Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Work Resumes On Virtual Fence With Mexico

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the eyes-to-see-with dept.

Security 259

Hugh Pickens writes "Work resumed this week on the five-year project to link a chain of tower-mounted sensors and other surveillance equipment over most of the 2,000-mile border with Mexico. The network of cameras, radar, and communications gear is intended to speed deployment of US Border Patrol officers to intercept illegal immigrants, drug smugglers and other violators, yielding greater 'operational control' over the vast and rugged area. A $20M pilot project for the Secure Border Initiative, or 'SBInet,' carried out in the Bush administration, was generally considered a colossal IT failure. Since that time the DHS has given the prime contractor, Boeing, another $600M. The government says it has learned many lessons and made many changes in the program since the previous pilot rushed off-the-shelf equipment into operation without testing. The Obama administration has lowered the cost estimate for the 5-year project by $1.1B, to $6.7B, mainly by deferring work on the most difficult 200 miles of the border, in southwest Texas."

cancel ×

259 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Frist parst (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27890605)

Frist parst?

shyeah right (3, Funny)

David Gerard (12369) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890609)

Hey, how about that economic collapse? [today.com]

"A majority of US soldiers in Afghanistan stated the place was 'just fine, really' and they were learning to speak Pashto rather than returning. Canada looked south and snickered, though not very much as they still had Stephen Harper to cope with. The Kingdom of Mexico stated its 'regret' today that it has had to close its borders to American refugees."

(I'm in Eng-er-lund. We're way more fucked. And we have Gordon Brown.)

Re:shyeah right (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891591)

and if anyone's wondering how fucked we are in England we're this fucked:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45737000/jpg/_45737580_brown226getty.jpg [bbc.co.uk]

Yes, that's a real picture and yes, the last European leader who pushed ID cards for every citizen starting with select minorities and immigrants had those banners behind him too.

In other news (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890645)

The Mexican border has moved North between 1000 miles (at the northernmost point of the border) and 1500 miles (at the border's southernmost point).

Re:In other news Which, The Onion or The Times... (1)

PickleToast (1547169) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891275)

The Mexican border has moved North between 1000 miles (at the northernmost point of the border) and 1500 miles (at the border's southernmost point).

Do you have any proof of this? I've looked a bit and can't find any reference's on this topic?

Re:In other news Which, The Onion or The Times... (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891605)

Note the breaking news of Febuary 28, 2009 [wikia.com]

Borders & fences don't stop desperate people. (0, Flamebait)

reporter (666905) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891679)

Borders and fences do not stop desperate people (who are often literally hungry due to lack of nourishment) from fleeing to the United States. An even bigger joke than fences is the immigration "reform" bill that appears periodically on Capitol Hill and that is supposed to permanently fix the "problem" of uncontrolled illegal immigration. This "problem" is often described as an American problem for us Americans to fix.

That is just politically correct propaganda. The "problem" is not an American problem.

What is the problem? Mexicans hate to live in a society created by their culture. It cannot generate sufficient wealth. Mexicans lack the ability to build a modern society. That is the problem. For political reasons, no one will state this obvious problem.

Building a modern, properous society is not rocket science. Look at Eastern Europe. Within about 1 year of liberation (in about 1990) from Soviet oppression, the Eastern Europeans laid the foundation of a genuine democratic government and a free market. Today, the Eastern Europeans are comfortable, have enough to eat, and have a decent live. Many Eastern Europeans do emigrate to, say, England for better economic opportunities, but they are not doing so out of desperation.

Now look at Mexico. It is blessed with plenty of natural resources: vast regions that are ideal for agriculture, oil, etc. Yet, despite having more than 50 years to build a prosperous society, the Mexicans did not do so. They turned a bounty of natural resources into stinking poverty, infested with drug gangs. No one -- not the Soviet Union of the old days nor any other external power -- imposed or is imposing this rotten society on the Mexicans. The Mexicans themselves created it. They are solely responsible for it.

By stark contrast, Japan has almost no natural resources, but the Japanese people turned their barren rock into the 2nd wealthiest nation in the world. Furthermore, Japan is a liberal Western democracy.

What do the Japanese and the Eastern Europeans have but Mexicans lack?

Washington should explore the possibility of a colonial approach to dealing with Mexico. If the Mexicans lack the ability to build a prosperous society, then we Americans should take effective control of the Mexican government and run Mexico as a de-facto colony of the USA. We in the West know how to build a prosperous society, and we should impose the process of Westernization onto Mexico.

We Americans should not allow desperate illegal aliens to suppress the wages of the American underclass. We have an obligation to help our own citizens first. Americans in the unskilled labor market are American citizens. We have an obligation to help them, not the Mexicans.

Good Grief! (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890665)

$600 million for towers with cameras and motion detectors. Another slam-dunk pork contract for one of the biggest porkers of them all, Boeing. Can they do better on this than on the famous Dreamliner? Not likly, we might as well just pile up the cash and use it to BBQ hot dogs or something.

Re:Good Grief! (2, Informative)

j-stroy (640921) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891747)

Latin American culture has shown itself to be incredibly ingenious with minimal resources. This fence is a boondoggle. I spoke with someone who ran the border several times. One technique is to soak their clothes in a bucket of ice water to get past infrared sensors. The Mythbusters did a great sensor test [kwc.org] , where a simple pane of glass was enough to walk in front of infrared sensors, and a bedsheet over the head hosed ultrasonic sensors at close range. Walking very slowly worked too.

It must be just me... (4, Insightful)

willoughby (1367773) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890671)

A Latina family live near me. Mom, Dad, & a couple of pre-high school boys. They peridocally come through the neighborhood selling fresh, homemade tamales. I always buy (they're delicious) and have even given them a few things, like an unabridged english dictionary for the kids in school.

These folks are just trying to make a living & put their kids through school so they can have a better life. I guess I'm the only person in the USA who doesn't recognize that to be the horrible crime it is.

It's not the first time I've been wrong but sometimes I like being wrong. Just ask my ex-wives about that.

Re:It must be just me... (5, Insightful)

ChromeAeonium (1026952) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890725)

It has nothing to do with any of that. It is about using the proper channels to do it. That's not to say that some people aren't just bigots (some are), or that the immigration system doesn't need some work (it does), but it really isn't about not wanting immigrant to get a a better life. It is about people doing things the legal way (and stopping any other unlawful activities that cross the border).

Re:It must be just me... (4, Insightful)

owlnation (858981) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891059)

It is about people doing things the legal way (and stopping any other unlawful activities that cross the border).

No, it isn't. It's just theater. Here's a question... Prisons. Don't get much more secure than that do you? Are there drugs in prisons? Oh yes, there's plenty. So yeah... good luck stopping illegal traffic. Good luck with that indeed.

Re:It must be just me... (1)

DarkIye (875062) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891337)

Good idea. Let's abolish the police force entirely, too, since crimes happen all the time, and obviously the best way to deal with that is to get rid of anything getting in its way.

Re:It must be just me... (4, Insightful)

bfields (66644) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891213)

The "proper channels" set immigration limits drastically to less than what economic forces would set them to.

If you agree that massive disregard for the law creates problems, then, in tandem with increased enforcement, you should also support a huge increase in the amount of immigration allowed.

My impression is that most economists believe the eventual result of increased immigration would be an increase in employment and standard of living on *both* sides of the border.

Re:It must be just me... (2)

ChromeAeonium (1026952) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891767)

The "proper channels" set immigration limits drastically to less than what economic forces would set them to.

I've always found that to be the kicker to the illegal immigration thing. Sure, what they're doing is illegal, but that doesn't mean it isn't understandable. The proper channels (the immigration system) do need some work, and the illegal immigrants are usually just doing what will be best for them, so I can't say I blame for hopping the border illegally. Nonetheless, there are plenty of otherwise necessary rules that give some people hard times, and we can't just have people doing as they please legal or not because of it.

Re:It must be just me... (2, Insightful)

fluffykitty1234 (1005053) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891273)

Just like when our ancestors came to America, they all filed the proper paperwork and... oh wait a second...

Re:It must be just me... (5, Insightful)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890753)

i agree, i work in the construction trade and done so for most my adult life, all the mexicans i see are among the best workers there are, they show up everyday on time and do great work and are pleasant people to be around, i can understand wanting to stop the violence on the border but stopping people that want to make an honest living is a crime in it self, i think the playing field in the US should be made level so the US citizens that need/want to work can do so without being undercut by corrupt US businesses that exploit the mexican laborers just to improve their profits = more US citizens out of work...

Re:It must be just me... (4, Informative)

Bearhouse (1034238) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890971)

Problem is , many of these poor people are exploited by organised crime (human traffic is big business). If they're 'lucky', they get across OK; if not, they end up dying in the desert, foced into protitution or working all their life to pay offthe 'debt' they owe.

The trafficers are the bastards we need to stop.

Re:It must be just me... (2, Insightful)

earlymon (1116185) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891173)

But hey, you gotta love the Virtual Fence. Higher tech means it will take high tech - beginning with bribes - to overcome it.

So, if what you say is true, then the Virtual Fence is lead-pipe cinch guarantee to make the problem worse.

Re:It must be just me... (1)

bfields (66644) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891219)

Yup. And the way to do that is to provide more *legal* routes to immigration and to starve the traffickers of their customers.

Re:It must be just me... (3, Informative)

Darby (84953) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891501)

The trafficers are the bastards we need to stop.

No, you just acted like you were taking one step in the right direction and then failed to actually do it.

The only reason the trafficers have the ability to be bastards is America's idiotic immigration system. Fix that and you fix the problem.

We already are going with your approach, and that's why it's such a complete disaster.

Same exact problem with drug laws. There's nothing to be gained by our current policies on either of these issues, except for the scum who profit off of enforcement and have no morals or ethics whatsoever as they've chosen to profit off of causing nothing but massive damage to our nation.

So, no, creating a problem (trafficers of people or drugs) and then suggesting increasing enforcement of the problem you created can't ever be a good idea. Please think your thoughts all the way through in future. That sort reactionary ignorance is the problem, not the solution.

 

Re:It must be just me... (1)

hemp (36945) | more than 5 years ago | (#27892061)

And the cool thing is that when they get hurt on the job site, you can just drive them to the county hospital and drop them off. No need to worry about that expensive wokerman's compensation insurance.

Re:It must be just me... (1)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890869)

Being against immigration is not a sensible position. Immigrants are often great contributors to American life. Being against illegal immigration is very sensible, and an entirely different issue.

I feel that many people deliberately conflate the two, in order to make border defense seem like a racist or xenophobic idea. It's not. Curbing illegal immigration would probably result in substantially increasing the legal immigration quotas.

Re:It must be just me... (2, Interesting)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890903)

Clearly you've not had to go through the hassles of legal immigration and can't see why those of us that have get fucked off when a load of people decide the rules don't apply to them.

Those people who have to work low paying jobs get pissed off too because some employers rather pay less and deal with people's poor english rather than playing by the rules.

Quite frankly if we're happy to just let the poor flood in from Mexico then we might as well remove H1-B visa limits too and let companies bring in as much cheap labour as they want to fill higher-end jobs.

Re:It must be just me... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27890923)

I'm so absolutely SICK and TIRED of this arguement and for the life of me I can't understand why you and others keep lumping two completely separate subjects together.

Immigration =/= Illegal Immigration. I FULLY support immigration through the proper channel. Being a supporter of one does not mean you support the other.

I like them too. That's why I dislike illegals. (3, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890957)

These folks are just trying to make a living & put their kids through school so they can have a better life.

They sure are, that's why I support fully a greater degree of legal immigration from Mexico. But it's also why illegal immigrants should not be given amnesty, and the ones that are here now should be sent back without exception.

Consider this, illegal immigrants make it much harder for people like you describe, to come here legally. Why should people have a shot at a better life by jumping the line ahead of people who are trying to do it right?

That to me is why fundamentally I support locking down the border as tightly as possible, because the process to be a part of America should be as fair as we can make it and not just for those willing to pay a lot of money to a lot of shady people just to get here.

Again, this is obviously in conjunction with a wider open immigration process that would allow a faster flow of legal immigrants - from all over, not just Mexico.

Re:It must be just me... (2, Insightful)

djupedal (584558) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890963)

>These folks are just trying to make a living & put their kids through school so they can have a better life.

When you've had your SSN used by one of them and your wages have been garnered by the IRS, ask them if you can live with them...

Re:It must be just me... (3, Insightful)

earlymon (1116185) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891063)

I agree. And how about those latest budget cuts?

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/43568/title/Federal_budget [sciencenews.org] 's_new_'black_book'

Each year, the administration releases its federal-spending blueprint -- usually in a series of phone book-sized tomes that must surely weigh eight to 10 pounds. And of course, the first thing most of us look for is what programs are slated for big gains -- or excisions. Well, team Obama made looking for the big cuts a little easier this year. This morning it issued a 120-page volume: "Terminations, Reductions, and Savings: Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year 2010."

A lot respondents are making hay over legal vs. illegal immigrants. Fine. But look at our real history of our immigration laws. You'd think it would be driven by many good things - such as what our infrastructure can support and so forth. And the pundits would have you believe that. It's not so.

First, we have people complaining about illegals using Social Security. Kindly note that the fossil records clearly show those illegals have paying into Social Security - something the pundits don't want to mention.

They're over-running our infrastructure! Yeah. It's not the white suburban kids pushing meth, it's not the middle-aged housewives enjoying a joint in the middle of the day, it's the not smokers, it's not the cops over-reacting to anyone near a .08 a block from their home, it's not that the insurance companies and HMOs have taken over what a doctor can do in his/her own judgement, it's not that we let the S&Ls and Enrons screw us out of real jobs, it's not that our trade and tariff policies are so fucking complicated that a gaggle of Ph.D.s still can't explain it to anyone reasonably intelligent, and it's not that all of our taxes are regressive, and it's not that the biggest corporations pulling in the most money pay the absolute minimum (if not zero) in actual money turned over as taxes - and it's not as if the whole fucking engine isn't powered by crooked politicians.

The real problem is those pesky, illegal Mexicans - with their strong sense of family and religion and culture and a desire to live outside of poverty, with a deep fear of the law because of where our Immigration Dept. will send them back to live if caught.

Oh yeah - illegal != legal immigration ... sure, that's the real issue. And I'm a monkey's uncle.

Re:It must be just me... (1)

budgenator (254554) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891685)

A while back Cringley blogged about a visit from the FBI, seems they wanted to know how he was so certain that there were 18 million people using SSN's used by multiple people. He explained to them he had a source that worked in a credit agency and the data was the result of simple and routine data-mining. It certainly strain our credulity that Equifax can do this routinely, but the SSN admin, FBI and NSA can't. Seems obvious to me that if the same SSN is reporting income and tax withholding from both New York and California on a regular basis that something hookey is going on.

Re:It must be just me... (1)

earlymon (1116185) | more than 5 years ago | (#27892001)

Yes, identity theft is a problem. It has existed long before computers and long before our so-called border problems. I knew a Mafioso in Detroit with 15 Social Security numbers, 40 years ago.

As my signal-processing mentor once taught me - never look for a signal in noise - you will always find exactly what you're looking for.

If today's illegals have a high rate of abusing Social Security numbers, it's because they're buying from an established industry. I'd say it's that established industry that's the problem.

Or - we can all just go on believing the surface only of blog info.

Re:It must be just me... (1, Insightful)

darkwing_bmf (178021) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891231)

"I support legal immigration, but not illegal" is it's just a cover for saying "I don't support *more* legal immigration."

Frankly this is all really about freedom. It should be as hard to live and work in the US if you're from Mexico or Canada as it is to live and work in New York if your from Alabama (valid ID, no court orders against you). The EU lets their people have freedom of movement and labor among the Union countries and it works well for them. The NAFTA countries should have that same freedom. It would solve a lot of problems, including strengthening worker rights and limiting the "fear of deportation" factor in employee employer relations.

But why illegally? (0)

antdude (79039) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891513)

I am OK with legal immigrants, but not with illegally. If they want to come to U.S. to have a better life, then do it the legal ways.

Re:It must be just me... (0, Flamebait)

Henry V .009 (518000) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891565)

A Latina family lives next door to me. They blast their Mariachi music until 2:00-3:00 am every morning from their car stereo while smoking dope and drinking.

The problem with letting low-IQ (Hispanic IQ approximately 90-95) people in, is that your average as a country goes down. A lot if their average fertility is positive while yours is negative.

Hispanics in America commit a lot of crime, consume a lot of social services, and return relatively little as a fraction of the GDP. Republicans want more Hispanics because big business likes cheap labor. Democrats want more Hispanics because they're going to vote Democrat forever. The average American -- well, he's screwed.

Please read Steve Sailer'sIQ FAQ [vdare.com] before replying with something dumb about IQ. I'm not going to respond to non-studied opinions about IQ any more than I'd respond to someone making stupid claims about Thermodynamics without even knowing the definition of Etropy.

Re:It must be just me... (2, Insightful)

earlymon (1116185) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891901)

My friend, I have a teaching degree in vocational education. Look it up - those are not so easy to get, requiring not only a concentration in a particular field, but documented years of working in that field with *strong* references from employers for your concentration in that field, then documentation of work training in industry in that field, then years of teaching as an intern at a post-secondary school. And you study things in depth the way that many teachers to not have to, such as educational psychology and - the IQ test.

The IQ test was invented for one reason and one reason only to assist teachers. It is the quotient of your intellectual age / chronological age. It was - and is - meant to apply to developing minds. At the time of its conception, it was so that teachers could recognize those kids who needed help catching up with their peers, and which didn't need that so much. It could even be used in pairing up study partners.

And for that reason, under the theory that it was a valid idea at the time, IQ results were to be kept confidential, so as to not be abused and not stigmatized anyone.

It is was never meant to become some constant that follows a person around in life. If you think about it, if you have an IQ of 130 when you're ten, and nothing changes, then you'll have an IQ of 100 when you're thirteen years old.

Enlightened educators have all but given up on IQ tests. They are not easy to keep up to date. When the IQ theories were first postulated, the developers could not and did not foresee the technological and social changes that were to come - and most importantly, the rate of acceleration of those changes.

Imagine thinking you're doing a good job on designing IQ tests when suddenly, immigrant Muslim children as a group are scoring lower and you find one example question stands out in your quality study: they misidentify pig as the source animal for bacon because they are either unexposed to "bacon" or can prove from the packaging that "bacon" comes from turkeys. I did not make this example up, it was documented in the 90s.

Now - your source link says that the military uses IQ tests very effectively. That's true. I've worked with them on training programs. But their tests are at least geared toward their demographic of less-privileged, post-secondary school ages, and not generalized for all possible knowledge, but specific enough for judging things like spacial-oriented thinking. They do it to save soldiers' lives, so they're pretty good at it.

Your reference also says that IQs are validly applied to groups because it washes out statistical noise. That's true. As in, groups of post training at this Air Force base vs. same at that Army base. Or for northern-state 9th graders vs. southern-state ones.

But, and I choose my bacon example carefully - not for comparing against races or nationalities with different cultural and linguistic backgrounds. If you follow this link from your link - http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118996255/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0 [wiley.com] - [Ethnic group differences in cognitive ability in employment and educational settings: a meta-analysis, Personnel Psychology 54, 297-330.] then you will be surprised to find this statement in the study's abstract: We conduct similar analyses for Hispanics, when possible, and note that Hispanic-White differences are somewhat less than Black-White differences. That said, I warn the no-RTFA types (like me, usually) that this was focused to one adult-job metric, not to a whole race or anything sweeping.

And that said, I hereby declare the following:
1. You have abused the use of IQ
2. You have done so against the tenets of your own IQ reference
3. I will not believe without a lot of supporting evidence that you have anything but asinine references to peg Hispanics at 90-95, of any subgroup beyond those in prison (where they would most probably match their other-raced counterparts)
4. When your reference source said that IQ and other tests are "proven predictors of actual behavior" he did not mean it the way you did - he meant it as I did and have stated and implied: focused to a job area, or a particular school grade (re: age group) and you have abused all intention of his meaning

IQ does not dictate all skills (see your own references inclusion that musical ability has ZERO correlation to IQ) and neither does it broadly dictate behavior. I distill your statement as follows:

Hispanic -> low IQ -> criminal behavior

You are so sadly ignorant of the facts of the world around you, and the behavioral and social sciences trying to make sense of that world to improve it, it is no wonder that you display racist tendencies. Rather than inflame you, I sincerely hope that I have toughly educated you to become a better human being.

Re:It must be just me... (1)

uncqual (836337) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891579)

You don't say if this family is in the U.S. legally or not so I would assume they (like many Latina families) are in the U.S. legally.

So, I'm assuming that their actions that someone might consider a "horrible crime" is that they don't have proper business licenses, registrations, or inspections to sell food? Or, perhaps, that they don't collect sales tax (if your area has such a thing)?

If this is the case, they should not be allowed to sell food -- any more than Burger King should be allowed to sell prepared food without proper licenses, registrations, and inspections. Or, any more than Burger King should be able to escape their responsibility to collect sales tax.

Re:It must be just me... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891733)

A Latina family live near me.

One lives near me, too. The woman cleans my toilet and blows me all for the same price.

Here's a solution to the budget problem (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27890673)

We could just hire Mexicans to build it. As long as they stay on their side while working, then no problem!

Re:Here's a solution to the budget problem (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890737)

Tap Tap Tap... Is this thing on? Tap Tap Tap... Is this thing on?

You Hack.

Yeah, and they expected (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890675)

that this system would work to stop marijuana smuggling across the Canadian border too... with all the mountains and trees. Hahahaha.

Re:Yeah, and they expected (1)

inKubus (199753) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891819)

that this system would work to stop marijuana smuggling across the Canadian border too... with all the mountains and trees. Hahahaha.

There's a pretty easy way to stop that, and that's to legalize growing it in the U.S. It practically is already because the Justice Department has made it their lowest priority.

The only applicable Simpsons reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27890683)

ÂAye! ÂNo es bueno!

Re:The only applicable Simpsons reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27890765)

You know what else isn't bueno? Slashdot's UTF-8 support.

Slashdot is US Centric. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891083)

N/T

Re:The only applicable Simpsons reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891759)

Not quite. Try this one: "Monorail, monorail, MONORAIL!!!"

Thank God, (2, Funny)

Vertana (1094987) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890695)

for this fence! Cause they took our jebs! ...relax and realize I'm kidding.

Re:Thank God, (2, Funny)

Bloopie (991306) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891211)

Cause they took our jebs!

They can have him. Does anyone really want a third Bush presidency?

Re:Thank God, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891613)

You spelled "jorb" wrong, Coach.

We should apply this to software development (1)

e9th (652576) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890715)

Hey, we saved you lots of money. All we had to do was leave out the hard parts.

It's not racism (1, Insightful)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890729)

To have a well-defended border is not racism, it is border control.

Why don't we ask Israel how they're keeping their borders secure and take a few hints? Scale up the border and enforcement. Then actually treat the border as a no-go territory, where things and people get shot at or worse.

Re:It's not racism (1)

nametaken (610866) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890797)

I'm all for protecting the border and trying to stem the flood of illegal immigration, drugs, etc.

However, I don't think it's fair to compare our border with Mexico to the Israeli-Palestinian border. We're considerably less hostile with each other, and I don't buy the terrorist influx argument on any scale I've had pitched to me in the media.

Re:It's not racism (0)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890855)

It would be better to have an expert on the subject of border control. At least they know something about keeping them out. We only know about letting people in.

It'd also be better to overbuild it for that case given the relative instability. Terrorism or not, it would most certainly send a message to Mexico to reform their country.

Re:It's not racism (2, Insightful)

maxume (22995) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891101)

It would probably be simpler to spend money on enforcing work permit laws and so force, making illegal border crossings a less attractive activity.

Or do you also favor beefing up the border with Canada? That would be consistent with worrying about the border with a reasonably friendly nation.

Re:It's not racism (1)

gringofrijolero (1489395) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891643)

Terrorism or not, it would most certainly send a message to Mexico to reform their country.

You oughta get that beam out of your eye there, son. Any "reforms" that aren't USGA grade A approved will go nowhere. Some of us remember Chile's 9/11.

Re:It's not racism (1)

cptnapalm (120276) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890909)

I agree on the "terroist influx" bit as well. It is seriously sensationalistic.

I do find it funny that the same people who are for unimpeded immigration are usually those who will not be in direct competition with said immigrants. But outsourcing (which does affect them economically)? It is teh 3v1L, and there is much baying for blood. Both are similar in that they are lower cost labor, but one does affect them directly and the other does not. One is acceptable to loathe, the taking away of American (white collar) jobs, while the other is called (blue collar) bigotry.

Sort of similar to journalists sounding off their hate for bloggers and the like.

Re:It's not racism (1)

L4m3rthanyou (1015323) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891841)

I do find it funny that the same people who are for unimpeded immigration are usually those who will not be in direct competition with said immigrants.

Really? I find that people who are for unimpeded immigration are usually Hispanic, and fail to comprehend that they will have to compete with the illegal immigrants that they support.

Re:It's not racism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27890809)

To have a well-defended border is not racism, it is border control.

Why don't we ask Israel...

When a country engages in discrimination with respect to who gets citizenship and who doesn't then any differences in how citizens and non-citizens are treated is discrimination.

Or maybe you think it would be OK for the USA to decide that, say, Jewish people are no longer citizens and that a sovereign country has a right to deport non-citizens?

Stupid strawman (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891023)

When a country engages in discrimination with respect to who gets citizenship and who doesn't then any differences in how citizens and non-citizens are treated is discrimination.

Since every other country without exception chooses who can be citizens, I'd say your point there is pretty stupid.

Or maybe you think it would be OK for the USA to decide that, say, Jewish people are no longer citizens and that a sovereign country has a right to deport non-citizens?

Undoing citizenship is not even close to the same thing as choosing who you can take in. Wake me when that ever happens (hint - not likely since we even grant automatic citizenship to babies born here).

Re:Stupid strawman (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891345)

When a country engages in discrimination with respect to who gets citizenship and who doesn't then any differences in how citizens and non-citizens are treated is discrimination.

Since every other country without exception chooses who can be citizens, I'd say your point there is pretty stupid.

The point is that if a country treats, say, black people differently from white people when granting citizenship then if it treats non-citizens worse than citizens (most countries do) then the country is engaging in racial discrimination. That is, using some notion of race in deciding whether to grant citizenship is racism.

Undoing citizenship is not even close to the same thing as choosing who you can take in.

That depends. If you somehow do away with the previous government (e.g. civil war) and then engage in some sort of racial discrimination with respect to who gets citizenship in the new country then that is essentially the same thing.

Wake me when that ever happens...

It happened in what used to be Palestine and we've been burdened with the repercussions ever since.

The original post claimed that controlling a border was not racism and then went on to talk about Israel - which was a rather ironic juxtaposition.

Re:Stupid strawman (1)

gringofrijolero (1489395) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891811)

If you somehow do away with the previous government (e.g. civil war) and then engage in some sort of racial discrimination with respect to who gets citizenship in the new country then that is essentially the same thing.

*All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.*

It's not racial discrimination. It's geographical discrimination. In modern times one's no better than the other.

Re:It's not racism (1)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890877)

people get shot at or worse.

Worse? They get tickled to death?

Re:It's not racism (0)

owlnation (858981) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890961)

To have a well-defended border is not racism, it is border control.

Why don't we ask Israel how they're keeping their borders secure and take a few hints? Scale up the border and enforcement. Then actually treat the border as a no-go territory, where things and people get shot at or worse.

What you suggest doesn't sound like racism, but it sure sounds a lot like fascism. Worked well for East Berlin, your suggestion did -- oh wait, it didn't, it got 200+ innocent people killed.

Borders are senseless. It's just a pissing contest between greedy and greedier politicians, held over from the middle ages. It also removes local power from people, and devolves that power to unwieldy, bureaucratic, expensive, dysfunctional national governmental bodies. Living in Europe you cross a street in some places you are in a different country -- makes no logical fucking sense at all. Makes about as much sense as flags do.

Truth is the US economy would collapse overnight without immigrant labor (legal and otherwise). I find it astonishingly ironic that the most rabid protectionists are also the ones who are apparently pro-free-market. Make the next logical step. Free-market means free-market, hire the best workers regardless of their color of skin or supposed national identity. It will sort itself out, and balance itself.

Border just create wars, racism, fascism, and add to human unhappiness. Time to start working towards removing them all, and grow up.

Re:It's not racism (2, Informative)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891027)

Truth is the US economy would collapse overnight without immigrant labor (legal and otherwise). I find it astonishingly ironic that the most rabid protectionists are also the ones who are apparently pro-free-market.

It would only adjust to having citizens do such work under the existing regulations. All of that would work within the free-market doctrine.

Citizen only refers to status, not race.

Make the next logical step. Free-market means free-market, hire the best workers regardless of their color of skin or supposed national identity. It will sort itself out, and balance itself.

...to the detriment of citizens, just as it has done to manufacturing and IT.

Re:It's not racism (1)

owlnation (858981) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891135)

...to the detriment of citizens, just as it has done to manufacturing and IT.

That's still protectionist. That scenario may be true in the short term. Long term, it will balance out. It also means more jobs stay at home rather than being farmed out to other countries -- which will happen regardless. Once equilibrium is reached, I think there will be a net benefit.

Re:It's not racism. (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891177)

That scenario may be true in the short term. Long term, it will balance out. It also means more jobs stay at home rather than being farmed out to other countries -- which will happen regardless. Once equilibrium is reached, I think there will be a net benefit.

Waiting 50-100 years is not an option for most if anyone in that situation.

You're not taking into account firms like Grigsby & Cohen that decide to turn on citizens with legal dirty pool.

Better to take the lumps of protecting the nation if we're not going to help our citizens transition.

Re:It's not racism (1)

gringofrijolero (1489395) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891443)

Citizen only refers to status, not race.

That's right. You're either a citizen, or you're property. When somebody can restrict your movements, you're his property.

borders vis a vis the free market (2, Insightful)

benjamindees (441808) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891795)

I find it astonishingly ironic that the most rabid protectionists are also the ones who are apparently pro-free-market.

That's because you don't understand the physical limits of economics and of the free market.

The free market for labor only works in a closed system with reasonably slow population growth. Human labor is the only commodity that is self-replicating, legally protected and government subsidized. For those reasons it's also the only economic input whose supply has an inverse relationship to quality of living and, thus, utility. Without limits, labor supply would grow uncontrollably, outstripping demand and collapsing individual quality of life.

Look at almost any third world country for an example of this in action. China and India don't need more people. They're trying to kill them off as quickly as possible by herding them into polluted cities and enforcing quotas on cigarettes and limits on children. Saturating our labor markets with an unending flow of immigrants would cause Americans' quality of life to plummet, and would not appreciably improve the quality of life in the emigrant countries from which they came, because they would quickly be replaced.

Then, beyond any of that, which should be obvious by now, consider that labor demand is shrinking as technology improves. Jobs are increasingly being done by computers and robots. One worker can do the jobs of ten or a hundred workers of just a few decades ago. Energy is the limiting factor to future economic growth, not labor.

And you're wrong about one other thing: Borders don't create wars. Resource shortages create wars. Overpopulation creates resource shortages. And competent governments with well-managed borders prevent overpopulation.

I just hope that well-intentioned idiots like yourself begin to realize this before the next large-scale war is caused by China and India's overpopulation problems. Surely you wouldn't be so stupid and short-sighted as to blame that on racism and fascism when greed and scarcity are much more obvious culprits?

It would be cheaper just to annex Mexico (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27890745)

At least in the long run. Say a couple of generations, with full English immersion in schools and government to prevent a Spanish Quebec.

Plus, it would save a lot of people a trip north and waiting until the next amnesty. They would get instant American citizenship, and people north of the current border get some say in what's going on in the deep, DEEP South.

Re:It would be cheaper just to annex Mexico (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27890891)

hmmm...but how about all the americans that went to Mexico to get away from the law?

Re:It would be cheaper just to annex Mexico (1)

guabah (968691) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891663)

At least in the long run. Say a couple of generations, with full English immersion in schools and government to prevent a Spanish Quebec.

s it's We already have a Spanish Quebec but it's not a state yet.

Re:It would be cheaper just to annex Mexico (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891913)

Whoa, slow down... there's a new Mexico?

Is this equipment expensive? (5, Insightful)

atlastiamborn (1252206) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890807)

How long until it's stolen? Seriously.

Re:Is this equipment expensive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27890905)

You think they did not think of that?

Brain goes where?!

Re:Is this equipment expensive? (1)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891069)

Of course they thought of it.

The contractor is no doubt salivating at the $500,000,000 worth of equipment they'll be replacing every year, for ever.

Re:Is this equipment expensive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891245)

The equipment itself is pretty much COTS. The cost of the system is the software and design and gui design and system integration and training. Each tower is expensive, but not zomg they stole an fighter jet expensive. And eventually they will be making upwards of thousands of these towers for the southern and northern borders, so it's not like they won't have spares.

Much of the expensive equipment is 40 - 100 feet in the air, so someone will have to do some climbing on a tower that is already in 24x7 comms with border patrol and that has cameras on it.

Apart from that, your suggestion that no one has considered the cost of vandalism or theft is insightful, and you should pass it along to your congress critter.

This happened in South Jersey in the 70's (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891375)

My father worked for RCA at a remote location in South Jersey (Gibsboro). One week, they put up a chain link fence around the place. Over the weekend, the fence disappeared. I guess "Soprano Fencing" was a bad choice of a contractor.

"Hey, Tony, whadda I do wid dis fence?"

Landmines are cheaper (-1, Troll)

fluffy99 (870997) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890821)

Seriously. Spend $500m to buy mines, and $100m to lay them. Mines are about $3-5 actual manufacturing cost and that would give you a fairly high density of mines. I guarantee that midnight crossing would slow way down. Right now there's almost no risk to crossing the border illegally. Worst case they get detained and deported.

Re:Landmines are cheaper (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891095)

And why, pray tell, is illegally entering another country a crime WORTHY OF DEATH?

Re:Landmines are cheaper (1, Insightful)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891103)

Yeah, it's a national border; I have no problems with a minefield and machine gun turrets. As long as it's not used to keep anybody IN the u.s., it's completely acceptable.

Re:Landmines are cheaper (0, Troll)

oneirophrenos (1500619) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891469)

Seriously. Spend $500m to buy mines, and $100m to lay them. Mines are about $3-5 actual manufacturing cost and that would give you a fairly high density of mines. I guarantee that midnight crossing would slow way down. Right now there's almost no risk to crossing the border illegally. Worst case they get detained and deported.

Land mines? Are you fucking kidding me? You seriously suggest killing people who cross a god-damned border. And you're spared from this just because you happened to be born within said borders?

Cheaper way (0, Troll)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890851)

A much cheaper way is to put up giant signs saying, "Welcome to Bush Country" with W and Cheney smiling like the devil himself.
   

Re:Cheaper way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891009)

It hasn't made you leave.

Re:Cheaper way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891061)

but because of W, nobody else wants us.

Let's review the definitions of real and virtual (4, Interesting)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890901)

If you can see it, and it's there, it's real.

If you can see it, but it's not there, it's virtual.

If you can't see it, and it's not there, it's gone.

Which applies to the state of this fence?

Re:Let's review the definitions of real and virtua (1)

amiga3D (567632) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891073)

Try..."they paid for and it's not there."

Re:Let's review the definitions of real and virtua (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891099)

Okay, so "Invisible Fence" was already taken by the doggie people. What can you do?

Work resumes on pissing money away (5, Insightful)

amiga3D (567632) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890931)

Billions of dollars for contractors. The answer to illegal immigration is simple. Jail the employers of illegal immigrants. Presto! No jobs for illegals equals vastly reduced illegal immigration. The local chicken processing plant here actually warns their workers not to show up on days when the INS is coming. Their management should go to jail but nooooo.... can't have people with money forced to obey the law. That'll never do.

Re:Work resumes on pissing money away (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891107)

The local chicken processing plant here actually warns their workers not to show up on days when the INS is coming.

Take a page from Arizona and enact a Business Death Penalty.

Then make it possible to prosecute doubly for the violation and the attempt to to hide it.

Re:Work resumes on pissing money away (1)

j. andrew rogers (774820) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891265)

Jailing the employers of illegal immigrants is a pretty ignorant and useless "remedy" for the problem of illegal immigration. Nobody is hiring "illegal immigrants", they are hiring legal immigrants insofar as the employer is obligated to determine such things. In all the environs I have been in where there were illegal immigrants working, they always had papers sufficient to satisfy the obligation of the employer in determination of their eligibility to work. The employer may strongly suspect they are illegal, but the employer has no legal proof of that fact.

If the employer is presented government documents that show eligibility to work by an illegal immigrant, that is a failure of government process and law. Or are you suggesting that we give the employer an obligation to arbitrarily discriminate against employees on the basis that they do not believe the government documents presented are valid without any evidence to support that opinion?

The employers may benefit, but they are not at fault. Their choice is to assume the government documents are valid in the absence of contrary evidence or to be sued for employment discrimination.

Re:Work resumes on pissing money away (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 5 years ago | (#27892025)

How's Pennsylvania for you at Grigsby & Cohen?

Seriously, they're the ones who benefit from overlooking the law and the ones who push for lax enforcement.

Unfortunately... (1)

dvh.tosomja (1235032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27890947)

Current models protect US only from virtual mexicans

6.7 Billion is a lot of labor hours (1, Troll)

fluffy99 (870997) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891133)

The border patrol has approx 25,000 officers to cover the 2,000 mile border. Assuming each officer covers a 40-hour week, thats roughly 3 officers per mile. These guys must have awefully poor eyesight! You can't even make the case that one man isn't enough since you have another 29 within a 5-minute response time. Why the hell are we spending a huge chunk of money for a _detection_ system that still does nothing to prevent the intrusions? 6.7 billion would double the existing border patrol levels for 4 years. I think we also need to aggressively defend out borders. Enough with this detain and deport strategy. You don't see other countries doing this.

Re:6.7 Billion is a lot of labor hours (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891239)

"6.7 Billion is a lot of labor hours" It is, but they could save big bucks by employing illegal foreign workers.

Re:6.7 Billion is a lot of labor hours (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27891241)

6.7 billion would double the existing border patrol levels for 4 years.

Actually, 6.8 billion will buy AN AWFUL LOT of land mines (deployment cost included.) Of course, somebody will have to go scoop up what's left of the would-be illegal immigrants every morning...

Re:6.7 Billion is a lot of labor hours (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891355)

Of course, somebody will have to go scoop up what's left of the would-be illegal immigrants every morning...

Leave them there as a warning.

Re:6.7 Billion is a lot of labor hours (1)

Pretzalzz (577309) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891789)

Your error is in assuming that the border patrol is evenly distributed. I'd think places like Tijuana/San Diego could have 50-100 officers a mile, and need them. The actual road crossings tend to have significant delays getting through.

Soo.. (1)

cortesoft (1150075) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891369)

This will protect us from all virtual Mexicans...

Blueservo (1)

band-aid-brand (1068196) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891417)

This [blueservo.com] site lets you watch the border and report suspicious activity. I'm not sure how effective it is, but its an example of what can be done with this "virtual fence" technology.

Isn't there already a better, cheaper, solution? (1)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 5 years ago | (#27891467)

Most of those illegally crossing the boarder are looking for jobs, right? So why not require the use of eVerify, and have a meaningful system of identification, and mandatory jail sentences for anybody hiring an illegal immigrant. For most Mexicans, if they can not get jobs in the USA, there is no reason to come here.

There is also the GWB solution: make the US such an awful place to live, that nobody would want to come here, illegally or otherwise.

It works out like this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27892059)

Illegal immigrants are people that break into an apartment complex and start living there without the permission of the landlord. The landlord knows about this but can't throw him out because his tenants will call him racist or fascist. SO what he does is he puts him on the lowest part of the totem pole, giving him the least in maintenance any whatnot. Then, some of the tenants start saying that the landlord should take care of the new guy just like the rest of them because he's already there.

Now, the legal immigrants are the people who spoke to the landlord and are about to come in to look at the apartment. They're getting credit checks run on them and everything and hey, they might even rent the apartment. But they can't because the illegal immigrant got there first.

I don't care if the illegal immigrant is paying his landlord the rental fee. Most likely he isn't but it's possible. I don't care if he'd been living in craptown before this. The thing here is he's pushed ahead of the legal immigrants to get into the apartment without following the established way of doing things.

So what can the landlord do? He tries to increase security on the empty apartments so the same thing can't happen. Except, hey, the tenants complain AGAIN that he's being overbearing against those people who might want to break in and live in the apartment without the permission of the landlord.

I mean seriously, what the hell. If this situation weren't in a national scale the illegal immigrant would be thrown out and hauled to jail instantly.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>