Well I’m not saying rebuild ICE. We had a Customs Service and INS before CBP. I’d say just rebuild Customs, and create an Immigration Service that is more focused on efficiently processing claims and helping people into the country legally than enforcing illegal immigration. As for TSA, they replaced a security wing of the FAA and I think 95% of Americans would agree we need some form of airport security.
This is what USCIS is for. It was created at the same time as CBP to separate those two functions.
Only mentioning this so you can skip a step.
1 Like
Gee, how about we build a wall through the middle of Philadelphia, we can test this “technology vs people” theory there. Sounds cool to me, I don’t live anywhere near there.
In the meantime, I hope to live long enough to do this to the wall down the middle of my home town…
4 Likes
I wish I could give this more than one like.
Who said shit about a wall? More tech and less people means fewer armed agents patrolling the border and more cameras and such aimed at detecting drugs and human trafficking. It means cutting the budget and the size of the agency drastically.
But, sure, paint me as some kind of pro-wall fascist, why the fuck not?
Adding even more cameras to public spaces is a reactionary big brother policy when what’s needed is efforts to legalise drugs and help the people who are being trafficked at source.
4 Likes
It’s def not going to be ‘eDems’ to the rescue, not sure where you grabbed that from what I said. The pressure is going to have to come the left and the people to get them to do the right thing.
If you’re trying for systemic change inside a system that needs changing but isn’t going away (unless Trump wins), you have to start at the fundamentals of the broken system. For me, those are:
- Restoring the Voting Rights Act (everyone no matter what they believe must have the right and ability to easily vote and trust their votes will be counted)
- Election security
- An impartial Supreme Court (any court that’s not a true referee is not a good court)
- Removing money from politics
Gerrymandering fixes likely also belong right below that. Removing the Electoral College is right after that. Anything that actively and intentionally removes the will of the people (even the stupid will of the people) has to be gotten rid of.
Right below that is restoring oversight to Congress. And right below that is reigning in corruption and abuses. ICE is the absolute easiest agency to get rid of, because it doesn’t even have a Senate confirmed head. It’s just there to terrorize people.
These are my personal things that must be addressed first to get anything anyone wants. All of those things are Constitutional Democracy busters. You’ll get zero, or will be in court forever, without those first.
The main thing that needs to happen is people need to campaign on these things. I can guarantee you I was an extreme minority in actually campaigning on them. No one’s running on fixing corruption because it’s not popular (though time and again voters talk about how corrupt each party is) and because they don’t want to make enemies of ‘eDems’ who they want promotions from and Congresspeople who might be corrupt (this is a both sides of the aisle major problem). They’re running on things like health care because they are. To me, that’s not running for changing anything because of how hard something like M4A will be to accomplish with the fundamental system issues in place, that’s just running on what you think will get votes.
There should be at least one candidate running on exactly these things in every single Democratic Primary as long these problems remain and as long as the Constitutional Democracy remains in place. If Trump wins, I think everyone should run on open corruption from that point forward because that will be the norm.
1 Like
I already said I was for ending the war on drugs. But in reality we’re decades from that happening, and if it’s illegal you can’t have it pouring over the border creating a public health crisis. I’m not really talking big brother in public spaces for the most part, just trying to stop it from following across the border until the country is ready to end the war on drugs.
None of this matters, as we’re years away from even my suggestion being feasible politically.
Yeah I don’t see that energy in the party, which is concerning.
It’s awfully optimistic of you to think you’re going to have a say in where the cameras and such are aimed.
Actually they can just pass legislation for whatever you like and the Dems will agree to and then spend the money on dirt bikes and boats. LEGISLATION.
This whole “tear down the wall” derail should proly be split off… at some point. But, IIRC SCOTUS takes the whole summer off, so maybe that can wait forever.
Would you prefer the term “a barrier” to “the wall”? Or… how about “triple fence”?
Above in theory, below in practice…
More tech and less people means fewer armed agents patrolling the border… It means cutting the budget and the size of the agency drastically.
Dude, they already got all the tech. Fences and cameras (and the buried motion detectors, and the drones/etc/etc) all work together. Like, let’s say you owned a sportsball stadium and wanted to set a barrier to collect admissions. Would you… have a line painted on the ground and hire an army of extra ushers to follow everyone who crosses it -or- have a fence built, and hire a few ticket takers? SMH.
detecting drugs and human trafficking.
LOL @ imagining this is what this is all about. But sure, let’s run with this nonsense, and see where it leads to. First, you forgot all the terrorists, the diseased, rapists, and all the jerb takers too. Oh my! Do you imagine all those drugs, and those human traffic victims, all stay put in San Ysidro? Or… maybe they end up in Philadelphia or Berlin?
So, IYO, shouldn’t Berlin still have their wall? Or, how about we build a barrier through the middle of Philadelphia too? I mean they stop drugs & human traffic and that’s a good thing… right? Why not near where you live too?
But besides the humanitarian disaster these barriers are, and besides the environmental disaster these barriers are too… millions of us live here along and among the barriers. That humanitarian disaster happens right here, that environmental disaster happens right here. But there’s other costs too…
Sure… it sucks having CSA statues right in the middle of a town. I understand the pain that causes. We got this shit (above) running right down the middle of my home town. At night it’s lit up like a 15 mile long sportsball stadium. TEAR DOWN THE WALL !!!1!
1 Like
You need to go back and read my first couple posts about this because you’re either massively misunderstanding my position or you’re strawmanning me and being an asshole. I’m staunchly anti-wall and pro-immigration. So fuck off with your “should we call it a fence” and “what about all the rapists” bullshit. That’s so grossly mischaracterizing my position.
At this point, I’m massively confused by what you mean by “anti-wall”. As for pro-immigration, that’s a different topic that I haven’t mentioned ITT.
… and “what about all the rapists” bullshit.
LOL no. I wasn’t saying you were spewing the “keeps rapists out” BS. I was pointing out that you were spewing two of top 5 BSes typically heard, and was pointing out you were “missing some bets”, so to speak. None of this incredibly expensive infrastructure is built and maintained because… ZOMG any of these BS reasons.
Then I was further making fun of you by doing a little reducio ad absurdum thingee. As in… if we assume these barriers actually do accomplish X (where X is “keep out drugs”, “keep out rapists”, “keep out Yankee fans”/etc)… then wouldn’t Berlin have less X (drugs,rapes,cheering for the Yankees/etc) if they still had their wall?".
Now… the way that I would have hoped you would react was along these lines: “well, I know the Berlin Wall wasn’t a good thing, maybe WTF is going on in the San Ysidro is fucked up too”. When I mention partitioning Philadelphia too, I’m hoping for a reaction of “fuck no, I live here”.
lol thinking a wall will stop child traffickers when the elite know about child traffickers in their circles and don’t stop it. Also a wall barely does anything for drug trafficking, a cargo ship owned by JPMorgan chase was found with 20 TONS of cocaine on it, no wall is stopping that shit.
Arguing a wall is good for this stuff (which it isn’t) just gives cover to having it for the shitty reasons that it’s really there for
I mean you’re not trying to change my mind on these things, I’m anti wall in San Ysidro (and I’ve been there btw to cross on foot and found the wall to be creepy and scary to be around), anti wall in Philadelphia, anti wall in Berlin. Again I think you’re misunderstanding my positions.
1 Like
Right this is why nobody ITT is arguing that a wall is good.
Cameras won’t stop this stuff either and just puts more money into the surveillance state and lets our taxes get wasted on bullshit when we can put it to services that actually help with this stuff
Here go 60 more mobile cameras that the Trump admin added with 540 more troops. The border patrol has its own Border Surveillance System but sure a few more cameras will help
Edit: Trump didn’t have to build the cages for kids and the surveillance to catch all the “illegal” immigrants, this was built up over the years by both sides of the aisle so he already had all the tools but yeah let’s keep putting more money into this stuff and hope that it’s used for “good” reasons and hopefully we don’t get someone as bad or even worse than Trump in the future
Man, my heart skips a couple of beats when there are 17 new posts in the Supreme Court thread and I know there are no new opinions/cases coming.
3 Likes