Do you think there should be border control?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,648
46,344
136
Because the National Guard answers to the governors of the states where they are stationed, not to the President or any federal authority (edit: I was wrong--there is dual control but I don't think President can deploy National Guard without authorization from Congress or declaration of martial law?)
Posse comitatus.

The president can federalize the guard but once he does posse comitatus applies. To actually perform a law enforcement role the national guard has to remain under the command of the governor of said state, IIRC.

Since CA (at least) would give him the finger on any request to deploy their NG for this what's he going to do then?
 

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
25,577
10,265
136
The president can federalize the guard but once he does posse comitatus applies. To actually perform a law enforcement role the national guard has to remain under the command of the governor of said state, IIRC.

Since CA (at least) would give him the finger on any request to deploy their NG for this what's he going to do then?

I've heard one comment that he could technically deploy the Navy/Coast Guard along the Rio Grande, Gulf and Pacific (posse comitatus does not apply to them) but that still leaves vast amounts of territory that would require Congressional approval before deploying any troops or Air Force drones.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,648
46,344
136
I've heard one comment that he could technically deploy the Navy/Coast Guard along the Rio Grande, Gulf and Pacific (posse comitatus does not apply to them) but that still leaves vast amounts of territory that would require Congressional approval before deploying any troops or Air Force drones.

I think it covers all US forces now but I'm not 100% sure. I mean he could put the southern border states under martial law and deploy tanks and shit but he'd be in court within nanoseconds and probably get injuncted.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
Exactly, someone called Trump weak on immigration so he had his DACA freak out at the Dems and is doubling down on the crisis at the border narrative despite the low numbers of actual border crossings.



Reading FTW, the bold red passage in VRAMdemon's post.

Posturing for the chumps.
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,041
136
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

Puffnstuff

Lifer
Mar 9, 2005
16,203
4,884
136
What got him worked up was his meeting with Hannity and Judge Jeanine at Mar-A-Lago last weekend and them telling him he’ll lose his base if he doesn’t keep his promise.
Not to worry since organized religion's lips seem to be super glued to his
c52f91ef606f8d01b74fffc06d2bbec7.jpg
.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,836
10,252
136
Isn't immigration and border control the areas of the federal government and not police? If you have foreign nationals with the intent on violating our sovereignty and borders, it seems like the perfect job for deploying our armed forces.

Well...I was referring to the Posse Comitatus Act. Trump hasn't a clue about federal (or any, for that matter) law, but surely some general or admiral he speaks to must have at least a passing acquaintance with it...

6 weeks ago, according to him, ICE and our border control was kicking ass. Now, all of a sudden we need the military and/or the guard down there. For some reason our border patrol can't handle unarmed Mexican families crossing the border. I wonder why?
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,862
33,918
136

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,862
33,918
136
. For some reason our border patrol can't handle unarmed Mexican families crossing the border. I wonder why?
Agents split their time between sitting in their trucks and harassing Americans. Going after crossers would be too much like work; they'd have to drive all the way down to the border and maybe get out of their trucks.
 

rchunter

Senior member
Feb 26, 2015
933
72
91
Yes I think they should do whatever is necessary in order to protect our boarders. Including building a wall and putting national guard on our boarder if necessary.
Not that I think trump will actually build a wall, I think he is mostly all campaign promises, just like the majority of politicians.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
It seems perfectly clear to me that the GOP wants to keep the issues of immigration & border control very much alive by keeping things nicely screwed up. They get to rev up their base every election w/o actually solving a damned thing.
 

Svnla

Lifer
Nov 10, 2003
17,986
1,388
126
Should or not? Each and every sovereign country on Earth with a centralized government has a border and border control agents to control its border and how visitors entering and leaving. No exception.

/thread
 

NostaSeronx

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2011
3,811
1,290
136
The only good border control measure is conquest by any means necessary! Clearly the military build up on the border on the western front is to invade!
 

Chess

Golden Member
Mar 5, 2001
1,452
7
81
Agents split their time between sitting in their trucks and harassing Americans. Going after crossers would be too much like work; they'd have to drive all the way down to the border and maybe get out of their trucks.

@IronWing Obviously you are far from being correct.... Youre opinion is crap.... Go down to the border and see it for yourself.. I can give you some good BoP stations to goto, that they wont be sitting in their trucks... you're ignorant
 

Puffnstuff

Lifer
Mar 9, 2005
16,203
4,884
136
@IronWing Obviously you are far from being correct.... Youre opinion is crap.... Go down to the border and see it for yourself.. I can give you some good BoP stations to goto, that they wont be sitting in their trucks... you're ignorant
Having worked on the border multiple times for different agencies I've seen too many instances where sitting in a truck is the status quo.
 

Chess

Golden Member
Mar 5, 2001
1,452
7
81
Having worked on the border multiple times for different agencies I've seen too many instances where sitting in a truck is the status quo.

Where I have gone, which has been several locations, they may be sitting in a truck for a reason... Until you do C4I then dont think they are just sitting there.... Where I use to go, ATV's horses, etc were used all the time........

I dont meant just the southern border too....
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,862
33,918
136
@IronWing Obviously you are far from being correct.... Youre opinion is crap.... Go down to the border and see it for yourself.. I can give you some good BoP stations to goto, that they wont be sitting in their trucks... you're ignorant
I live on the border. If the BP would stop harassing Americans ,sorry, give up on the failed "defense in depth" strategy and patrol the actual border and get out of their trucks, the border would be more secure as would our Constitutional rights. The BP has all the resources they need to secure the border. But then they wouldn't need all the toys and overtime and the private prison industry that holds detainees caught farther from the border wouldn't make as much money. Current border policy is a scam.
 

Chess

Golden Member
Mar 5, 2001
1,452
7
81
I live on the border. If the BP would stop harassing Americans ,sorry, give up on the failed "defense in depth" strategy and patrol the actual border and get out of their trucks, the border would be more secure as would our Constitutional rights. The BP has all the resources they need to secure the border. But then they wouldn't need all the toys and overtime and the private prison industry that holds detainees caught farther from the border wouldn't make as much money. Current border policy is a scam.

So because you live on the border you are an "expert" GTFO.... Again you are wrong, they do not "have all the resources" they are way short of meeting the quota as a agent.... Great idea, but again.... Youre wrong....
I am not saying the current border policy is a scam, I dont agree with everything, but there are reasons some of it is happening, when you are knee deep in the C4I within the station alot of these things you are saying are false..
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
The answer is to go after the employers. The VAST majority of illegals aren't coming here for nefarious purposes, they are coming to build themselves and their families a better life. If you make the penalty for employing an illegal so high that no company dares to even consider it the problem will solve itself.

Obviously we should protect our borders just as every other nation does but a big ass expensive as fuck wall is dumb. We'd be better off spending less money on different forms of electronic surveillance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zaap

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,648
46,344
136
The answer is to go after the employers. The VAST majority of illegals aren't coming here for nefarious purposes, they are coming to build themselves and their families a better life. If you make the penalty for employing an illegal so high that no company dares to even consider it the problem will solve itself.

Obviously we should protect our borders just as every other nation does but a big ass expensive as fuck wall is dumb. We'd be better off spending less money on different forms of electronic surveillance.

A lot of what we're seeing now are Central Americans fleeing massive violence in places like Honduras due to the drug trade shifting around, not solely economic migrants.

If the US wants to resolve the immigration issue long term it needs to fix visa overstays and stabilize Mexico/Central America by ending the drug war plus providing economic assistance.
 

Zaap

Diamond Member
Jun 12, 2008
7,162
424
126
The answer is to go after the employers. The VAST majority of illegals aren't coming here for nefarious purposes, they are coming to build themselves and their families a better life. If you make the penalty for employing an illegal so high that no company dares to even consider it the problem will solve itself.

Obviously we should protect our borders just as every other nation does but a big ass expensive as fuck wall is dumb. We'd be better off spending less money on different forms of electronic surveillance.
You're right. Employer crackdown won't happen though as the exploiters have litterally bought the issue. They've also convinced so many dimwits to not only look the other way for... but actively cheer on selling out their fellow citizens.

As for people lamenting border walls, that arguement is decades too late. There's a vast stretch of border walls already. Congress agreed to build more long before Trump was elected, but didn't complete the last mandated wall fully. Trump seized on that fact in a stupid way, knowing most people are ignorant and stupid.

People operate as mostly symbolic idiots over a lot of things so to many Trump making a big show of enforcing already mandated walls being built becomes 'his wall' (singular) and he can play both sides for chumps over it.

The walls are nothing new, Trumps wall posturing is stupid, more of them arent really needed but since the employer penalty won't happen, it's just smoke and mirrors.