Have you been directly impacted by an unsecured border?
- Thread starter BlkGoldHoops Daddy
- Start date
Easy to measure if you are shot by an illegal. Impossible to measure tangential impacts layering on top of each other. I would simply say an unsecured border is way more likely to have bad knock off impacts vs good impacts.
I had a car vandalized by several illegals after I had their unregistered, salvaged pickup towed from my paid parking spot. It was my fault because they couldn’t get their truck back.
My car was t-boned by an illegal driving a pickup
and running a red light. 4 illegals were on the truck bed and flew onto my car. Two others were passengers in the cab. None spoke English. Another truck came by before the cops. 7 jumped in the back and they were gone. The policeman said the truck was an unregistered salvage.
A classmate of mine was killed by an illegal immigrant in Tennessee so yes it's had an effect on me directly. This not counting our tax money going to these people.
They estimate 60% of hard drugs "caught" are at border crossings. The bulk of marijuana through the open borders. However, they cannot give an accurate estimate on border crossings vs open border because they have no idea how much comes across the open border and tunnels. They said it's so wide open it's difficult to compare. They also report rampant rape, sexual assault and murders by human smugglers using the open borders. None of the above is acceptable.
So what you are saying is that women should have more access to doctors and birth control while increasing the actual sex education our children receive in school to not simply be abstinence only and teach them about safe sex practices? I think most liberals would agree with that sentiment as well but many simply want to force women to have babies instead of giving them the access they need to the healthcare and services they want.
Me personally...hand out condoms at school and allow school nurses to write prescriptions for birth control.
Seriously. Unwanted pregnancy is preventable by both sexes.
Like all things Trump, he insists on approaching this topic in the most polarizing way possible. And as a result, we're stuck with a seeming never-ending government shutdown that is taking money out of the pockets of working Americans. As an aside, Trump also recently put a freeze on federal pay raises, which was estimated to cost about $3.3 billion, because the country can't afford it.
Anyway, I think most rational people would prefer a comprehensive look at the southern border. Let's not forget that Ronald Reagan extended amnesty to 3+ million undocumented immigrants because he knew, unlike Trump, that immigrants bring a lot to this country. Many industries rely on them. Many of them start small businesses. Many of them pay all sorts of taxes - sales, property, etc. Many of them have children that go on to be professionals (would you really know if your doctor, lawyer, teacher, firefighter, police officer, etc. was a son/daughter of an undocumented immigrant? Probably not). The "problem" of illegal immigration isn't necessarily a net negative (or at least isn't to the degree with which the xenophobes would have you believe). If you really want to bring reform, then where is the accompanying legislation on immigration reform? Where is the plan to deal with refugee status of those fleeing Central America? What is the strategy to combat drug cartels when they inevitably tunnel under, boat around, fly over your wall? Who is going to enforce laws designed to punish employers for hiring undocumented workers? What is the solution for over-stayed visas (and please don't say less visas because that's a losing strategy).
The point is that it's a cheap, political stunt to engender fear and loathing based on some cherry-picked events/data and then offer a seemingly simple solution but it takes real leadership to actually solve/reform/change how things are. This is no solution - this is grandstanding at its finest - except with a hefty perpetual price tag. Since when do conservatives support large government boondoggles with associative costs owed in perpetuity?
Last edited:
As a longtime, current resident of San Diego, the local news on all sides has a field day with what the administration is making up about the border here, the “wall already being built” and how San Diegans are all for it. It’s pretty comical and sad what is allowed to be spewed from one’s mouth that is contrary to the facts of his own Homeland Security folks. The amount of tunnels that go beneath the border wall that are found AFTER they’ve already been used for a lengthy amount of time is just one of many examples of how resources could be better spent on technology at the border than the actual existing wall.
Yes, but only one has to carry the baby. There is no denying the fact that when women are given access to healthcare options for birth control and proper sex education is taught in schools, there is a decrease in unwanted pregnancy rates. Unless you'd like to face the biggest factor which tends to be economic opportunity and inequalities...but I wasn't willing to touch that subject on a sports board.
Hey, I'm with you. I think we'd all like to see abortions minimized as much as possible and the best way to do that is to invest heavily in sex education, condom/birth control dispersion, women's health availability, etc.
Personally I’m for whatever we need to do that makes abortion an extremely rare thing. Whether that’s education, pills, condoms whatever. If you think that isn’t the majority view of conservatives, you are sadly mistaken. Heck, it’s a majority view for Catholics. I am not smart enough to know at what point a fetus becomes a human being from a biological or spiritual sense but I think it might be well before birth.
If this is the majority view of conservatives, then either the majority of conservatives are electing representation that doesn't represent them or the representation is afraid to go against the minority. Unfortunately, in my experience, conservatives in power too often would rather preach abstinence, remove sex education from schools (because it makes the kids frisky), and de-fund all and any women's health clinics.
Just throw a little info here. The last very significant tunnel from Mexico they caught 30 illegals coming through on the day they closed it. Of the 30 caught 23 were Chinese nationals and 7 were Mexican nationals. There is a large industry of pregnant Chinese coming to this country to have their babies and get dual citizenship.
WD
As is pretty obvious to the board, I’m very conservative. Most people I hang around with are conservative (and quite a few of them are democrats). I don’t personally know of one single person that doesn’t agree with teaching about sex, contraceptives, and consequences. We all also believe that abstinence should be taught along with it. You can’t argue that it’s not the most reliable form of protection. We also believe that condoms are already cheap and readily available. They don’t need to be free. Should cabs be free for drunk people? There are also plenty of health clinics that are geared towards low income individuals. The biggest issue is funding PP that performs the most abortions.
The abortion rate has fallen precipitously in recent years, particularly the last couple of years. Why do you think that is?
It’s been dropping since 1980. It’s still about a million per year. Why do you think it’s dropping?
According to the CDC, it hasn't been a million since 1997. I believe that the more women that have health insurance, especially health insurance that covers contraception, the lower the abortion rate will be. And since "kids" can stay on their parent's health insurance until age 26 that a lot of women that otherwise would be insurance-less now have options.
Another reason is many extra restrictions have been placed on abortions in the last few years. They are becoming harder to get...thank goodness.
This is funny. Yeah, all conservatives are crazy religious bumpkins, bent on destroying those anarchists principals that today's Democratic Party is so richly embracing. How intelligent this take is.
Somewhat dws.
A more relevant question would be regarding positive and negative impacts of lack of US defensive cyber security!
Question for Nuke, Relio et al. I had to call social security a few weeks ago and was on hold for 67 minutes. A) Do you think that’s acceptable? B). Do those who want a much bigger government have a secret hot line that you call that takes you to the front of the line? C) I presume your answer is to hire more government workers. If so, is there any empirical evidence that more government workers have improved service levels? Maybe there is but I don’t recall ever reading about that.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Probably should modernize the Social Security system and you could have avoided calling at all.
Ironically, I was inexplicably booted off the website and could not get back on so I had to call. Later I had to call the customer service line and they came on and said he customer service line was "unavailable." Could you imagine a business doing this? Insane.
I see both parties coddling to minority views. The democrats never speak out against their large anti-Semite minority, they never come out against their socialist minority (or is it majority now?).
The border already is secure and has been long before trump, so no
Weird. I requested some documentation from the IRS and received it almost immediately. And the worker was very helpful. Personal anecdotes are fun!!
If this wasn't so stupid it would be funny. I don't like paying taxes so lets start a poll to see if anyone has been negatively affected by people who don't pay. How about speeding? or Drinking and Driving?
Its the law people!! Without laws we have no country. I lived in Mexico with my family, In Taiwan with my family. They take immigration very seriously. We should too.
Its the law people!! Without laws we have no country. I lived in Mexico with my family, In Taiwan with my family. They take immigration very seriously. We should too.
Does the government catch every tax evader? Does it ticket every speeder? Arrest every drunk driver? Of course not. And why not? It's the law, after all! Because it'd be cost-prohibitive to do so. Imagine the police state we'd live in. Instead, they conduct sensible multi-factor approaches to these problems - visible police presence, education, intervention, etc. The border already has that. This is classic over-kill - using hyperbole to fear monger about a decades-old problem. You could do the same with drunk driving - the numbers are fairly staggering (although much improved, much like illegal immigration) - but that doesn't get you votes.
Oops....
*crickets*
It seriously doesn't matter to these jackasses if they're proven wrong by facts. They'll just move on to the next falsehood and then, after a month or so, forget that they were proven wrong and start to once again parrot the exact same dumbassery when the debate resurfaces.
My Bad! It ruined one of my New Year’s resolutions of completing the year without making any mistakes.
