It seems like building a fence at the Mexican border is good just to keep drugs out

Author: n8nrgim

Posts

Total: 33
Topic's author
#1
n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,281
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
As far as illegal immigrants simply coming here without permission yet having no drugs. It's not right but it's not hurting that much and not that big of a deal. The population of illegals doesn't even keep going up, it just fluctuates. 

But even just a little bit of the most dangerous drugs is very bad for society and it floods over an unimpeded border killing thousands if not millions
#2
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
They ship them in via ferries often. The smuggling across the border is what the more generic ones tend to do.

Think of the risk factor; being stopped with Marijuana at some point at a border is some weed gone, maximum coke.

If we talk the harder stuff, that is usually shipped in, including coke, or flown in by private jets or inside luggage of official flights etc.

You really think standard poor Mexicans crossing illegally have got H, Meth or crack cocaine on them? 
#3
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 8,431
4
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
4
4
9
-->
@AdaptableRatman
You really think standard poor Mexicans crossing illegally have got H, Meth or crack cocaine on them? 
Amnesty international says 65% of children crossing the border are being trafficked. I wonder how sick a person has to want to see more children trafficked as opposed to making some attempts to prevent that sort of thing
#4
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,605
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@n8nrgim
At the end of the day, and after years of hitting heads against brick walls.

We have to conclude that some people are just fucking stupid.

And others will just take advantage of a stupid persons stupidity.

And in order to maintain some sort of social stability, others commit themselves to a battle that will never be won.

A wall just has to got around, over or through.

And it's not as if all U.S. Nationals are not stupid enough to not take advantage of the illegal drugs trade.

Might as well just make it legal and leave the stupid fuckers to get on with it.

And stop molly coddling them with help and sympathy when their lives go tits up.

Doing so will make drugs cheap and available, render the illegal traders redundant, and dramatically cut social services spending. 
#5
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
-->
@WyIted
Trafficked means illegally taken over btw.

Also, if they are abused in Mexico, they likely get less abused in US on average.
#6
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
-->
@WyIted
Link the Amnesty International data please, so I can see where they draw the line and confirm the stat.
#7
LucyStarfire
LucyStarfire's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 484
1
3
6
LucyStarfire's avatar
LucyStarfire
1
3
6
if they are abused in Mexico, they likely get less abused in US on average
Lol
#8
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,851
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@n8nrgim
The overwhelming majority of drugs being brought into this country get in through legal ports of entry. If we really cared about solving the problem we would be passing legislation to address that issue, not arresting abuelitas.
#9
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 8,431
4
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
4
4
9
-->
@AdaptableRatman
60% of migrant girls raped going over the border. 

#10
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 8,431
4
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
4
4
9
-->
@Double_R
The overwhelming majority of drugs being brought into this country get in through legal ports of entry. If we really cared about solving the problem we would be passing legislation to address that issue, not arresting abuelitas.
So because we also need to stop drugs over legal ports of industry we should stop trying to stop them over the border?
#11
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
-->
@WyIted
It says that nowhere in the document, it says they have no true idea what the number or percent is.

Furthermore that specifically is people who go on a fast track smuggle into Mexico and then into US.

It seems Mexican officials and criminal gangs are the worst offenders of abuse against them.

Is your stance that this proves they bring in drugs or do you admit you just gaslit and goalpost moved entirely?
#12
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 8,431
4
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
4
4
9
-->
@AdaptableRatman
You asked about the human trafficking element and the article claims 6/10 girls are raped going over the border many if which are children. It wasn't a citation for any drug claims and I won't make one since it's common knowledge that drugs come over the border. I provided one for the sex crimes because it's less well known.

Just do F6 for 6/10
#13
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
-->
@WyIted
Okay now I see it with the word six not number 6.

And do you think that is drug related?
#14
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 8,431
4
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
4
4
9
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I don't know. Best case scenario it's just opportunistic targeting of vulnerable populations. Worst case its probably about grooming these women and little girls for sex trafficking. I don't see how drugs would play a role unless drug problems in their communities are causing them to take a high risk flite. 
#15
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
-->
@WyIted
Do you admit that is a clash between Christian love for all and Fascist 'throw them back into the fire' border policies?
#16
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 8,431
4
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
4
4
9
-->
@AdaptableRatman
No because I think it's easier to solve their problems if we secure the borders and force Mexico to deal with dissidents as opposed to giving them an easy escape route. The people most motivated to change mexico are actually those we give mexico a release valve for. 

I would keep the border right and have the CIA work on influence campaigns to implement regime change in Mexico or perhaps not even regime change but advocating for things that can reduce cartel strangleholds and provide those people better economic opportunities without forcing them to leave their homeland. 
#17
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
-->
@WyIted
Wylted do you realise how corrupt Mexico leadership actually is?
#18
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 37
Posts: 8,431
4
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
4
4
9
My impression is pretty corrupt but some things can be down to reduce cartel strangleholds. One suggestion which we see some implementation of is increasing how much we build factories in Mexico as opposed to China for example and doing this pulls people close to the American border and in large population centers which makes the places easier to police and alser has the benefits of being safer and economically better
#19
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 27,914
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@n8nrgim
Stopping the caravans did far more at stopping mules and child sex traffic than any fence. The simple idea that there would be no sanctuary for illegals was the only factor stopping caravans, not a wall. The wall was simply a monument to an idea of enforced legal assimilation. Not a tool to defend an actual invasion. That alone makes the monument worth it. The results matter. Without caravan surges, traffic across the border becomes way too risky for the cartels.
#20
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
-->
@Greyparrot
@WyIted
So what is the best way to handle the situation? 
#21
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,605
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@AdaptableRatman
As I stated previously.

Legalise drug use.

But refuse to pay for the consequences.
#22
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
-->
@zedvictor4
How is this a consequence of some US states legalising weed?

Is there a link?
#23
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,605
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I thought the discussion was about the benefits and consequences of a wall in relation to the supply of narcotics from south and central America.

Anyone can grow a bit of weed in the attic or the glasshouse.


I doubt that the wall has scratched the surface of the US's drug addiction problem.

Or that either the legalisation or criminalisation of weed has made any difference to the numbers of weed users.


It's a losing battle that costs the US upwards of 40 billion dollars per annum.


#24
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
-->
@zedvictor4
I am not sure we agree here.

You value money over security and morality.

I find it interesting how 2 variants of right wing outlook are actually direct enemies of each other (libertarian vs conservative)
#25
LucyStarfire
LucyStarfire's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 484
1
3
6
LucyStarfire's avatar
LucyStarfire
1
3
6
You value money over security and morality
Money is useful, morality useless, and security is good. There are other things to value too.
#26
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
Morality is actually the primary reason you and I feel safe enough rn that you won't get robbed or your window smashed.

We call it legality but it is morality that drives the concept of it all being obeyed willingly.
#27
LucyStarfire
LucyStarfire's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 484
1
3
6
LucyStarfire's avatar
LucyStarfire
1
3
6
Morality is actually the primary reason you and I feel safe enough rn that you won't get robbed or your window smashed.
No, it is power alone.

It is useful to pretend to have morality now. But actually having moral goals means you get so easily manipulated. Everyone then knows what you think and can use it against you too. Morality was built to control you, so that people can know your thoughts.
#28
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 1,197
3
3
8
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
3
3
8
No it is not at all power alone.

Are you and those you live with very powerful locally?
#29
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,605
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@AdaptableRatman
You value money over security and morality.

Nope, I'm just a pragmatist who sees the issue for what it is.

And it will be the same next year, as it is this year...And so on.


Though in this case money neither ensures security nor affects morality, so perhaps money is best spent elsewhere.

Not forgetting that money is the one true global GOD that we all bow to...So cannot be dismissed as readily, as you do.

And right bends right, and left bends left, until they eventually meet.

Where freedom without restrictions eventually becomes freedom with dire consequences.
#30
LucyStarfire
LucyStarfire's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 484
1
3
6
LucyStarfire's avatar
LucyStarfire
1
3
6
No it is not at all power alone
It is, obviously. The only reason people who want to rob you dont rob you is because someone powerful prevents them. There are people who want to rob you, and if there was no power preventing them, they would, yes. Morality is enforced by power. Government power robs you and protects you. Helps you and ruins you. Morality doesnt do anything ever, and no one even has morality. They just have goals they want then.