Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

[danielpalos]

Building new Cities is better.

 

[bripat9643]

It isn't possible for that to be a lie, moron. It's an opinion, and it's far more credible than yours. The theory that foreigners have a right to emigrate here couldn't be more idiotic.

1) Despite the irrefutable FACT that this question was answered in court - in a case wherein a civilian border patrol got into a spat with undocumented foreigners trying to trespass over private property and effect an improper entry, you make that blatantly false claim???

Those who were brought into court even refused sound counsel to appeal the ruling

2) The Declaration of Independence states:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Do you know what the meaning of the word unalienable is? Can you explain how our Creator (whoever your God is) only gave citizens unalienable Rights?

It would appear to me that you are historically and legally ignorant on this point. So, your contention is, only citizens have rights and the government doles them out on the basis of your citizenship? If that is the case, you could stand on the border and pop the foreigner the moment they set foot on U.S. soil, right?

I mean, our county government allows us to kill squirrels when they come on our property. The squirrels are trespassing and have no rights. So, if the foreigners have no rights, how come you suppose it's against the law to use force against them if they come across your property? It's because they DO have Rights and it was people that support you who brought that ruling about.

You're an idiot. It's been legal to use force against trespassers for 250 years.

Ray is the most disrespectful person on this board. You are the most ignorant. Calling people names is a testament to your character.

The fact is, it is YOUR fault that the courts put people just like you in prison and then declared that undocumented have civil rights - and those civil rights trumped those who think just like you.

If people had a Right to protect private property, all private property along the border would be being protected by civilian militias.

You're a certifiable idiot. People have a right to use force to protect their property. The fact is irrefutable. I have personally had a shotgun pointed in my direction by a rancher because we were on his land.

Debating you is a waste of time because so much of what you believe just isn't true.

Most states don't recognize the use of lethal force for mere trespassing. Deadly force in the defense of one's life is permitted. Deadly force in defense of property alone generally isn't. Most uses of lethal force must be in response to reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to oneself or others

I didn't use the term "lethal force." However, in many states, if someone breaks into your home, you are allowed to blow them away. You are allowed to use force against trespassers.

 

[Skylar]

1) Despite the irrefutable FACT that this question was answered in court - in a case wherein a civilian border patrol got into a spat with undocumented foreigners trying to trespass over private property and effect an improper entry, you make that blatantly false claim???

Those who were brought into court even refused sound counsel to appeal the ruling

2) The Declaration of Independence states:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Do you know what the meaning of the word unalienable is? Can you explain how our Creator (whoever your God is) only gave citizens unalienable Rights?

It would appear to me that you are historically and legally ignorant on this point. So, your contention is, only citizens have rights and the government doles them out on the basis of your citizenship? If that is the case, you could stand on the border and pop the foreigner the moment they set foot on U.S. soil, right?

I mean, our county government allows us to kill squirrels when they come on our property. The squirrels are trespassing and have no rights. So, if the foreigners have no rights, how come you suppose it's against the law to use force against them if they come across your property? It's because they DO have Rights and it was people that support you who brought that ruling about.

You're an idiot. It's been legal to use force against trespassers for 250 years.

Ray is the most disrespectful person on this board. You are the most ignorant. Calling people names is a testament to your character.

The fact is, it is YOUR fault that the courts put people just like you in prison and then declared that undocumented have civil rights - and those civil rights trumped those who think just like you.

If people had a Right to protect private property, all private property along the border would be being protected by civilian militias.

You're a certifiable idiot. People have a right to use force to protect their property. The fact is irrefutable. I have personally had a shotgun pointed in my direction by a rancher because we were on his land.

Debating you is a waste of time because so much of what you believe just isn't true.

Most states don't recognize the use of lethal force for mere trespassing. Deadly force in the defense of one's life is permitted. Deadly force in defense of property alone generally isn't. Most uses of lethal force must be in response to reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to oneself or others

I didn't use the term "lethal force." However, in many states, if someone breaks into your home, you are allowed to blow them away. You are allowed to use force against trespassers.

Not 'any place'. But one's home specifically. You couldn't, for example, shoot someone on your lawn without a reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to one's self or others.

Trying to shift that to the use of deadly force on the border when someone is trying to enter the country.....would be poorly supported legally.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You're an idiot. It's been legal to use force against trespassers for 250 years.

Ray is the most disrespectful person on this board. You are the most ignorant. Calling people names is a testament to your character.

The fact is, it is YOUR fault that the courts put people just like you in prison and then declared that undocumented have civil rights - and those civil rights trumped those who think just like you.

If people had a Right to protect private property, all private property along the border would be being protected by civilian militias.

You're a certifiable idiot. People have a right to use force to protect their property. The fact is irrefutable. I have personally had a shotgun pointed in my direction by a rancher because we were on his land.

Debating you is a waste of time because so much of what you believe just isn't true.

Most states don't recognize the use of lethal force for mere trespassing. Deadly force in the defense of one's life is permitted. Deadly force in defense of property alone generally isn't. Most uses of lethal force must be in response to reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to oneself or others

I didn't use the term "lethal force." However, in many states, if someone breaks into your home, you are allowed to blow them away. You are allowed to use force against trespassers.

Not 'any place'. But one's home specifically. You couldn't, for example, shoot someone on your lawn without a reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to one's self or others.

Trying to shift that to the use of deadly force on the border when someone is trying to enter the country.....would be poorly supported legally.

And that's too bad.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It isn't possible for that to be a lie, moron. It's an opinion, and it's far more credible than yours. The theory that foreigners have a right to emigrate here couldn't be more idiotic.

1) Despite the irrefutable FACT that this question was answered in court - in a case wherein a civilian border patrol got into a spat with undocumented foreigners trying to trespass over private property and effect an improper entry, you make that blatantly false claim???

Those who were brought into court even refused sound counsel to appeal the ruling

2) The Declaration of Independence states:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Do you know what the meaning of the word unalienable is? Can you explain how our Creator (whoever your God is) only gave citizens unalienable Rights?

It would appear to me that you are historically and legally ignorant on this point. So, your contention is, only citizens have rights and the government doles them out on the basis of your citizenship? If that is the case, you could stand on the border and pop the foreigner the moment they set foot on U.S. soil, right?

I mean, our county government allows us to kill squirrels when they come on our property. The squirrels are trespassing and have no rights. So, if the foreigners have no rights, how come you suppose it's against the law to use force against them if they come across your property? It's because they DO have Rights and it was people that support you who brought that ruling about.

You're an idiot. It's been legal to use force against trespassers for 250 years.

Ray is the most disrespectful person on this board. You are the most ignorant. Calling people names is a testament to your character.

The fact is, it is YOUR fault that the courts put people just like you in prison and then declared that undocumented have civil rights - and those civil rights trumped those who think just like you.

If people had a Right to protect private property, all private property along the border would be being protected by civilian militias.

You're a certifiable idiot. People have a right to use force to protect their property. The fact is irrefutable. I have personally had a shotgun pointed in my direction by a rancher because we were on his land.

Debating you is a waste of time because so much of what you believe just isn't true.

Most states don't recognize the use of lethal force for mere trespassing. Deadly force in the defense of one's life is permitted. Deadly force in defense of property alone generally isn't. Most uses of lethal force must be in response to reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to oneself or others

That's the law we have except for your home or car. If somebody breaks into my home or car while I'm armed, I have the legal right to use deadly force.

 

[bripat9643]

It isn't possible for that to be a lie, moron. It's an opinion, and it's far more credible than yours. The theory that foreigners have a right to emigrate here couldn't be more idiotic.

1) Despite the irrefutable FACT that this question was answered in court - in a case wherein a civilian border patrol got into a spat with undocumented foreigners trying to trespass over private property and effect an improper entry, you make that blatantly false claim???

Those who were brought into court even refused sound counsel to appeal the ruling

2) The Declaration of Independence states:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Do you know what the meaning of the word unalienable is? Can you explain how our Creator (whoever your God is) only gave citizens unalienable Rights?

It would appear to me that you are historically and legally ignorant on this point. So, your contention is, only citizens have rights and the government doles them out on the basis of your citizenship? If that is the case, you could stand on the border and pop the foreigner the moment they set foot on U.S. soil, right?

I mean, our county government allows us to kill squirrels when they come on our property. The squirrels are trespassing and have no rights. So, if the foreigners have no rights, how come you suppose it's against the law to use force against them if they come across your property? It's because they DO have Rights and it was people that support you who brought that ruling about.

You're an idiot. It's been legal to use force against trespassers for 250 years.

Ray is the most disrespectful person on this board. You are the most ignorant. Calling people names is a testament to your character.

The fact is, it is YOUR fault that the courts put people just like you in prison and then declared that undocumented have civil rights - and those civil rights trumped those who think just like you.

If people had a Right to protect private property, all private property along the border would be being protected by civilian militias.

You're a certifiable idiot. People have a right to use force to protect their property. The fact is irrefutable. I have personally had a shotgun pointed in my direction by a rancher because we were on his land.

Debating you is a waste of time because so much of what you believe just isn't true.

You are an aggravating blowhard that don't have an IQ that is equivalent to his shoe size.

The bottom line is that the lie you just told would make even an idiot look like a freaking Einstein. Enough of this lying mental midgetry. Let's get down and dirty and tell the people the truth. I'd bet dollars against doughnuts that your dumb ass was, most likely, among those that caused this sh!+storm to begin in the first place.

Back in 2003 some Salvadorans were attempting to cross the border and enter the United States improperly. Unfortunately (later fortunately for them), it was private property and it was posted. In addition, the property was being guarded by Ranch Rescue, a civilian border patrol watch group.

The trespassing foreigners attempting an improper entry got into a tiff with Ranch Rescue whereupon Ranch Rescue ending up winning that altercation. The matter ended up in court. Ranch Rescue members were sent to prison; the land owner lost his property and his home to the undocumented foreigners.The ACLU went home, laughing all the way to the bank.

Both Ranch Rescue AND Jack Foote (the property owner) rejected the advice to appeal the decision. In the court's RULING, he said that Ranch Rescue "violated the civil rights" of the foreigners who were tryig to come into the U.S. improperly. Any way you slice it and any way you dice it, the facts are unequivocal:

* The undocumented foreigners not only have rights, but rights that trump those of American property owners

* Jack Foote did NOT have the right to protect his own private property. He lost it for trying.

AFTER that event, civilian militias gave up on saving America and allowed themselves to be recruited by neo nazis in some lame ass scheme to pretend to be an extension of Homeland (IN) Security and adopt David Duke's Border Watch scheme (Duke being a former neo nazi turned KKK leader.) It's been a pissing match ever since with the constitutionalists and patriots of the period (pre 2003) being ignored by the mainstream media as bripat9643 and his ilk serve as useful idiots, working to institute Bill Clinton's silliness as the gold standard by which the rest of America would be judged.

That is why, for a fact, the build the wall guys are asking you why we can't be like Mexico and reminding us every day about communist China's wall. They want to be at war like the Israelis and they want us to have the same kind of atmosphere the people had while maintaining the Berlin Wall. EVERY reference to their utopia is related to communist, socialist and tyrannical regimes and / or nations at war. The bulk of their news is what they get from media owned by a board of director on the Council on Foreign Relations.

People like bripat9643 are little more than change agents for the NEW WORLD ORDER. But, you have the facts and any of you that want to check it out can research it for yourselves. bripat9643 may think that name calling and using controversial language will be enough to hide what he is and what it he is doing. I don't think it is. That is why he is constantly trying to tell you I'm an idiot. He's projecting what he realizes what he is. But, people like Rupert Murdoch own him and those who waste their ever waking moment worrying about that damn wall. NEVER do they talk about what they want to do for their fellow Anmericans. I have and do. NEVER will you hear them extol the virtues of Liberty. I have and do. NEVER do they interject the Constitution into their phony "debate." I have and do.

The moment bripat9643 began calling people names, he lost any "debate" that might have been going on. ALL that troll has is name calling and trying to disrupt any chance of the different sides being able to have a productive conversation because, even being the most ignorant individual on this thread, he realizes his side LOST any pretend debate.

<YAWN!>

 

[bripat9643]

You're an idiot. It's been legal to use force against trespassers for 250 years.

Ray is the most disrespectful person on this board. You are the most ignorant. Calling people names is a testament to your character.

The fact is, it is YOUR fault that the courts put people just like you in prison and then declared that undocumented have civil rights - and those civil rights trumped those who think just like you.

If people had a Right to protect private property, all private property along the border would be being protected by civilian militias.

You're a certifiable idiot. People have a right to use force to protect their property. The fact is irrefutable. I have personally had a shotgun pointed in my direction by a rancher because we were on his land.

Debating you is a waste of time because so much of what you believe just isn't true.

Most states don't recognize the use of lethal force for mere trespassing. Deadly force in the defense of one's life is permitted. Deadly force in defense of property alone generally isn't. Most uses of lethal force must be in response to reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to oneself or others

I didn't use the term "lethal force." However, in many states, if someone breaks into your home, you are allowed to blow them away. You are allowed to use force against trespassers.

Not 'any place'. But one's home specifically. You couldn't, for example, shoot someone on your lawn without a reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to one's self or others.

Trying to shift that to the use of deadly force on the border when someone is trying to enter the country.....would be poorly supported legally.

You're the one who keeps using the term "deadly force," dumbass. I haven't used it. However, your claims are still bullshit. If you had a wall or fence around your property and some thief climbed over it, you would be entitled to shoot him in some states. Furthermore, many businesses have private security, and they are able to use deadly force in many cases.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That leftist argument doesn't fly.

That argument doesn't fly, Ray, because it is a bullshit argument, used here over and over again (because it is all they have). The popular vote only counts or decides anything at the STATE level. Take away a couple of square miles of area around LA and NYC and Hillary lost the popular vote as well. Once you win a county or a state by two votes, it doesn't matter if you add 200,000 more---- you've already won. The democrats have wet dreams about someday making the USA a pure democracy (the popular vote a la mob rule) because they want to be the mob, but the founders were wise and realized that to be president, you should represent the people, so they created the Electoral College so that by winning, a far wider swath of people and states would be represented that never would have any voice in their government otherwise.

In the Left's world, winning would become very easy. Just win California (LA and SanFran) and New York (City) and every time you've won! Screw all the deplorables everywhere else. Why else do you think they are so adamant on filling up states with illegal Latino democrat voters?! I happen to know a lot of people both in California and New York who DON'T live in those areas (the Valley and upstate NY) and they HATE how these small city areas decide everything against their wishes.

For decades, the anti-white party has been telling their people that Republicans are a thing of the past. Old white men that are dying off. People who are stuck in the 1940's. A party losing political ground every year.

When Republicans do win, they must have cheated somehow because it just isn't possible. I'm a liberal, all my friends are liberals, most of my family is liberal, all the people at Starbucks are liberals, and everybody in my state is liberal. Sure, there are Republicans; here and there; in flyover country, some on yachts, in pickup trucks with gun racks. But the rest of the country is like me.....liberal.

The Democrat party cannot tell their constituents the truth, otherwise many would lose faith and might quit voting. So they need to lie to them.

Donald Trump: James Comey, Russian collusion, the Electoral College, third party candidate, unequal campaign coverage, subservient white women who take voting orders from their Republican husbands.

2010 Republican victory in Congress: Voter-ID, voter suppression, gerrymandering.

George Bush reelection: Diebold machines, gerrymandering.

George Bush election: hanging chads, selected not elected, brother is the Governor, voter purging.

Brainwashing dictates they tell their constituents they never lost, they won, it's just the Republicans found a way to cheat them somehow. Liberals are way too closed minded to see a pattern like I listed above.

IF America were still white and IF Americans still respected the basics of our Declaration of Independence, Constitution,and founding principles then they could count on being re-elected. The reality is, when the economy was improving, the Democrats took the House. In Georgia where a lot of precincts are up to 87 percent white Republicans, a fraction of 1 percent of the votes separated the candidates for governor and the race for Secretary of State had to have a second run-off, neither major candidate getting 50 percent of the vote. A LOT of races here were decided by less than one percent of the vote.

I think that when America swings left again, they are going to make you sorry that you had such a cocky attitude. You should win with grace and style and NOT give your political opponents a reason to hate you. It only guarantees that they will show up on election day.

Lots of leftists are fleeing their high taxed states and polluting lower taxed red states. So unfortunately, you are seeing changes.

However a large part of change comes from liberalism. If you look at statistics, less people are claiming to be religious or believe in God. More people believe in Socialism. This is especially true of younger people and college kids. This is the era of "gimme."

So evil is spreading as planned and we on the right are trying to fight the will of Satan. People are becoming less and less responsible every year. More and more people want government to handle all their personal and financial affairs.

I don't know what will happen in 50 years from now, but I"m glad I'll be off this earth by then. Because the great experiment is coming to an end. Once Democrats wipe out white people and make us a minority, we will have a single-party government forever. Socialism will then be the new government quickly followed by Communism. The only hope I have is that they don't destroy history books like they are with statues and religious items today so people in the future can figure out where we went wrong and how we failed them.

And so, Ray, we failed as a nation for turning our backs against God. America became the greatest nation in the annals of history when we were keeping the Commandments of God. I belong to the Anglo-Israelite Christian Church. Among our tenets of faith is that we believe America is the New Jerusalem of the Bible and that the Anglo Saxon, Scandinavian, Germanic, Teutonic and kindred people are those that are Christ's servants and those destined to bless the world - which we have. Our race has provided the bulk of soldiers to die in foreign wars in the name of Liberty; we've provided more than 90 percent of the world's missionaries; created the bulk of the world's wealth; stopped slavery; poured more money into research to cure diseases, etc., etc.

The immigration issue is a diversionary tactic and a byproduct of what is known as the Hegelian Principle: Thesis + Anti-Thesis = Synthesis. The globalists play the political game very well. Create the problem (Thesis.) Create the opposition, hysteria and the chaos while advocating that something be done (Anti-Thesis.) Then produce a list of solutions and allow the sheeple pick from those pre-planned solutions (Synthesis.)

As it turns out, the solutions the globalists gave the sheeple to work with is predicated upon lies that, if you could understand their ultimate destination, end in slavery, oppression and inevitable genocide for the posterity of the founders of America. You are an unwitting pawn in a very sick game. What you fret over are symptoms of much larger problem in this world. Since you only see what the puppetmasters want you to see, you suffer from what is known as BIAS CONFIRMATION.

Bias confirmation happens when you are only interested in facts and information that lead credence to your point of view. As a result of this bias, you reject all knowledge that does not prove your point. Then you assume that everyone that disagrees with your opinions, certainly must be liberals. Well, I have opinions too. And my solutions are just like those from the left and the right: my own ideas have flaws. But I am not affected by bias confirmation so if the left points out the truth I can accept it; if the right slings skeet and lies, I can condemn it.

What I can tell you is that the left hates the Constitution; they hate the posterity of the founding fathers and every principle they stood for. They hate your race; they have an issue with Christianity; they oppose the foundational principles upon which this country was founded. Unfortunately, many of the people on the right have joined them and little separates them. When you stoop to their level in trying to articulate your points and refuse to understand that all sides have facts on their side, you lose those that are on the sidelines looking in.

 

[Flopper]

No one said a wall would magically keep people out but it would seriously slow illegals down if it was build right and it would slow the flow of drugs .
Again a 20 percent reduction in illegals and drugs would safe 7s7s billions a year.yyear.you just cant handle the truth

With half the illegals in the country coming in legally and only a 20% drop in illegal entry it wouldn't be worth 25 or 30 billion dollars, particular when you consider that whenever democrats get control, they're going to reform immigration and the wall will be joke.

You mean like they reformed it all these years?

The Democrats are not going to do anything that doesn't benefit them. And whatever benefits the Democrats is a disadvantage to citizens.

The only reason democrats did not reform immigration law when they had the chance was because it was a low priority item with the public. The only people really interested in immigration were racists whose goal was the supremacy of the white majority.

Trump of course has created an immigration crisis where none exist. So when democrats get the opportunity, they are going to have to go after immigration law.

They didn't do anything because it was going in their favor. Young male men who could fight for their country, kids, pregnant women all came here and got in under Catch and Release. So the Democrats are going to have to do something (if they ever gain full power again) because Trump is doing what he can to solve this problem. The anti-white party doesn't want the problem solved, they want it to grow.

When democrats took control of goverment in 2008, immigration was a non-issue for most Americans. It was healthcare and the economy and that is what democrats focused on.

Thanks to Donald Trump he has created a crisis in immigration where none exist. If democrats have sufficient control of government in 2020, there will be real immigration reform. It could come in the next two years with a democratic House. Both democrats and republicans in congress agree on a number immigration issues and Donald's only real interest in immigration is building a wall. Democrats will be willing to give Trump his wall for the right kind of immigration bill.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

1) Despite the irrefutable FACT that this question was answered in court - in a case wherein a civilian border patrol got into a spat with undocumented foreigners trying to trespass over private property and effect an improper entry, you make that blatantly false claim???

Those who were brought into court even refused sound counsel to appeal the ruling

2) The Declaration of Independence states:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Do you know what the meaning of the word unalienable is? Can you explain how our Creator (whoever your God is) only gave citizens unalienable Rights?

It would appear to me that you are historically and legally ignorant on this point. So, your contention is, only citizens have rights and the government doles them out on the basis of your citizenship? If that is the case, you could stand on the border and pop the foreigner the moment they set foot on U.S. soil, right?

I mean, our county government allows us to kill squirrels when they come on our property. The squirrels are trespassing and have no rights. So, if the foreigners have no rights, how come you suppose it's against the law to use force against them if they come across your property? It's because they DO have Rights and it was people that support you who brought that ruling about.

You're an idiot. It's been legal to use force against trespassers for 250 years.

Ray is the most disrespectful person on this board. You are the most ignorant. Calling people names is a testament to your character.

The fact is, it is YOUR fault that the courts put people just like you in prison and then declared that undocumented have civil rights - and those civil rights trumped those who think just like you.

If people had a Right to protect private property, all private property along the border would be being protected by civilian militias.

You're a certifiable idiot. People have a right to use force to protect their property. The fact is irrefutable. I have personally had a shotgun pointed in my direction by a rancher because we were on his land.

Debating you is a waste of time because so much of what you believe just isn't true.

You are an aggravating blowhard that don't have an IQ that is equivalent to his shoe size.

The bottom line is that the lie you just told would make even an idiot look like a freaking Einstein. Enough of this lying mental midgetry. Let's get down and dirty and tell the people the truth. I'd bet dollars against doughnuts that your dumb ass was, most likely, among those that caused this sh!+storm to begin in the first place.

Back in 2003 some Salvadorans were attempting to cross the border and enter the United States improperly. Unfortunately (later fortunately for them), it was private property and it was posted. In addition, the property was being guarded by Ranch Rescue, a civilian border patrol watch group.

The trespassing foreigners attempting an improper entry got into a tiff with Ranch Rescue whereupon Ranch Rescue ending up winning that altercation. The matter ended up in court. Ranch Rescue members were sent to prison; the land owner lost his property and his home to the undocumented foreigners.The ACLU went home, laughing all the way to the bank.

Both Ranch Rescue AND Jack Foote (the property owner) rejected the advice to appeal the decision. In the court's RULING, he said that Ranch Rescue "violated the civil rights" of the foreigners who were tryig to come into the U.S. improperly. Any way you slice it and any way you dice it, the facts are unequivocal:

* The undocumented foreigners not only have rights, but rights that trump those of American property owners

* Jack Foote did NOT have the right to protect his own private property. He lost it for trying.

AFTER that event, civilian militias gave up on saving America and allowed themselves to be recruited by neo nazis in some lame ass scheme to pretend to be an extension of Homeland (IN) Security and adopt David Duke's Border Watch scheme (Duke being a former neo nazi turned KKK leader.) It's been a pissing match ever since with the constitutionalists and patriots of the period (pre 2003) being ignored by the mainstream media as bripat9643 and his ilk serve as useful idiots, working to institute Bill Clinton's silliness as the gold standard by which the rest of America would be judged.

That is why, for a fact, the build the wall guys are asking you why we can't be like Mexico and reminding us every day about communist China's wall. They want to be at war like the Israelis and they want us to have the same kind of atmosphere the people had while maintaining the Berlin Wall. EVERY reference to their utopia is related to communist, socialist and tyrannical regimes and / or nations at war. The bulk of their news is what they get from media owned by a board of director on the Council on Foreign Relations.

People like bripat9643 are little more than change agents for the NEW WORLD ORDER. But, you have the facts and any of you that want to check it out can research it for yourselves. bripat9643 may think that name calling and using controversial language will be enough to hide what he is and what it he is doing. I don't think it is. That is why he is constantly trying to tell you I'm an idiot. He's projecting what he realizes what he is. But, people like Rupert Murdoch own him and those who waste their ever waking moment worrying about that damn wall. NEVER do they talk about what they want to do for their fellow Anmericans. I have and do. NEVER will you hear them extol the virtues of Liberty. I have and do. NEVER do they interject the Constitution into their phony "debate." I have and do.

The moment bripat9643 began calling people names, he lost any "debate" that might have been going on. ALL that troll has is name calling and trying to disrupt any chance of the different sides being able to have a productive conversation because, even being the most ignorant individual on this thread, he realizes his side LOST any pretend debate.

When it comes to posting stupid shit, you're right up their with danielpalos.

I've been thinking that you were danielpalos under another name

 

[Porter Rockwell]

A- Cost prohibitive
B- Won't work
C- It's racist
D- It would reduce those successfully crossing the border
E- None of the Above

The machine benefits by not having a wall. Business (Republicans) get their cheap labor and (Democrats) get the votes

You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours

There is no excuse for the Republicans not funding the wall.

-Geaux

Because bigotry and hate are wrong.

What you are really saying is that wisdom and prudence are wrong. People aren't required to turn off their brains to serve your idiotic ideals that say people are all the same. They aren't, and some are far worse than others.

Sounds like more of your paranoid projection. Wisdom and prudence are not your strong suit.

So you are contesting my position that people are not all the same? Really?

Sober up and ask me about something I actually said.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Ray is the most disrespectful person on this board. You are the most ignorant. Calling people names is a testament to your character.

The fact is, it is YOUR fault that the courts put people just like you in prison and then declared that undocumented have civil rights - and those civil rights trumped those who think just like you.

If people had a Right to protect private property, all private property along the border would be being protected by civilian militias.

You're a certifiable idiot. People have a right to use force to protect their property. The fact is irrefutable. I have personally had a shotgun pointed in my direction by a rancher because we were on his land.

Debating you is a waste of time because so much of what you believe just isn't true.

Most states don't recognize the use of lethal force for mere trespassing. Deadly force in the defense of one's life is permitted. Deadly force in defense of property alone generally isn't. Most uses of lethal force must be in response to reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to oneself or others

I didn't use the term "lethal force." However, in many states, if someone breaks into your home, you are allowed to blow them away. You are allowed to use force against trespassers.

Not 'any place'. But one's home specifically. You couldn't, for example, shoot someone on your lawn without a reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to one's self or others.

Trying to shift that to the use of deadly force on the border when someone is trying to enter the country.....would be poorly supported legally.

You're the one who keeps using the term "deadly force," dumbass. I haven't used it. However, your claims are still bullshit. If you had a wall or fence around your property and some thief climbed over it, you would be entitled to shoot him in some states. Furthermore, many businesses have private security, and they are able to use deadly force in many cases.

Yawn

 

[Skylar]

1) Despite the irrefutable FACT that this question was answered in court - in a case wherein a civilian border patrol got into a spat with undocumented foreigners trying to trespass over private property and effect an improper entry, you make that blatantly false claim???

Those who were brought into court even refused sound counsel to appeal the ruling

2) The Declaration of Independence states:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Do you know what the meaning of the word unalienable is? Can you explain how our Creator (whoever your God is) only gave citizens unalienable Rights?

It would appear to me that you are historically and legally ignorant on this point. So, your contention is, only citizens have rights and the government doles them out on the basis of your citizenship? If that is the case, you could stand on the border and pop the foreigner the moment they set foot on U.S. soil, right?

I mean, our county government allows us to kill squirrels when they come on our property. The squirrels are trespassing and have no rights. So, if the foreigners have no rights, how come you suppose it's against the law to use force against them if they come across your property? It's because they DO have Rights and it was people that support you who brought that ruling about.

You're an idiot. It's been legal to use force against trespassers for 250 years.

Ray is the most disrespectful person on this board. You are the most ignorant. Calling people names is a testament to your character.

The fact is, it is YOUR fault that the courts put people just like you in prison and then declared that undocumented have civil rights - and those civil rights trumped those who think just like you.

If people had a Right to protect private property, all private property along the border would be being protected by civilian militias.

You're a certifiable idiot. People have a right to use force to protect their property. The fact is irrefutable. I have personally had a shotgun pointed in my direction by a rancher because we were on his land.

Debating you is a waste of time because so much of what you believe just isn't true.

Most states don't recognize the use of lethal force for mere trespassing. Deadly force in the defense of one's life is permitted. Deadly force in defense of property alone generally isn't. Most uses of lethal force must be in response to reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to oneself or others

That's the law we have except for your home or car. If somebody breaks into my home or car while I'm armed, I have the legal right to use deadly force.

Depends on the state and depends on if you have a reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to oneself or others. You wouldn't be able to kill someone say....walking across your lawn.

And since we're talking about legal allegories to lethal force against illegals as they cross the border.......the United States is neither a 'house' nor a 'car'.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

That argument doesn't fly, Ray, because it is a bullshit argument, used here over and over again (because it is all they have). The popular vote only counts or decides anything at the STATE level. Take away a couple of square miles of area around LA and NYC and Hillary lost the popular vote as well. Once you win a county or a state by two votes, it doesn't matter if you add 200,000 more---- you've already won. The democrats have wet dreams about someday making the USA a pure democracy (the popular vote a la mob rule) because they want to be the mob, but the founders were wise and realized that to be president, you should represent the people, so they created the Electoral College so that by winning, a far wider swath of people and states would be represented that never would have any voice in their government otherwise.

In the Left's world, winning would become very easy. Just win California (LA and SanFran) and New York (City) and every time you've won! Screw all the deplorables everywhere else. Why else do you think they are so adamant on filling up states with illegal Latino democrat voters?! I happen to know a lot of people both in California and New York who DON'T live in those areas (the Valley and upstate NY) and they HATE how these small city areas decide everything against their wishes.

For decades, the anti-white party has been telling their people that Republicans are a thing of the past. Old white men that are dying off. People who are stuck in the 1940's. A party losing political ground every year.

When Republicans do win, they must have cheated somehow because it just isn't possible. I'm a liberal, all my friends are liberals, most of my family is liberal, all the people at Starbucks are liberals, and everybody in my state is liberal. Sure, there are Republicans; here and there; in flyover country, some on yachts, in pickup trucks with gun racks. But the rest of the country is like me.....liberal.

The Democrat party cannot tell their constituents the truth, otherwise many would lose faith and might quit voting. So they need to lie to them.

Donald Trump: James Comey, Russian collusion, the Electoral College, third party candidate, unequal campaign coverage, subservient white women who take voting orders from their Republican husbands.

2010 Republican victory in Congress: Voter-ID, voter suppression, gerrymandering.

George Bush reelection: Diebold machines, gerrymandering.

George Bush election: hanging chads, selected not elected, brother is the Governor, voter purging.

Brainwashing dictates they tell their constituents they never lost, they won, it's just the Republicans found a way to cheat them somehow. Liberals are way too closed minded to see a pattern like I listed above.

IF America were still white and IF Americans still respected the basics of our Declaration of Independence, Constitution,and founding principles then they could count on being re-elected. The reality is, when the economy was improving, the Democrats took the House. In Georgia where a lot of precincts are up to 87 percent white Republicans, a fraction of 1 percent of the votes separated the candidates for governor and the race for Secretary of State had to have a second run-off, neither major candidate getting 50 percent of the vote. A LOT of races here were decided by less than one percent of the vote.

I think that when America swings left again, they are going to make you sorry that you had such a cocky attitude. You should win with grace and style and NOT give your political opponents a reason to hate you. It only guarantees that they will show up on election day.

Lots of leftists are fleeing their high taxed states and polluting lower taxed red states. So unfortunately, you are seeing changes.

However a large part of change comes from liberalism. If you look at statistics, less people are claiming to be religious or believe in God. More people believe in Socialism. This is especially true of younger people and college kids. This is the era of "gimme."

So evil is spreading as planned and we on the right are trying to fight the will of Satan. People are becoming less and less responsible every year. More and more people want government to handle all their personal and financial affairs.

I don't know what will happen in 50 years from now, but I"m glad I'll be off this earth by then. Because the great experiment is coming to an end. Once Democrats wipe out white people and make us a minority, we will have a single-party government forever. Socialism will then be the new government quickly followed by Communism. The only hope I have is that they don't destroy history books like they are with statues and religious items today so people in the future can figure out where we went wrong and how we failed them.

And so, Ray, we failed as a nation for turning our backs against God. America became the greatest nation in the annals of history when we were keeping the Commandments of God. I belong to the Anglo-Israelite Christian Church. Among our tenets of faith is that we believe America is the New Jerusalem of the Bible and that the Anglo Saxon, Scandinavian, Germanic, Teutonic and kindred people are those that are Christ's servants and those destined to bless the world - which we have. Our race has provided the bulk of soldiers to die in foreign wars in the name of Liberty; we've provided more than 90 percent of the world's missionaries; created the bulk of the world's wealth; stopped slavery; poured more money into research to cure diseases, etc., etc.

The immigration issue is a diversionary tactic and a byproduct of what is known as the Hegelian Principle: Thesis + Anti-Thesis = Synthesis. The globalists play the political game very well. Create the problem (Thesis.) Create the opposition, hysteria and the chaos while advocating that something be done (Anti-Thesis.) Then produce a list of solutions and allow the sheeple pick from those pre-planned solutions (Synthesis.)

As it turns out, the solutions the globalists gave the sheeple to work with is predicated upon lies that, if you could understand their ultimate destination, end in slavery, oppression and inevitable genocide for the posterity of the founders of America. You are an unwitting pawn in a very sick game. What you fret over are symptoms of much larger problem in this world. Since you only see what the puppetmasters want you to see, you suffer from what is known as BIAS CONFIRMATION.

Bias confirmation happens when you are only interested in facts and information that lead credence to your point of view. As a result of this bias, you reject all knowledge that does not prove your point. Then you assume that everyone that disagrees with your opinions, certainly must be liberals. Well, I have opinions too. And my solutions are just like those from the left and the right: my own ideas have flaws. But I am not affected by bias confirmation so if the left points out the truth I can accept it; if the right slings skeet and lies, I can condemn it.

What I can tell you is that the left hates the Constitution; they hate the posterity of the founding fathers and every principle they stood for. They hate your race; they have an issue with Christianity; they oppose the foundational principles upon which this country was founded. Unfortunately, many of the people on the right have joined them and little separates them. When you stoop to their level in trying to articulate your points and refuse to understand that all sides have facts on their side, you lose those that are on the sidelines looking in.

View attachment 237085

In what sentence and in what post have you gotten any conspiracy theory out of me? I gave you the facts son. I did not theorize a damn thing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You're an idiot. It's been legal to use force against trespassers for 250 years.

Ray is the most disrespectful person on this board. You are the most ignorant. Calling people names is a testament to your character.

The fact is, it is YOUR fault that the courts put people just like you in prison and then declared that undocumented have civil rights - and those civil rights trumped those who think just like you.

If people had a Right to protect private property, all private property along the border would be being protected by civilian militias.

You're a certifiable idiot. People have a right to use force to protect their property. The fact is irrefutable. I have personally had a shotgun pointed in my direction by a rancher because we were on his land.

Debating you is a waste of time because so much of what you believe just isn't true.

Most states don't recognize the use of lethal force for mere trespassing. Deadly force in the defense of one's life is permitted. Deadly force in defense of property alone generally isn't. Most uses of lethal force must be in response to reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to oneself or others

That's the law we have except for your home or car. If somebody breaks into my home or car while I'm armed, I have the legal right to use deadly force.

Depends on the state and depends on if you have a reasonable fear of serious, imminent bodily harm to oneself or others. You wouldn't be able to kill someone say....walking across your lawn.

And since we're talking about legal allegories to lethal force against illegals as they cross the border.......the United States is neither a 'house' nor a 'car'.

Correct, but I was just responding to your comment that using deadly force is only acceptable if you believe you are in jeopardy of serious harm or death. If I am carrying on the street, that is true. But we don't have those restrictions for our Castle Doctrine. If somebody breaks into my home, that's the only legal excuse I need to kill the SOB. Our Castle Doctrine also extends to your vehicle.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No one said a wall would magically keep people out but it would seriously slow illegals down if it was build right and it would slow the flow of drugs .
Again a 20 percent reduction in illegals and drugs would safe 7s7s billions a year.yyear.you just cant handle the truth

With half the illegals in the country coming in legally and only a 20% drop in illegal entry it wouldn't be worth 25 or 30 billion dollars, particular when you consider that whenever democrats get control, they're going to reform immigration and the wall will be joke.

You mean like they reformed it all these years?

The Democrats are not going to do anything that doesn't benefit them. And whatever benefits the Democrats is a disadvantage to citizens.

The only reason democrats did not reform immigration law when they had the chance was because it was a low priority item with the public. The only people really interested in immigration were racists whose goal was the supremacy of the white majority.

Trump of course has created an immigration crisis where none exist. So when democrats get the opportunity, they are going to have to go after immigration law.

They didn't do anything because it was going in their favor. Young male men who could fight for their country, kids, pregnant women all came here and got in under Catch and Release. So the Democrats are going to have to do something (if they ever gain full power again) because Trump is doing what he can to solve this problem. The anti-white party doesn't want the problem solved, they want it to grow.

When democrats took control of goverment in 2008, immigration was a non-issue for most Americans. It was healthcare and the economy and that is what democrats focused on.

Thanks to Donald Trump he has created a crisis in immigration where none exist. If democrats have sufficient control of government in 2020, there will be real immigration reform. It could come in the next two years with a democratic House. Both democrats and republicans in congress agree on a number immigration issues and Donald's only real interest in immigration is building a wall. Democrats will be willing to give Trump his wall for the right kind of immigration bill.

No they will not. Piglosi said it herself, the wall is totally off the table. Nothing is being traded for it.

Immigration has always been a problem. Perhaps you on the left could care less, but for the rest of us, a real problem. Donald Trump didn't create a problem, he addressed the problem. In fact that's what led to his victory against Hil-Liar. Every other candidate spoke the same way about illegals. Blah, blah, blah, Blah, blah, blah. Only Trump was transcending in what he said. He told us what we wanted to hear: We are going to stop illegals from entering this country. We will build a wall. And that's why in light of our congressional loss, Trump is addressing the issue much more seriously.

 

[Skylar]

With half the illegals in the country coming in legally and only a 20% drop in illegal entry it wouldn't be worth 25 or 30 billion dollars, particular when you consider that whenever democrats get control, they're going to reform immigration and the wall will be joke.

You mean like they reformed it all these years?

The Democrats are not going to do anything that doesn't benefit them. And whatever benefits the Democrats is a disadvantage to citizens.

The only reason democrats did not reform immigration law when they had the chance was because it was a low priority item with the public. The only people really interested in immigration were racists whose goal was the supremacy of the white majority.

Trump of course has created an immigration crisis where none exist. So when democrats get the opportunity, they are going to have to go after immigration law.

They didn't do anything because it was going in their favor. Young male men who could fight for their country, kids, pregnant women all came here and got in under Catch and Release. So the Democrats are going to have to do something (if they ever gain full power again) because Trump is doing what he can to solve this problem. The anti-white party doesn't want the problem solved, they want it to grow.

When democrats took control of goverment in 2008, immigration was a non-issue for most Americans. It was healthcare and the economy and that is what democrats focused on.

Thanks to Donald Trump he has created a crisis in immigration where none exist. If democrats have sufficient control of government in 2020, there will be real immigration reform. It could come in the next two years with a democratic House. Both democrats and republicans in congress agree on a number immigration issues and Donald's only real interest in immigration is building a wall. Democrats will be willing to give Trump his wall for the right kind of immigration bill.

No they will not. Piglosi said it herself, the wall is totally off the table. Nothing is being traded for it.

Immigration has always been a problem. Perhaps you on the left could care less, but for the rest of us, a real problem. Donald Trump didn't create a problem, he addressed the problem. In fact that's what led to his victory against Hil-Liar. Every other candidate spoke the same way about illegals. Blah, blah, blah, Blah, blah, blah. Only Trump was transcending in what he said. He told us what we wanted to hear: We are going to stop illegals from entering this country. We will build a wall. And that's why in light of our congressional loss, Trump is addressing the issue much more seriously.

There are far more affordable, faster, and more effective methods: Make E-Verify mandatory and put some teeth in it.

Illegal immigrant focused enforcement is stupid. Illegals are numerous, numbering in the tens of millions. They move. We don't know where they live. They may or may not be using their own names. And if we deport them, they can come back.

Use employer based focus.....the same way we focus our drug enforcement policy not on the users, but on the sellers and distributors. Employers make far more sense. They're public, they generally don't move, they're easy to find (most advertise!), they use their real names, and they're far less numerous.

Make the use of E-verify mandatory. Give any employer that doesn't use it 1 year in prison....including HR people and Hiring Managers. If an employer uses E-Verify and a perspective employee passes...and are later found to be illegal, the employer is free and clear. Employers only get in trouble if they don't use E-Verify.

The system already exists, is easy to use....so there's no ramp up or roll out. It takes a few minutes per employee and can be done online or over the phone. Merely make it mandatory, put some teeth behind it and give employers a 6 month grace period to bring their employees into compliance. You'd need a few dozen high profile prosecutions before employers got the message....and jobs for illegals dried up.

In comparison to their home countries, the US is usually expensive. With no work, they'll largely deport themselves. You could have the vast majority of the illegal immigration problem fixed in about a year. It would work and work well.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Look to the facts from a study, on the cost burdens surrounding illegal immigrants.

“At the federal, state, and local levels, taxpayers shell out approximately $134.9 billion to cover the costs incurred by the presence of more than 12.5 million illegal aliens, and about 4.2 million citizen children of illegal aliens. That amounts to a tax burden of approximately $8,075 per illegal alien family member and a total of $115,894,597,664. The total cost of illegal immigration to U.S. taxpayers is both staggering and crippling. In 2013, FAIR estimated the total cost to be approximately $113 billion. So, in under four years, the cost has risen nearly $3 billion.”

So let's fix that. And let's do it without indulging the shackles of big government.

The problems we have are the welfare state and birth-right citizenship. Neither of those requires the Berlin wall.

China / Hong Kong (early 1960s) - 32 km
Botswana / Zimbabwe 2003 - 500 km
Bulgaria / Turkey 2014 - 30 km
Chinese / Korean border fence (under construction) - 1,416 km
Macedonia / Greece barrier 2015 - 30 km
India / Myanmar barrier (under construction) - 1,624 km

Just the facts, and this is to name but a few. However, we are called to follow after other nations on how government faces health care? Yet a wall is immoral and racist, despite other nations around the globe seeing fit to do so against illegal immigration.

Explain that one to me. Anyone?

What is it you don't understand? Other nations have overbearing governments, bad laws and policies that violate individual liberty? Are you suggesting we follow their example?

Even Harry Reid saw the burden of illegals on our nation, and that was 1993. Look, liberals lost the cost argument on illegal immigration and now they are to lose on the nation’s border barrier argument.

I have no interest in the opinions of liberals, nor Harry Reid.

This is about (1) enforcement of CURRENT Federal Immigration Laws through deportation and ICE,

(2) an amnesty decision during the Reagan administration with the promise of strict border enforcement that never happened. In fact that amnesty decision only made the immigration problem WORSE not better with a larger amount of illegals in our country that we must deal with.

(3) A flow of violent MS-13 gangs, the report of repeat offender illegals that don’t get deported or reported to ICE

(4) sex trafficking coming in from our southern neighbor.

Perhaps you aren’t willing to take these issues seriously.


Interesting to note how democrats blame the increase of violent crime deaths among the most STRICT of cities ... like California, Maryland, and Michigan ... on filtering weapons from neighboring states. Yet these same liberal democrats will throw their support behind open borders with Mexico. For a party that “claims” weapons coming across the border, where criminals can find loose gun regulations outside the state as the underlining issue, it’s rather evident liberal democrats have become their own real problem through their support of an “open border policy” with Mexico.

 

[Flopper]

Correct, this is a barrier free country, and that's why we have over 20 million illegals here. If you don't think 20 million people here illegally is an issue, over 70,000 Americans dying from overdoses every year is an issue, Americans losing work and working for lower pay because of foreigners is an issue, Americans getting murdered by these foreigners is an issue, then what is an issue to you?

I don't like that we spend 70 billion a year on food stamps either; especially when I see the kind of people using them at my grocery store, but hey......... we keep spending it anyway.

A wall that we originally wanted is less than half of that, and it's one time only, not an annual thing.

The majority of those 20 million came in to the country legally, then wound up not reporting to the INS when their visas ran out. They take jobs Americans don't want. And you have a bigger chance getting murdered by the alt right, than you do someone whose in the country illegally.

This is a non-issue. Only 10% of the most whacked out part of our population wants this wall.

Sure, if you believe biased polling that wants to convince people of something that's not true.

Trump won the presidential election because of the wall. Last midterms broke records for turnouts on both sides. If nobody wanted the wall, the Republican turnout would have been pathetic.

Of course someone wants a big beautiful wall. However, a lot more people want to know that it will really work, how much will it cost, how long will it take to build it, what parts of the border will have a wall, what is the environmental impact, and what will be done with the rest of the border. Trump tweets one thing today and something entirely different tomorrow. That is not a plan.

So walls are a new concept to people??


What kind of post is that, did they just hear of locks also?


.

No, and neither is scaling them.

 

[bripat9643]

You mean like they reformed it all these years?

The Democrats are not going to do anything that doesn't benefit them. And whatever benefits the Democrats is a disadvantage to citizens.

The only reason democrats did not reform immigration law when they had the chance was because it was a low priority item with the public. The only people really interested in immigration were racists whose goal was the supremacy of the white majority.

Trump of course has created an immigration crisis where none exist. So when democrats get the opportunity, they are going to have to go after immigration law.

They didn't do anything because it was going in their favor. Young male men who could fight for their country, kids, pregnant women all came here and got in under Catch and Release. So the Democrats are going to have to do something (if they ever gain full power again) because Trump is doing what he can to solve this problem. The anti-white party doesn't want the problem solved, they want it to grow.

When democrats took control of goverment in 2008, immigration was a non-issue for most Americans. It was healthcare and the economy and that is what democrats focused on.

Thanks to Donald Trump he has created a crisis in immigration where none exist. If democrats have sufficient control of government in 2020, there will be real immigration reform. It could come in the next two years with a democratic House. Both democrats and republicans in congress agree on a number immigration issues and Donald's only real interest in immigration is building a wall. Democrats will be willing to give Trump his wall for the right kind of immigration bill.

No they will not. Piglosi said it herself, the wall is totally off the table. Nothing is being traded for it.

Immigration has always been a problem. Perhaps you on the left could care less, but for the rest of us, a real problem. Donald Trump didn't create a problem, he addressed the problem. In fact that's what led to his victory against Hil-Liar. Every other candidate spoke the same way about illegals. Blah, blah, blah, Blah, blah, blah. Only Trump was transcending in what he said. He told us what we wanted to hear: We are going to stop illegals from entering this country. We will build a wall. And that's why in light of our congressional loss, Trump is addressing the issue much more seriously.

There are far more affordable, faster, and more effective methods: Make E-Verify mandatory and put some teeth in it.

Illegal immigrant focused enforcement is stupid. Illegals are numerous, numbering in the tens of millions. They move. We don't know where they live. They may or may not be using their own names. And if we deport them, they can come back.

Use employer based focus.....the same way we focus our drug enforcement policy not on the users, but on the sellers and distributors. Employers make far more sense. They're public, they generally don't move, they're easy to find (most advertise!), they use their real names, and they're far less numerous.

Make the use of E-verify mandatory. Give any employer that doesn't use it 1 year in prison....including HR people and Hiring Managers. If an employer uses E-Verify and a perspective employee passes...and are later found to be illegal, the employer is free and clear. Employers only get in trouble if they don't use E-Verify.

The system already exists, is easy to use....so there's no ramp up or roll out. It takes a few minutes per employee and can be done online or over the phone. Merely make it mandatory, put some teeth behind it and give employers a 6 month grace period to bring their employees into compliance. You'd need a few dozen high profile prosecutions before employers got the message....and jobs for illegals dried up.

In comparison to their home countries, the US is usually expensive. With no work, they'll largely deport themselves. You could have the vast majority of the illegal immigration problem fixed in about a year. It would work and work well.

Utter horseshit. All your claims have been refuted in this forum 1000 times. The wall has been proven the most effective method for controlling illegal immigration.