Have you clowns figured out yet that is a stupid fraudulent argument.
If laws are made based on “well it won’t work because…” then we have lawlessness, you know, kind of like what the senile old man in the White House and humus people have created on the southern border. Whatever they are doing we literally need to do the exact opposite.
The wall was part of the system the border patrol wanted.
I believe them, not a bunch of open borders living leftists.
No no no…smartest guy in the room liberals know better than all of those people…30 foot wall 32 foot ladders or some such thing!
(It’s time to start pointing and laughing at the clowns).
Well said. You won’t get a straight answer.
Mayorkas has claimed these “deterrents” and electronic surveillance devices are making it possible to “keep the border secure”.
Based on the number of illegals being encountered I’d say Mayorkas needs to buy more drones?
Mayorkas is the worst, most dishonest, most incompetent person in that cabinet. Which is saying something considering the general level of horrible people who are lying incompetents that clueless Joe has surrounded himself with.
The whole bunch starting with mayorkas followed quickly by Garland, mayor Pete and that idiot woman from Michigan energy Secretary granholm need to go.
The majority of illegal immigrants in America came here lagally and then overstayed their visas. They got those Visas through jobs but once here find ways to get the jobs without needing the paperwork. E-verify would cut down on that immensely
Assault rifle bans, tougher red flags laws and gun registries are part of what law enforcement wants to bring down gun violence
I believe them, not a bunch of fetish clingers
You don’t know that to be true.
Even if it was… so what? Poor is poor regardless of citizenship status.
If an illegal immigrant pays 5k in local taxes and a US citizen pays the same… both are likely getting more back than they put in.
Sounds awfully like the argument made against more gun control. “It won’t work because” “tell me how a new gun law would have stopped this shooting”.
But I actually agree with you. I am for border control. Just like I am for gun control. I just don’t think a wall is a great solution at that cost.
If Mexico actually paid for the wall… I would have no problem with it. But they aren’t.
That’s not true, especially now with 200,000-300,000 coming across every month.
It’s more around 42%, so about 58% from across the border.
Interesting story tonight from Foxnews.com
“Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, appeared on “Sunday Night in America with Trey Gowdy” to discuss the ongoing migrant crisis on the southern border… On Tuesday, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas asserted that the southern border “is secure” despite Border Patrol officers reporting record numbers of migrant encounters. Gonzales also insisted that Mayorkas’ statement was not true…“It’s the furthest thing from secure. I represent 42% of the southern border. There’s certainly no one in my district who thinks it’s secure,” Gonzales said…
“ Gowdy noted that some Democrat leaders such as New York Mayor Eric Adams and D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser have begun acknowledging the struggles dealing with illegal immigrants putting pressure on their cities’ social services and budgets. Gonzales, however, noted the Democrats have no one to blame but themselves… “Of course, we’d seen these Democrat mayors, and other folks, complain about it, because it’s pure chaos. What you are seeing is Democrats control the House, they control Senate, and they control the White House. They created this problem,” Gonzales said.
Or a court ruling.
I believe the revival of the thread is intentionally intended to distract from discussing current and real threats to the United States and her citizens.
Law enforcement wants to arrest criminal possession and use of guns during the commission of crimes then have the criminals rightfully imprisoned under the statutes of the law. Law enforcement wants access to information about minors who have committed criminal acts or have had prior contact. Law enforcement wants to be able to stop the flow of illegal guns, drugs and other violent criminal enterprises without being portrayed as “fascists” trampling the po’ crooks rights. There are already gun registries. If you satisfy the requirements and background checks, purchase a legal firearm, that weapon and your name are in a system law enforcement has access to. Transferring ownership of a firearm without filing the paperwork or facilitating a FFL dealer is against the law. Was there something else? Until “red flag laws” protect the rights of citizens from fake claims? But to your point I agree, crazy people shouldn’t have guns. Finally, an “assault rifle” by definition is not available to the general public without a Federal Class III license. A .223/ 5.56 magazine fed semi-automatic rifle is not an “assault rifle” because it is black and scary looking. We taught our kids to shoot on .22 semi- automatic tube fed rifles. Their rate of fire is the same as the scary black rifle; as fast as you can pull the trigger. I used the M-16, A2 & A3s in the Army. I don’t own one and have no use for one. If I felt the need to drop a human with a firearm at a distance I prefer a 7.62, a 30.06 or a 45.70 Govt. round. But unfortunately all of my firearms were lost in a tragic boating accident years ago and now lie somewhere at the bottom of the Chesapeake Bay.
Another reason they are doing this is to get in on this billion dollar enterprise and find ways for the Mexican government to profit from this as well:
If any of you libs honestly think this proposal will slow down the illegal immigration into the US facilitated by the Democrat Party I got a ■■■■■■■ bridge to sell you.
Yes I do. See the following thread:
How is anything you typed unique to illegal immigrants? If they were legal… would the data change?
For one, the average American is in a much better place to succeed than the typical person coming across the border. Number two, we have enough poverty and problems already in the country, we sure as hell don’t need to import more from south of our border!
So are you arguing against immigration, all together, from the southern border?
