Who is supporting the immigrant caravan?

[youthathletics]

despite the FACT that most drugs come in via ports of entry. Dopes.

Show us the facts to back that up. How do we know how much unseized dope get's through at the ports of entry, overland between them, by air, sea or mail.

We don't know how much gets through, or how & where. We seize more at the ports because we have the ability to search there.

What % of dope entering the US are we seizing ?

Barriers make it possible to more effectively surveil & respond to the open areas of the border, between the ports of entry.

That's your how do you prove a negative logic....carry on.

Gee, how do we know its not illegal Martians bringing the drugs in by invisible spaceship?
Prove its not Martians.

More seriously, Salty, we've penetrated the drug cartels again and again and we have lots of human intelligence about their various methods.
The vast bulk of drugs are coming through the legal ports of entry...yes, we catch more there too, but only a very small part of what gets through.

Think about it, if I can reliably ship in huge amounts on a truck with a single driver, why would I use a couple hundred human mules to carry it through the desert?

If I also bother to dig long tunnels under the fences and send through vast amounts of drugs there in bulk, instead of trying to send human mules through the desert, why would I do so if its so easy to send it where there aren't fences??

Just show us the facts that back up the assertion that most of the drugs come through the ports of entry.
How do we know that ? The only data I've seen is based on how much is seized. Everything else is analysis or extrapolation. We have no way of knowing how much gets through. What % comes through between POEs.
A barrier is to stop people, not just drugs.
Are you assuming we seize the same % at the POEs as we seize in between ?
Apply your Martian brain to the question, rather than blindly repeating a talking point you can't substantiate.

Additionally, do your homework, and tell us how much fentanyl will fit in a few backpacks vs the amount of people that quantity can kill and put a price on it. Hint: 2 milligrams of fentanyl is considered deadly.

Get the 18 wheeler half loaded with refer out your head. That image is 1980’s, the times have changed.

[old salt]

These methods seem more efficient than having women carry drugs through the desert....but you never know. You can be smuggling drugs for all I know. Prove that you are not...
If I am, I've yet to be caught. I've flown enough of the border to appreciate how open it is.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/25/us/d ... l.amp.html

If women walking from Guatemala was all we had to worry about we would t have the volume of addicts we have in this country. Sampling is a well known method of statistical analysis.
Nobody's saying that's all there is to worry about. Drugs aren't the only reason to have a barrier to reduce illegal entries.

Instead of a wall, we should build a force field!
https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/2591279002

You said it was a FACT that most drugs enter via ports of entry. I merely asked for the data which back up your FACT.
The data your links cite are amounts seized, then analysis of that data & the opinions of unnamed "experts".

It would be helpful in assessing the value of the barrier being proposed to know how much is estimated to come through betweem POEs.

[old salt]

Additionally, do your homework, and tell us how much fentanyl will fit in a few backpacks vs the amount of people that quantity can kill and put a price on it. Hint: 2 milligrams of fentanyl is considered deadly.

Get the 18 wheeler half loaded with refer out your head. That image is 1980’s, the times have changed.

One tri-athelete mule could pack in enough on one run to live comfortably for a decade.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Additionally, do your homework, and tell us how much fentanyl will fit in a few backpacks vs the amount of people that quantity can kill and put a price on it. Hint: 2 milligrams of fentanyl is considered deadly.

Get the 18 wheeler half loaded with refer out your head. That image is 1980’s, the times have changed.

One tri-athelete mule could pack in enough on one run to live comfortably for a decade.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la- ... utType=amp

https://www.philly.com/health/how-do-il ... utType=amp

Maybe you and youth can consult the government on drug interdiction! I bet it pays well and not as hazardous as flying!

https://delphihealthgroup.com/blog/wher ... -from/amp/

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/ ... html?amp=y

https://amp.azcentral.com/amp/2770914002

https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2018/1 ... e=amp-type

How about we do something about demand?

[old salt]

We can't tell you by how much, but since most drug seizures take place at the ports of entry (where more money is also being allocated), there's no need to erect more border barriers (in addition to other detection & surveillance measures), to reduce total illegal border crossings (not just drug smugglers) & to act as a deterrent to economic migrants who enter between the ports of entry, posing as asylum seekers. Okie Dokie.

Why go through the whole asylum, then catch & release legal scam (for which 75 more immigration Judges are also being hired).

...& let's reduce the number of undocumented aliens ICE can detain while awaiting adjudication &/or deportation.

Why not just own up to open borders ? Fentanyl should be classified a WMD.

[Typical Lax Dad]

We can't tell you by how much, but since most drug seizures take place at the ports of entry (where more money is also being allocated), there's no need to erect more border barriers (in addition to other detection & surveillance measures), to reduce total illegal border crossings (not just drug smugglers) & to act as a deterrent to economic migrants who enter between the ports of entry, posing as asylum seekers. Okie Dokie.

Why go through the whole asylum, then catch & release legal scam (for which 75 more immigration Judges are also being hired).

...& let's reduce the number of undocumented aliens ICE can detain while awaiting adjudication &/or deportation.

Why not just own up to open borders ? Fentanyl should be classified a WMD.

Brain wiped

[youthathletics]

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la- ... utType=amp

https://www.philly.com/health/how-do-il ... utType=amp

Maybe you and youth can consult the government on drug interdiction! I bet it pays well and not as hazardous as flying!

https://delphihealthgroup.com/blog/wher ... -from/amp/

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/ ... html?amp=y

https://amp.azcentral.com/amp/2770914002

https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2018/1 ... e=amp-type

How about we do something about demand?

Your links prove our point and importance of funneling ALL traffic through ports of entry. Anyone can do a google search and find headlines with "might", "unlikley", "hidden in condoms", "unaware I was carrying drugs (That was quite funny, nice one)", did you bother to follow the pretty red arrows in your last link.. or where you just excited to copy and paste anther link

The demand is surely a problem, but you should know that when supply is very high the price is very low. And to think we do not have enough education and drug rehabilitation places is just silly. One effing accident and you are hooked, your mind has changed forever. This turd ain't no joke TLD and your know that, especially living in the NE.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la- ... utType=amp

https://www.philly.com/health/how-do-il ... utType=amp

Maybe you and youth can consult the government on drug interdiction! I bet it pays well and not as hazardous as flying!

https://delphihealthgroup.com/blog/wher ... -from/amp/

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/ ... html?amp=y

https://amp.azcentral.com/amp/2770914002

https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2018/1 ... e=amp-type

How about we do something about demand?

Your links prove our point and importance of funneling ALL traffic through ports of entry. Anyone can do a google search and find headlines with "might", "unlikley", "hidden in condoms", "unaware I was carrying drugs (That was quite funny, nice one)", did you bother to follow the pretty red arrows in your last link.. or where you just excited to copy and paste anther link

[MDlaxfan76]

despite the FACT that most drugs come in via ports of entry. Dopes.

Show us the facts to back that up. How do we know how much unseized dope get's through at the ports of entry, overland between them, by air, sea or mail.

We don't know how much gets through, or how & where. We seize more at the ports because we have the ability to search there.

What % of dope entering the US are we seizing ?

Barriers make it possible to more effectively surveil & respond to the open areas of the border, between the ports of entry.

That's your how do you prove a negative logic....carry on.

Gee, how do we know its not illegal Martians bringing the drugs in by invisible spaceship?
Prove its not Martians.

More seriously, Salty, we've penetrated the drug cartels again and again and we have lots of human intelligence about their various methods.
The vast bulk of drugs are coming through the legal ports of entry...yes, we catch more there too, but only a very small part of what gets through.

Think about it, if I can reliably ship in huge amounts on a truck with a single driver, why would I use a couple hundred human mules to carry it through the desert?

If I also bother to dig long tunnels under the fences and send through vast amounts of drugs there in bulk, instead of trying to send human mules through the desert, why would I do so if its so easy to send it where there aren't fences??

Just show us the facts that back up the assertion that most of the drugs come through the ports of entry.
How do we know that ? The only data I've seen is based on how much is seized. Everything else is analysis or extrapolation. We have no way of knowing how much gets through. What % comes through between POEs.
A barrier is to stop people, not just drugs.
Are you assuming we seize the same % at the POEs as we seize in between ?
Apply your Martian brain to the question, rather than blindly repeating a talking point you can't substantiate.

I'm not saying that it's impossible to smuggle drugs via human mule across the desert, just that it's hugely inefficient relative to the ability to ship it on a truck or, as in fentanyl, through the mail.

We catch lots of humans coming across through tough terrain. But, they're very rarely caught carrying drugs and the amounts are relatively minuscule. We also know from our human intelligence where the drug traffickers are focusing their energies, and it ain't human mules.

If interdiction is the primary goal along with locking up the big time criminals, focus on where the high volume actually is easiest. Make it far less efficient to get the drugs in (they'll still get in because the profits are so high), but forcing costs to be higher on the drug traffickers will force up costs on the street.

If you become convinced that the drug traffickers can no longer ship the drugs more efficiently via truck, mail, or via tunnels, and instead are turning to the desert, then sure figure out how best to interdict there...is it more barriers or is it technology...whatever works best as far as I'm concerned.

But focus resources where it's most efficient, please.

I'm just a taxpayer, not a Martian.

[youthathletics]

I have not finished watching this, but it may serve as a resource to further our discussion. https://thedarkwire.com/watch/

[dislaxxic]

Asinine discussion. Sure "immigration" is an issue. The ONLY issue conservatives want to push into the spotlight day-in and day-out? That's just flat stupid. A distraction to keep the low-information, racist-tinged "base" teed up.

Wake up people. The country's discourse/focus is circling the drain thanks to this sad, demented caricature of a "president". What a mistake he's turned out to be.

..

[ggait]

Additionally, do your homework, and tell us how much fentanyl will fit in a few backpacks vs the amount of people that quantity can kill and put a price on it. Hint: 2 milligrams of fentanyl is considered deadly.

Yup. Shipment sizes for fentanyl are quite small, so many come through the mail. Often from China.

A physical wall around every Post Office and Fed Ex office is gonna take a lot of time and money to build.

[youthathletics]

Additionally, do your homework, and tell us how much fentanyl will fit in a few backpacks vs the amount of people that quantity can kill and put a price on it. Hint: 2 milligrams of fentanyl is considered deadly.

Yup. Shipment sizes for fentanyl are quite small, so many come through the mail. Often from China.

A physical wall around every Post Office and Fed Ex office is gonna take a lot of time and money to build.

Look for the forest ggait. I get it, you guys do not want or believe a wall will work, fine. But to argue your case about the simplicity of "shipping" drugs via mail is shortsighted.

For instance, as TLD likes to add, treat the demand. Sure, we can educate and rehabilitate till we are blue in the face, but these drugs are for more addictive and deadly....attend any rehab place that treats the big drugs like Heroin, Meth, Opiods, etc....they give those recovering a bit over a 50% chance of staying clean, not to mention the price has dropped significantly. Now, the drugs are simply deadly....first use, or if you are lucky you get another chance.

If more and more drugs are seized at ports of entry after more barriers are installed, that clearly means new ways of drug flow has to take place with higher volumes of product, which makes it harder to disguise in small packages, which makes scanning packages much simpler. The barriers, coupled with funneling traffic flow....treats the demand, because the supply is not there. The only fear is robberies and thefts will likely go up as addicts will be searching for the their next fix. I bet we would see a rise in drug issues in Canada and across the pond if the barriers go up along the border.

[cradleandshoot]

Asinine discussion. Sure "immigration" is an issue. The ONLY issue conservatives want to push into the spotlight day-in and day-out? That's just flat stupid. A distraction to keep the low-information, racist-tinged "base" teed up.

Wake up people. The country's discourse/focus is circling the drain thanks to this sad, demented caricature of a "president". What a mistake he's turned out to be.

..

Of course, but of course, lets put all of our attention and efforts where it is most needed... COW FARTS. That is the problem to be solved. How many corks can you buy for 5 billion dollars. Dis... job opportunity.

[MDlaxfan76]

Additionally, do your homework, and tell us how much fentanyl will fit in a few backpacks vs the amount of people that quantity can kill and put a price on it. Hint: 2 milligrams of fentanyl is considered deadly.

Yup. Shipment sizes for fentanyl are quite small, so many come through the mail. Often from China.

A physical wall around every Post Office and Fed Ex office is gonna take a lot of time and money to build.

Look for the forest ggait. I get it, you guys do not want or believe a wall will work, fine. But to argue your case about the simplicity of "shipping" drugs via mail is shortsighted.

For instance, as TLD likes to add, treat the demand. Sure, we can educate and rehabilitate till we are blue in the face, but these drugs are for more addictive and deadly....attend any rehab place that treats the big drugs like Heroin, Meth, Opiods, etc....they give those recovering a bit over a 50% chance of staying clean, not to mention the price has dropped significantly. Now, the drugs are simply deadly....first use, or if you are lucky you get another chance.

If more and more drugs are seized at ports of entry after more barriers are installed, that clearly means new ways of drug flow has to take place with higher volumes of product, which makes it harder to disguise in small packages, which makes scanning packages much simpler. The barriers, coupled with funneling traffic flow....treats the demand, because the supply is not there. The only fear is robberies and thefts will likely go up as addicts will be searching for the their next fix. I bet we would see a rise in drug issues in Canada and across the pond if the barriers go up along the border.

I think you have this backward, cradle.

Step up technology and manpower for detection of drugs through the mail, shipped in bulk via truck or shipping container at ports, or on rail cars through tunnels. Make it really, really difficult to come in through the current low cost means, and sure, the drug traffickers will eventually turn to trying to cross the desert with it. Use technology to detect them and nail'em. If you need some more fencing to make that easier, that's when you spend $ for that. But not until you've addressed where most of the drugs are coming in.

In other words, let's spend our tax dollars as efficiently as possible, get the most bang for the buck.

On the other hand, I think this will always be a losing battle until we decriminalize drug use and put our efforts into prevention and rehabilitation instead of policing and incarceration of users and their non-drug trafficking crimes done to feed their costly addiction.

Take the profit out of it for the drug traffickers.

Focus the policing on any remaining black market. Be very, very tough on black marketers, especially any who use weapons in any way.

Personally, I've managed to avoid all criminal drug use all my life except a bit of underage drinking as a teenager. But I have lots of family who have been badly addicted to alcohol, and one to both alcohol and illegal substances (sober now for more than a decade) and one who remains in desperate shape with opioids and heroin. Addiction needs to be seen as a serious disease, not a criminal activity.

[youthathletics]

Additionally, do your homework, and tell us how much fentanyl will fit in a few backpacks vs the amount of people that quantity can kill and put a price on it. Hint: 2 milligrams of fentanyl is considered deadly.

Yup. Shipment sizes for fentanyl are quite small, so many come through the mail. Often from China.

A physical wall around every Post Office and Fed Ex office is gonna take a lot of time and money to build.

Look for the forest ggait. I get it, you guys do not want or believe a wall will work, fine. But to argue your case about the simplicity of "shipping" drugs via mail is shortsighted.

For instance, as TLD likes to add, treat the demand. Sure, we can educate and rehabilitate till we are blue in the face, but these drugs are for more addictive and deadly....attend any rehab place that treats the big drugs like Heroin, Meth, Opiods, etc....they give those recovering a bit over a 50% chance of staying clean, not to mention the price has dropped significantly. Now, the drugs are simply deadly....first use, or if you are lucky you get another chance.

If more and more drugs are seized at ports of entry after more barriers are installed, that clearly means new ways of drug flow has to take place with higher volumes of product, which makes it harder to disguise in small packages, which makes scanning packages much simpler. The barriers, coupled with funneling traffic flow....treats the demand, because the supply is not there. The only fear is robberies and thefts will likely go up as addicts will be searching for the their next fix. I bet we would see a rise in drug issues in Canada and across the pond if the barriers go up along the border.

I think you have this backward, cradle. me and craddle are different people.

Step up technology and manpower for detection of drugs through the mail, shipped in bulk via truck or shipping container at ports, or on rail cars through tunnels. Make it really, really difficult to come in through the current low cost means, and sure, the drug traffickers will eventually turn to trying to cross the desert with it. Use technology to detect them and nail'em. If you need some more fencing to make that easier, that's when you spend $ for that. But not until you've addressed where most of the drugs are coming in.

In other words, let's spend our tax dollars as efficiently as possible, get the most bang for the buck.

On the other hand, I think this will always be a losing battle until we decriminalize drug use and put our efforts into prevention and rehabilitation instead of policing and incarceration of users and their non-drug trafficking crimes done to feed their costly addiction.

Take the profit out of it for the drug traffickers.

Focus the policing on any remaining black market. Be very, very tough on black marketers, especially any who use weapons in any way.

Personally, I've managed to avoid all criminal drug use all my life except a bit of underage drinking as a teenager. But I have lots of family who have been badly addicted to alcohol, and one to both alcohol and illegal substances (sober now for more than a decade) and one who remains in desperate shape with opioids and heroin. Addiction needs to be seen as a serious disease, not a criminal activity.

We are saying darned near the same thing mdlax. The only rub is the barrier aspect. The wall is much more than drugs, and I would think you would be for barriers, primarily for the human trafficking element that would decline, set aside the drug aspect if that is the roadblock you are stuck on. There can be no more (or very little) paid coyote caravans that lead to wall with no impasse, this also funnels legit traffic towards legal ports of entry.

[Trinity]

You know how the undocumented workers reached Trump’s golf club? They flew into Newark.

[MDlaxfan76]

Additionally, do your homework, and tell us how much fentanyl will fit in a few backpacks vs the amount of people that quantity can kill and put a price on it. Hint: 2 milligrams of fentanyl is considered deadly.

Yup. Shipment sizes for fentanyl are quite small, so many come through the mail. Often from China.

A physical wall around every Post Office and Fed Ex office is gonna take a lot of time and money to build.

Look for the forest ggait. I get it, you guys do not want or believe a wall will work, fine. But to argue your case about the simplicity of "shipping" drugs via mail is shortsighted.

For instance, as TLD likes to add, treat the demand. Sure, we can educate and rehabilitate till we are blue in the face, but these drugs are for more addictive and deadly....attend any rehab place that treats the big drugs like Heroin, Meth, Opiods, etc....they give those recovering a bit over a 50% chance of staying clean, not to mention the price has dropped significantly. Now, the drugs are simply deadly....first use, or if you are lucky you get another chance.

If more and more drugs are seized at ports of entry after more barriers are installed, that clearly means new ways of drug flow has to take place with higher volumes of product, which makes it harder to disguise in small packages, which makes scanning packages much simpler. The barriers, coupled with funneling traffic flow....treats the demand, because the supply is not there. The only fear is robberies and thefts will likely go up as addicts will be searching for the their next fix. I bet we would see a rise in drug issues in Canada and across the pond if the barriers go up along the border.

I think you have this backward, cradle. me and craddle are different people.

Step up technology and manpower for detection of drugs through the mail, shipped in bulk via truck or shipping container at ports, or on rail cars through tunnels. Make it really, really difficult to come in through the current low cost means, and sure, the drug traffickers will eventually turn to trying to cross the desert with it. Use technology to detect them and nail'em. If you need some more fencing to make that easier, that's when you spend $ for that. But not until you've addressed where most of the drugs are coming in.

In other words, let's spend our tax dollars as efficiently as possible, get the most bang for the buck.

On the other hand, I think this will always be a losing battle until we decriminalize drug use and put our efforts into prevention and rehabilitation instead of policing and incarceration of users and their non-drug trafficking crimes done to feed their costly addiction.

Take the profit out of it for the drug traffickers.

Focus the policing on any remaining black market. Be very, very tough on black marketers, especially any who use weapons in any way.

Personally, I've managed to avoid all criminal drug use all my life except a bit of underage drinking as a teenager. But I have lots of family who have been badly addicted to alcohol, and one to both alcohol and illegal substances (sober now for more than a decade) and one who remains in desperate shape with opioids and heroin. Addiction needs to be seen as a serious disease, not a criminal activity.

We are saying darned near the same thing mdlax. The only rub is the barrier aspect. The wall is much more than drugs, and I would think you would be for barriers, primarily for the human trafficking element that would decline, set aside the drug aspect if that is the roadblock you are stuck on. There can be no more (or very little) paid coyote caravans that lead to wall with no impasse, this also funnels legit traffic towards legal ports of entry.

sorry, didn't mean to confuse you guys! my bad

Yes, I was speaking primarily about drugs. More fences should be very low on the priority list of how to spend money efficiently in that regard.

By human trafficking, do you mean sex trafficking ? or do you just mean economic migrants and actual asylum seekers?
I'm all for nailing those who exploit others.

If it's a question of wanting to control the numbers of people here in the US without proper documentation, let's focus first on those who over stay their visas. I want to make it a lot easier to be here with up to date documentation, but I also want to make it tougher to exploit them. Implement e-verify.

But I really don't see spending enormous sums for fences to be a wise investment. There are too many other investments that should be done first.
Now, using technology to detect illegal crossings could well be an efficient spend.

[runrussellrun]

The funds to build the wall have already been allocated to the DoD.

That stands for the Department of Defense. Billions from the "construction" allocation.

Guess that new SIGNET "station" in Tuvalu will have to wait until next year to be built. Built by "whom"

hmmm........the TAATS are calling for investigations into the DoD "construction" billions.

Guess the SeaBees don't exist anymore, nor the Corps of Engineers.....gotta hire a company that COngress own stock in.