Posted on 06/04/2007 12:47:26 PM PDT by TheDon
Preventing migration using sturdy fence does not require that you stop people from crossing. It only requires that you inspect the fence frequently and keep it in good repair.
I was going to use the same concept but in the opposite direction:
"But potentially it may be the most effective way of deterring people from crossing the border."
Interlocking fields of fire are potentially much more effective.
A fence would need to be heavily patrolled 24/7 for at least a couple of years until the message got out that we were serious, that is if we were really serious.
We have missed the point of this exercise, it is to be used for taken the census not halt crossings.
“The all-weather, all-hours technology will be able to distinguish humans from animals”
They have already developed a “top Secret” defeat to this technology:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dR4MgGPV63M
2) Since this does affect national security, will somebody PLEASE put this reporter in jail for bringing this up?
Of couse not. But because you can drive a truck with a couple of guys with rifles in it to a mile or half-mile away (on the Mexican side), you don’t have to.
Hey, waita second, I have to call Discovery Channel and Art Bell, I now know how we can get the inside scoop on Area51, send some meh-hee-cans in there.
In order to stop people without a fence, the border patrol and the person must be in the same place at the same time. A sturdy fence stops people even when the border patrol is not there.
It takes a heck of a lot more manpower to patrol a virtual fence, if stopping people is the aim. Of course, a sturdy fence with a virtual fence is the better still...
The all-weather, all-hours technology will be able to distinguish humans from animals and vehicles, determine a group's size and whether weapons are being carried.
And as soon as the political heat dies down, the Feds can flip a switch and turn it off to keep the illegals pouring in.
That's why we want a double or triple layer fence built, it's something we can see and know is still working.
Exactly. With a real fence, they could get by with a string of ultracheap motion detectors that would go off if anyone walks or drives up to the fence.
A fence only slows people down. Check the history of the fences between east and west Berlin. An nmanned fence system could be easily circumvented by bringing a large crane to the fence system and lifting people/drugs over.
Holes in a barrier - even big gaping holes in a concrete wall - are inexpensive to fix. If the wall system has an inexpensive visual monitoring system, those holes can be found in short order. An even less expensive method of detection would be to implant wires in the concrete (or Stormer fence) which trigger an alarm when the wire is cut or displaced.
A virtual fence is a fence in the same manner that virtual reality is reality.
Total bs.
The credit must go where the credit is due.
The illegals, the smugglers and Kennedy, that is what has created the "war zone."
Actually the problem would largely dry up if they enforced the laws WITHIN our country.
If they prosecuted employers for giving them jobs, and if they stopped giving them welfare, free schooling, and welfare benefits, they would leave voluntarily and stop pouring in.
I don’t notice that Americans can go to Mexico and get free schooling or welfare benefits, and there is a LOT of wealth in Mexico. They could afford it just as easily as we can.
Anyone who’s been between Alpine and Marfa,TX has probably seen the *blimp*. It looks like a fat spaceshuttle and is tethered to the ground with a couple of thousand ft. of steel cable. Some type of ground-based radar to detect vehicle and low-flying planes crossing the desert.
I think you have that exactly backwards: the physical barrier, once completed, will cost less on an annual basis to maintain than no fence with the "virtual" setup which requires an agent going out and physically capturing every single person who the high-tech system detects as crossing the border.
And what happens to such a person who is so caught? Well, they just get sent back over to the other side of the border, so there is no reason to think that a virtual fence will not be constantly tested in many places.
And as to the "large numbers of people rushing through" that is exactly the problem that needs to be solved. We don't need to bring the number down to zero, we just to need to greatly reduce the number. Some people seem to make the argument that anything that does not guarantee zero people crossing the border is not worth doing.
I never said that a fence need not be patrolled. In fact, I said that a fence must be patrolled frequently and kept in good repair. If you want to refute an argument, it is polite to refute an argument somebody actually made.
My point is that it requires less patrolling if a physical fence is in place than if a physical fence is not in place. If it takes five minutes to defeat a fence, then patrols at five-minute intervals is sufficient to stop people. If somebody can run across a section of open ground in 30 seconds, patrols must be much more frequent.
A physical fence is a necessary part of any effective border control scheme. Any scheme that does not include a physical fence is not meant to be effective.
I don’t think the virtual fence posts are right on the border, are they ? Even if they are, that just means they can see 9 miles into Mexico. The article says the system can identify people and whether they are armed or not. So the monitors still have plenty of time to identify threats to the area and converge agents there. Also to notify Mexican officials. By the time those guys in the pickup get within range, they’ll be faced with live agents, not just a pole with equipment on it.
It would be embarrassing for the Mexican government not to respond to video evidence of drug runners or other armed Mexican nationals firing weapons into the United States.
Either way, the virtual fence would be restored simply by replacing some equipment. A few thousand dollars of equipment to cover a few miles of border ? That’s cheap. I wonder if the radar and camera setups include laser sights ? Having a red dot on your forehead ought to make anybody nervous as to whether there was a sniper on the other end.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.