Pinkycatcher wrote:Yes, but were not trying to stop 100% of everyone moving sides for political reasons, were looking to stop a large amount. When you don't set your expectations at 100% it's much easier to obtain. You just have to make crossing more and more expensive and troublesome and less people will be able to come over.Liberty wrote:I doubt if such puny efforts would be all that effective. the Koreans and East Berliners used much more substantial fences and defenses to protect their borders. With Machine guns and land mines to support the military forces. Yet they still managed to escape. Keeping out people motivated by political and economic freedom isn't such an easy tasks. The Berliners and North Koreans have shown us that they are willing to put themselves at extreme risks to escape oppression. I don't believe we as a nation really have the stomach to do what it takes to keep them out. Fences without the hardware and manpower won't work. Never has never will. I know if I were born in the country side and lived in that type of poverty that I would do what it takes to improve my family's living conditions.
Search found 2 matches
Return to “Southwest Border Violence Reduction Act of 2009”
- Sun Jan 25, 2009 12:23 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Southwest Border Violence Reduction Act of 2009
- Replies: 24
- Views: 3970
Re: Southwest Border Violence Reduction Act of 2009
- Sun Jan 25, 2009 10:41 am
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Southwest Border Violence Reduction Act of 2009
- Replies: 24
- Views: 3970
Re: Southwest Border Violence Reduction Act of 2009
yes!wheelgun1958 wrote:Here's the answer we need to provide Mexico.