• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does a border wall work

jdog21

jdog21

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
3,677
Reaction score
785
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
All the talk about border walls and all the people who chirp they dont work, leads me to think reasonably does it?

If you had a steel and concrete wall 30 foot high thats then separated by 100 feet and then have another 20 foot high fence. Added with more border security agents. How are we not to think that this wont keep alot of drugs out and significantly lower the illegal aliens that cross from the border?

The first wall is hard to breach, climbing over is significantly harder to do. Have you ever tried to climb a rope 30ft high, also the descent it pretty dangerous from that height. Now the deterrent factor will reduce the rate of people that try and cross. Secondly the strength and athleticism of the person that trys to climb the wall would have to be pretty good and this would keep the success rate low. The ones that make it over then have to run across a small distant and then climb a second easier fence. But the time it take to cross the first big wall and then the second fence compared to what it takes now significantly increases the chance of the person being caught by border patrol.

The ways that someone or a group would use to climb the fences makes it more expensive and bulkier to do adding to the decrease amount of people making the attempt and increase chance of them being spotted.
Sure there are those who would dig tunnels. But 1 the added weight of the wall means the tunnel has to be deeper and the added distance means the tunnel would have to be longer. This would increase the chances of the tunnel being found and increase the costs to the persons digging the tunnel. Cartels yes would probably still do it but decreasing the amount of crossers and reducing their numbers plus increasing the costs of the crossing all reduce the amount of drugs coming into the states and reducing the profits for the cartels themselves.
Also having the double style fence reduces those small time drug runners who through drugs over the border to person waiting on the other side. The distant would be too far for people to throw drugs. Elaborate systems like a catapult are easier for agents to spot as well. San Deigo has probably the best fencing on the border and sense that fencing was built the amount of crossers in that area has been greatly reduced.

Regardless of what you think about the costs, your thoughts on Trump, or your immigration position, Would the wall and double fencing work?
 
Personally, I'm not convinced of the efficacy of a physical wall. There is wildlife, ranching and hydrology that would be effected. On top of that there just isn't a lot of evidence that the wall does what it's intended to do. Smugglers regularly catapult loads over the fence now and in more urban areas there are tunnels all over the place.

The solution is manpower combined with an immigration policy that makes LAWFUL immigration easier. Make it easy to come here legally and then, when you find someone coming across illegally, you can bet they have bad intentions.
 
jdog21 said:
All the talk about border walls and all the people who chirp they dont work, leads me to think reasonably does it?

If you had a steel and concrete wall 30 foot high thats then separated by 100 feet and then have another 20 foot high fence. Added with more border security agents. How are we not to think that this wont keep alot of drugs out and significantly lower the illegal aliens that cross from the border?

The first wall is hard to breach, climbing over is significantly harder to do. Have you ever tried to climb a rope 30ft high, also the descent it pretty dangerous from that height. Now the deterrent factor will reduce the rate of people that try and cross. Secondly the strength and athleticism of the person that trys to climb the wall would have to be pretty good and this would keep the success rate low. The ones that make it over then have to run across a small distant and then climb a second easier fence. But the time it take to cross the first big wall and then the second fence compared to what it takes now significantly increases the chance of the person being caught by border patrol.

The ways that someone or a group would use to climb the fences makes it more expensive and bulkier to do adding to the decrease amount of people making the attempt and increase chance of them being spotted.
Sure there are those who would dig tunnels. But 1 the added weight of the wall means the tunnel has to be deeper and the added distance means the tunnel would have to be longer. This would increase the chances of the tunnel being found and increase the costs to the persons digging the tunnel. Cartels yes would probably still do it but decreasing the amount of crossers and reducing their numbers plus increasing the costs of the crossing all reduce the amount of drugs coming into the states and reducing the profits for the cartels themselves.
Also having the double style fence reduces those small time drug runners who through drugs over the border to person waiting on the other side. The distant would be too far for people to throw drugs. Elaborate systems like a catapult are easier for agents to spot as well. San Deigo has probably the best fencing on the border and sense that fencing was built the amount of crossers in that area has been greatly reduced.

Regardless of what you think about the costs, your thoughts on Trump, or your immigration position, Would the wall and double fencing work?
Click to expand...
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-suggests-a-rope-for-mexicans-on-top-of-his-border-wall
During a town-hall meeting in New Hampshire on Wednesday, Donald Trump said if elected president he would build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border so tall that no one could scale it—or would regret it if they did. “Once they get up there,” he said, “there will be no way to get down. Well, maybe a rope, but...
 
I don't care about a border wall. Eliminate every single benefit for coming here illegally and people just won't come. They will self-deport. It's not that hard.
 
jdog21 said:
All the talk about border walls and all the people who chirp they dont work, leads me to think reasonably does it?

If you had a steel and concrete wall 30 foot high thats then separated by 100 feet and then have another 20 foot high fence. Added with more border security agents. How are we not to think that this wont keep alot of drugs out and significantly lower the illegal aliens that cross from the border?

The first wall is hard to breach, climbing over is significantly harder to do. Have you ever tried to climb a rope 30ft high, also the descent it pretty dangerous from that height. Now the deterrent factor will reduce the rate of people that try and cross. Secondly the strength and athleticism of the person that trys to climb the wall would have to be pretty good and this would keep the success rate low. The ones that make it over then have to run across a small distant and then climb a second easier fence. But the time it take to cross the first big wall and then the second fence compared to what it takes now significantly increases the chance of the person being caught by border patrol.

The ways that someone or a group would use to climb the fences makes it more expensive and bulkier to do adding to the decrease amount of people making the attempt and increase chance of them being spotted.
Sure there are those who would dig tunnels. But 1 the added weight of the wall means the tunnel has to be deeper and the added distance means the tunnel would have to be longer. This would increase the chances of the tunnel being found and increase the costs to the persons digging the tunnel. Cartels yes would probably still do it but decreasing the amount of crossers and reducing their numbers plus increasing the costs of the crossing all reduce the amount of drugs coming into the states and reducing the profits for the cartels themselves.
Also having the double style fence reduces those small time drug runners who through drugs over the border to person waiting on the other side. The distant would be too far for people to throw drugs. Elaborate systems like a catapult are easier for agents to spot as well. San Deigo has probably the best fencing on the border and sense that fencing was built the amount of crossers in that area has been greatly reduced.

Regardless of what you think about the costs, your thoughts on Trump, or your immigration position, Would the wall and double fencing work?
Click to expand...

I think the only wall that truly worked was the Berlin Wall because you were shot if you attempted to cross it.
 
I think illegal immigration is an issue but the wall is a waste of money. Drones, more officers on the wall, E-Verify rules. Those are all things I support.
 
soylentgreen said:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-suggests-a-rope-for-mexicans-on-top-of-his-border-wall
During a town-hall meeting in New Hampshire on Wednesday, Donald Trump said if elected president he would build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border so tall that no one could scale it—or would regret it if they did. “Once they get up there,” he said, “there will be no way to get down. Well, maybe a rope, but...
Click to expand...

Still the upper body strength needed to descent on a rope from that hieght would have to be in pretty good shape wouldnt you agree?
 
Carleen said:
I think the only wall that truly worked was the Berlin Wall because you were shot if you attempted to cross it.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure that a lot of the people that are hell bent on a wall would be cool with mining the border so long as it kept the USA a little bit whiter for them.
 
jdog21 said:
Still the upper body strength needed to descent on a rope from that hieght would have to be in pretty good shape wouldnt you agree?
Click to expand...

No. A rope ladder would work just as well.
Not as if they do not have the hemp to make ropes with.
 
Last edited:
Cephus said:
I don't care about a border wall. Eliminate every single benefit for coming here illegally and people just won't come. They will self-deport. It's not that hard.
Click to expand...

I agree but I dont think we can eliminate all the benefits. Just hiding out and living on the streets to alot of people would be considered a benefit compared to where they are coming from.
 
jdog21 said:
All the talk about border walls and all the people who chirp they dont work, leads me to think reasonably does it?

If you had a steel and concrete wall 30 foot high thats then separated by 100 feet and then have another 20 foot high fence. Added with more border security agents. How are we not to think that this wont keep alot of drugs out and significantly lower the illegal aliens that cross from the border?

The first wall is hard to breach, climbing over is significantly harder to do. Have you ever tried to climb a rope 30ft high, also the descent it pretty dangerous from that height. Now the deterrent factor will reduce the rate of people that try and cross. Secondly the strength and athleticism of the person that trys to climb the wall would have to be pretty good and this would keep the success rate low. The ones that make it over then have to run across a small distant and then climb a second easier fence. But the time it take to cross the first big wall and then the second fence compared to what it takes now significantly increases the chance of the person being caught by border patrol.

The ways that someone or a group would use to climb the fences makes it more expensive and bulkier to do adding to the decrease amount of people making the attempt and increase chance of them being spotted.
Sure there are those who would dig tunnels. But 1 the added weight of the wall means the tunnel has to be deeper and the added distance means the tunnel would have to be longer. This would increase the chances of the tunnel being found and increase the costs to the persons digging the tunnel. Cartels yes would probably still do it but decreasing the amount of crossers and reducing their numbers plus increasing the costs of the crossing all reduce the amount of drugs coming into the states and reducing the profits for the cartels themselves.
Also having the double style fence reduces those small time drug runners who through drugs over the border to person waiting on the other side. The distant would be too far for people to throw drugs. Elaborate systems like a catapult are easier for agents to spot as well. San Deigo has probably the best fencing on the border and sense that fencing was built the amount of crossers in that area has been greatly reduced.

Regardless of what you think about the costs, your thoughts on Trump, or your immigration position, Would the wall and double fencing work?
Click to expand...

Half the border is the Rio Grande. So lets say you build this wall. Mexico is not going to let us build it on the Mexican side, so we have to build it on our side of the river and thus give the river to Mexico. Point being, its not going to happen.
 
iliveonramen said:
I think illegal immigration is an issue but the wall is a waste of money. Drones, more officers on the wall, E-Verify rules. Those are all things I support.
Click to expand...
See original post
Regardless of what you think about the costs, your thoughts on Trump, or your immigration position, Would the wall and double fencing work?
Click to expand...
 
soylentgreen said:
No. A rope ladder would work just as well.
Click to expand...

What about the fact that they would need to do this twice and the time it takes to do it and the increase in border patrol personnell. You dont think it increases the likelyhood of them being caught?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
You guys with the constant race baiting. /facepalm
Click to expand...

More like us guys that constantly call a spade a spade. The wall is a dumb idea for the simple reason that half the border is the Rio Grande. You think we are going to build a 30 foot concrete wall (which is ridiculous in and of itself) on our side of the Rio Grande and thus give that river to Mexico? Of course not. It is like every wall proponent has never even so much as looked at a map.
 
Walls and fences do what they are designed to do. That is why millions of walls have been built all over the world. The discussion should be not if a wall works but where and what type we need. There is no need for a wall where we have a natural barrier such as a 10,000' mountain. However in an urban area where you have millions of people a wall is a necessity.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Half the border is the Rio Grande. So lets say you build this wall. Mexico is not going to let us build it on the Mexican side, so we have to build it on our side of the river and thus give the river to Mexico. Point being, its not going to happen.
Click to expand...

Could you explain how a wall on the texas side of the border would there for sced the river to Mexico
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
More like us guys that constantly call a spade a spade. The wall is a dumb idea for the simple reason that half the border is the Rio Grande. You think we are going to build a 30 foot concrete wall (which is ridiculous in and of itself) on our side of the Rio Grande and thus give that river to Mexico? Of course not. It is like every wall proponent has never even so much as looked at a map.
Click to expand...



nah you use black and brown people as bats because you lack an intellectual argument and fall back on the dumb "yer a racist" left wing racial politics. It's as racist as you claim others are.
 
Carleen said:
I think the only wall that truly worked was the Berlin Wall because you were shot if you attempted to cross it.
Click to expand...

Cant see us doing that. But there was a lot more reasons why it worked.
 
Cephus said:
I don't care about a border wall. Eliminate every single benefit for coming here illegally and people just won't come. They will self-deport. It's not that hard.
Click to expand...

It is very hard politically because that impacts the "job creators" who just happen to be campaign contributors and very averse to raising wages and/or benefits to entice US citizens into doing those jobs. It would also seem to require public schools, and other government programs or agencies, not to "harbor" or "assist" illegal immigrants by granting them taxpayer funded aid.

We could just make them legal by granting them all amnesty, accepting anyone from anywhere that wanted to be here and then it would all be OK coming in 3, 2, 1...
 
jdog21 said:
Could you explain how a wall on the texas side of the border would there for sced the river to Mexico
Click to expand...

See a map:

pdf-Map-Of-The-Us-And-Mexico-Border-23-For-with-Map-Of-The-Us-And-Mexico-Border.jpg

If you put a 30 foot high wall along that border on our side of it, then yes, you have given that river to Mexico because how in the hell is anyone on our side of the wall going to use it then. You have cut off God knows how many farmers and ranchers on and near the border from their only significant source of water for ranching and irrigation. This is obvious because you have put a 30 foot high wall between them and that water source. In contrast, on the Mexican side, there is no wall between farmers, ranchers and so on and that water source. Thus you gave the river to Mexico.

This is why it is never going to happen. It is why the talk of a wall across the entire U.S. border with Mexico is nonsense.
 
jdog21 said:
Cant see us doing that. But there was a lot more reasons why it worked.
Click to expand...

I think being shot is a pretty strong deterrent. No need for more reasons in my opinion.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
nah you use black and brown people as bats because you lack an intellectual argument and fall back on the dumb "yer a racist" left wing racial politics. It's as racist as you claim others are.
Click to expand...

The people thinking they are going to get a wall have obviously never even so much as looked at a map of the United States as they are obviously unaware that half the border between us and Mexico is a river. Yet, we are the ones that lack an intellectual argument?

How are you going to build that wall without giving the Rio Grande to Mexico?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
The people thinking they are going to get a wall have obviously never even so much as looked at a map of the United States as they are obviously unaware that half the border between us and Mexico is a river. Yet, we are the ones that lack an intellectual argument?

How are you going to build that wall without giving the Rio Grande to Mexico?
Click to expand...




I'm still wondering if you are going to prove your racist claim. Once you do that we can talk about what you want. deal?
 
jdog21 said:
Would the wall and double fencing work?
Click to expand...

Yes, in the sense it will stop and/or dramatically slow illegal crossings and drug smuggling in the immediate area.

However, it won't have the effect people might expect, as constantly finding new routes is a big part of the smuggling business.

Drug cartels in particular have nothing but time and money to throw at developing new methods, and making smuggling people more difficult also makes it more profitable.

They will find new approaches, and bypass the wall.

Ultimately, I predict effectively zero impact on drug smuggling, and moderate impact on people entering illegal. Likely we'll have some really nasty stories about people dying crammed in shipping containers, trucks, and rafts as the smugglers explore new avenues, but that's nothing new.

The people most hurt will be the truly desperate border crossers, who can't afford professional assistance, but I suppose that's the point.

There's a school of thought that this will force them to address political problems in their home countries, but that will probably get much worse before it gets any better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom