General Question

Caravanfan's avatar

All politics aside, how could a wall not decrease illegal migration?

Asked by Caravanfan (3414points) 2 weeks ago from iPhone

Again, put aside policy, the environmental and humanitarian ramifications, the cost, etc.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

51 Answers

rebbel's avatar

You mean for, let’s say, Americans wanting to seek a better life in, let’s say, Canada?

YARNLADY's avatar

Most of the undocumented in the country came in with legal short term visas and simply stayed past the limit.
Also, in California, you can simply walk down the beach into this country from Mexico, or take a short boat ride.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Fixed fortifications are pretty much a waste of effort. At best, a wall might initially slow down the breaching of the border, but no one worth their salt is going to be deterred by anything so archaic as “Hadrian’s solution”. The obscene cost of the thing will never justify its meager effects, let alone dampen the ridicule and disgust accompanying the message affixed to the woman at our other “border” summoning people to a refuge with a wall around it.

stanleybmanly's avatar

To me the greatest fault with the wall is that it would amount to a more or less eternal testament to an obtuse lack of vision. Trump should show a little imagination. Why not erect a wall in block letters that can be read from the moon? The letters should spell “KICK ME IM A DUMMY”

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

If it was built like a modern security perimeter like they use around high security areas with sensors and regular patrols I believe it would be rather effective in reducing most casual border crossings and have a significant, measurable effect. All caveats in construction and cost aside.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Wasnt this recent tunnel about 35 feet underground? I’m not sure how effective it would be if you can walk a Cali beach with impunity. Maybe the wall should encompass Cali too. Jk

LostInParadise's avatar

The question is not if a wall would stop some illegal immigration, but whether or not it is the most cost effective way of so doing. I have seen testimony from experts saying that there are better methods.

canidmajor's avatar

The actual number would diminish, but by such a small percentage as to not even register on the meter.
The “bad peoples” would not be deterred at all.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

I have seen what it costs to erect such a “wall” (Security fence) that would be effective and America simply cannot afford it. Even a small area cost millions. A few billion is not going to cut it. It would work though and even against tunneling. A 25% reduction in illegal immigration across the southern border would not surprise me. Still not worth the cost.

zenvelo's avatar

Because you can’t build a wall high enough to stop airplanes, which is how most illegal immigrants get to the U.S.

A wall would play havoc with the ecological balance of the southern border.

Darth_Algar's avatar

Because people can always go over, under or around a wall. Because most illegal immigrants initially arrived here legally. Walls didn’t work for the Roman Empire, walls didn’t work for the Chinese, walls won’t work for us.

kritiper's avatar

GQ! Your question answers itself.

seawulf575's avatar

It would basically stop people from just walking into our country. Many of the coyote paths would disappear. But as has been mentioned, it wouldn’t stop all. It would just drive up the cost the coyotes charge for sneaking people into this country.

Dutchess_III's avatar

They’ll just have to work a little harder in the beginning, but they’ll get a method down pretty quick. Humans are just crafty like that.

Caravanfan's avatar

Great answers everybody, thanks.

kritiper's avatar

A wall is a great place to start, even if not perfect.

stanleybmanly's avatar

It is a stupidly overpriced and wasteful place to start. That money could be committed to remedying the horrors propelling people here, though I admit these days we would probably fk that up too. We did it with the Marshal plan, which is why the Europeans aren’t mobbing our borders, but gazing on us now for the fools we are. And the day will surely arrive if the monstrosity is erected, when people will look on the wall as just another testament to people who squandered untold wealth on abandoned missle silos, billion dollar bombers, decades of unwinnable wars and pointless refugee brutalization.

Caravanfan's avatar

@stanleybmanly Well done in referencing the Marshall Plan!

Dutchess_III's avatar

How is it a “great place to start,” @kritiper? Could you please explain?

mazingerz88's avatar

Great place to start re-electing trrumpy the dangewous toddler… : )

kritiper's avatar

If you want to control who comes in, a wall is a great place to start. Like the Berlin Wall. With razor wire, trip mines, machine gun nests, snipers…
But ya gotta start with a wall.

Dutchess_III's avatar

So, we’ll have snipers and machine gun nests positioned along 2000 miles of wall, ready to mow down women, children?

Darth_Algar's avatar

Ask the Chinese how well their wall controlled who came in. The people they were trying to keep out ended up ruling them.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@Dutchess_III No,
Infrared, motion and vibration sensors, cameras, drones, dispatched patrols… all monitored 24/7. That’s what a modern security perimeter looks like. This is not West Germany, we would not “mow down” people at the border.

Darth_Algar's avatar

^^^And how much is all that going to cost? Per year? How effective will it really be?

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

Oh it would be very effective and if you read above I have already said it would be an astronomical and completely unrealistic cost. OP asked us to overlook that.

Darth_Algar's avatar

I was considering your post as is. I did not realize I was supposed to connect it to some earlier post. Especially since you were replying to @Duchess, who was responding to @kritiper.

Now, how would it be effective? All those measures seem impressive, but unless you’ve got the boots on the ground to quickly respond it’s just a lot of proverbial hot air.

Caravanfan's avatar

Right, I was just saying ignore the politics, cost, etc.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@ARE_you_kidding_me So tell me shooting tear gas across into Mexico is . . . what?
Trump has said shoot to kill ! !

MrGrimm888's avatar

I just don’t see a wall stopping ANYONE. Seriously, does anyone expect immigrants to see the wall and simply turn around and never try to come back? After traveling thousands of miles, dealing with all of the adversity that comes with it, a wall might be the easiest obstacle the people confront.

Trump’s current design is a steel wall, with 9 inch gaps. Plenty of people are capable of squeezing through such a gap. Drugs would be easily squeezed through, or simply thrown over.
A simple hydraulic car jack could probably widen the gaps, or some other method.

Trump is asking for $5 billion. Estimates have gone higher than $13 billion. Given the fact that most construction jobs run over costs and time estimates it’s quite easy to assume that the wall could cost more than 13 billion.

The wall should be considered one of the most foolish endeavors in history. I find it telling that Trump is focused on a “Spaceforce,” and at the same time calling for a fucking wall. Talk about a disconnection from reality….

Politics aside, a wall is just retarded.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Oh yeah. The OP asked us not to consider the political and humanitarianrealities of the wall, only asking how would it not work. Well, it would work to a certain extent.

MrGrimm888's avatar

A wall is an ancient technology. Every possible design can be circumvented…

Caravanfan's avatar

Yes. I agree it’s terrible policy. That’s not my question though

Pinguidchance's avatar

“All politics aside, how could a wall not decrease illegal migration?”

How?

By making it a very low wall

ucme's avatar

Should also build a moat around it like we have, like I often say, a fortified wall without a moat is like tea without scones, really rather pointless.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@MrGrimm888 It may be ancient technology, but no other wall in history has had to stand up against modern technology. Dynamite, for example.

Dutchess_III's avatar

The wall would mostly stop the women and children, IMO. It wouldn’t make a dent in the males, dangerous or otherwise, coming over, if they’re willing to leave the women and kids.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^I disagree. The women and children should easily squeeze through the 9 inch gaps. Men would simply find a way to get through. Like I said, a car jack would probably open the gaps wide enough.

People have managed to squeeze through 5.5 inch prison bars. 9 inches should be of little detriment.

stanleybmanly's avatar

@ucme Yes and the moat should be filled with gators and declared a wildlife refuge.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I didn’t realize it had 9 inch gaps. Who the hell’s idea was that?

stanleybmanly's avatar

Steel is EXPENSIVE.

zenvelo's avatar

@Dutchess_III The President wants a see through wall, so that patrols can see what is going on over the border.

kritiper's avatar

I was making somewhat of a joke about the mines, machine guns, etc., although they would be good options, too. (You don’t have to actually shoot anybody, although there is a surplus of people on the planet…)
The point I was trying to make was if you want border security, a wall is a great place to start. I do not mean to imply that it would be the perfect deterrent to illegal border crossings.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Dutch. The wall has to cover 2,000 miles of uninhabitable terrain. Rolling hills, and desert conditions will be the majority of “walled” areas. Most of the terrain is crazy, that’s why the wall will cost so much. The terrain is a natural wall. Which is why there isn’t a fence there from the beginning.
The majority of the costs for such a wall, are because of how hard it will be to construct anything there. It is a massive waste of time/money.

It is said to need to be transparent, so drug smugglers won’t hurt people by throwing drugs over the wall. Hence the gaps, so you can see drugs being thrown over, and not be killed by the packages.

Any wall, will be laughable.

Pinguidchance's avatar

A second wall would be risible.

And quite circumspect of Canadians to show not the slightest bit of interest in illegal migration.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@stanleybmanly steel is expensive but for the president money is no object. Never has been, never will be.

stanleybmanly's avatar

A lot like integrity or the truth.

MrGrimm888's avatar

The steel would have been 25% cheaper, before the tariffs.

Dutchess_III's avatar

It does not matter to trump.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^I know. He only cares about himself.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther