' to their constituents. (Kinda like 'RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA!!!!) Frankly with the way Trump seems to have a lot of energy at his age, I have always thought that he has some pretty 'killer' stuff.

'killer' stuff??

I'm not sure but think it means "good stuff," Mr. Flopper.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Trump's speech... wow what a fool.

The drugs come into the country by submarine, tunnel, by car/truck, shipping.

The amount of drugs walked over the border is very small.

Stopping that will have no effect on drugs in our country.

If you think "it's better than nothing" you are completely wrong because the price tag of a wall is high and it would be better to spend the money on more effective means.

Right now we stop such a minor amount of drugs coming into the country that it has no effect at all. A border wall will be the same, it will have no effect. If you want to stop drugs you need a better idea than a border wall, if you can't understand that I feel sorry for you.

Normally Democrats emphasize the demand side of economics and Republicans try to solve a problem by focusing on the supply side. In this instance, the public has been led as to which is which.

The supply side this time is NOT the drugs. In this instance, the supply side of the equation is drug users. The United States manufactures a steady supply of drug users. In the United States, Americans consume 80 percent of the world's opioids. I recall a lawsuit from about five years ago that gave alarming stats on how much profit and how many people were on opioids, how many died, etc. in the U.S.

Five Pharmaceutical Companies Sued in Response to Opioid Addiction Epidemic

That begs the questions, At what age does the average American start taking opioids? When those people become addicts and then lose their insurance (i.e. being taken off mommy's insurance for example), what are their options for getting more drugs? Being addicts that have, most likely gotten a criminal record, so where do they get their money since they have no high school diploma, job skills, work history, problem solving skills, a driver's license, and in all likelihood, they have a criminal record?

The United States already has more people in prison than any nation on the planet, representing 22 percent of the world's prison population. Will a wall stop the government, misguided parents, doctors / mental health professionals and Big Pharma from creating the millions of drug addicts we manufacture?

Unless you address the supply of drug addicts demanding the drugs, a wall is about as useful as using a hammer to fix your computer.

 

[Picaro]

The wall around Obama's house won't keep drugs out of there either, but so what?

Some people managed to get over the Berlin wall once in a while, too, but they didn't tear it down; that's because it worked far more often than it failed. The wall will make it much easier to focus on the more elaborate and time-consuming pro smugglers, so it is indeed going to be effective, as will enforcing laws against hiring these criminal illegals and forcing Mexico to pay for the costs of those illegals to our courts and social services, including lost wages by Americans and the losses and expenses to the criminal activities of their citizens running amok here.

 

[toobfreak]

Wait wait wait, you don't seem to comprehend
You don't seem to comprehend
You don't seem to understand

The Banker gets it! The BIGGER the wall, the MORE drugs that come in! Trump is actually working with the cartels to help them bring in more drugs faster!

It's as if the whole and only point of the wall were to stop drug traffic!!!

 

[Porter Rockwell]

The wall around Obama's house won't keep drugs out of there either, but so what?

Some people managed to get over the Berlin wall once in a while, too, but they didn't tear it down; that's because it worked far more often than it failed. The wall will make it much easier to focus on the more elaborate and time-consuming pro smugglers, so it is indeed going to be effective, as will enforcing laws against hiring these criminal illegals and forcing Mexico to pay for the costs of those illegals to our courts and social services, including lost wages by Americans and the losses and expenses to the criminal activities of their citizens running amok here.

Is the Berlin Wall still standing? Is there some mental block that stands in the way of those wanting a wall so bad that they cannot see that the reasons other countries built a wall are not the same reasons extremists want a wall in the U.S.?