Mexican Drug war in pics (boston.com)

[Ns1]

Let's start with marijuana and then go from there.

cartel argument = moot

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Legalizing marijuana would work to stop this in a couple of ways.

1) Marijuana is extremely easy and cheap to grow for personal use. Demand would drop through the floor if it became legal.

2) If drugs like marijuana are easily available, people migrate to the easiest option, dropping demand for other drugs too.

Hard drugs like cocaine and heroin shouldn't be legalized. Marijuana is not a hard drug (when is the last time you heard of someone overdosing on weed? on alcohol?)

You are wrong. Legalizing cannabis would do almost nothing for the problems we are discussing here. It would still be a good move, but have zero effect on violent gang crime.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom
Legalize it and put all the drug dealers out of business. Tax it and payoff our debt.

Wouldn't even need to tax it. The money saved simply from no longer processing the criminals the drug war CREATES, would cover quite a bit of real estate. Crime is a $700 billion dollar per year industry.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Worked for booze.

No one should be prevented from putting whatever they want to into themselves either. I am for this for MANY more reasons than the FACT that it will ELIMINATE street gangs in the US withing 1 year.

You logic that not legalizing because there are corrupt politicians is flawless...

huh? Most gangs in the US have nothing to do with drugs at all, if US had zero drugs we'd still have a huuuuuge gang problem. If you believe legalizing drugs will eliminate gangs I don't know what to tell you. There are plenty of gang members in my neighborhood and they fight over colors, not Cocaine or any other drug.

Please go do some research and thinking about this before you make such unfounded statements.

 

[Poulsonator]

Originally posted by: dbkI don't think I'll ever visit Mexico anytime soon

I'm going there for a week next month as my cousin's getting married. A little town about 20 minutes from Manzanillo.

These stories have made me think, but I'm not too worried about it. Can't be worried about this stuff and travel abroad.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Please go do some research and thinking about this before you make such unfounded statements.

I can walk over 2 blocks and assure you that his statement is indeed true.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha
Very moving pictures.

SphinxnihpS is spot on. And we would need to legalize all drugs, not just marijuana. If you only legalize marijuana, trafficking in cocaine, heroin, etc. will continue (even increase).

The reason many of these drugs are "dangerous" is because they are produced in a completely unregulated fashion for the black market, and there is no way to know the purity or additional ingredients they contain. This is similar to moonshine, which blinded or killed people during Prohibition. Today, when you go to a bar or liquor store, you know exactly how much alcohol you are purchasing, and you know it is free from dangerous additives.

Many of these drugs have in fact been used responsibly throughout history - Peruvians chewing coca leaves, the Chinese smoking opium, Mexicans smoking marijuana, etc. For an example closer to home, US WWII pilots took meth to be more alert during combat.

It may surprise the pro-drug war types that it is possible (though difficult) to withdraw from a heroin addiction "cold turkey" without risking death. However, without detox and assistance, alcoholics can die from withdrawal.

If drugs are legal, then those who develop addictions (and who could be addicted to anything) can freely seek assistance (clean needles, rehabilitation) without fear of reprisal from the state. This is simply smart health care policy, rather than driving them into hiding, and increasing the likelihood of spreading HIV, Hepatitis and other diseases.

I do not identify as a Libertarian, but it is hypocritical that in a country such as the US, which prides itself on civil liberties and freedom of choice, that people are so adamantly against the freedom to let people ingest any substances they choose. Some people die an early death from heroin; some from a heart attack after gorging at McDonald's on a daily basis. Does that mean that people shouldn't be allowed to ingest heroin or McGangBangs as they choose, and seek help if their choice becomes an addiction?

On a slightly related tangent, I can't believe people are actually backing the "border wall" between the US and Mexico as a good idea. Besides being horrendously expensive, it doesn't solve the root problems of either the drug war or immigration issues.

Surely you all remember what a resounding success the Berlin Wall was :roll:.

I recall that once they had the double wall up with minefield and armed sentries you no longer tried to cross in berlin.

The entire border between East and West Germany was 858 miles, the double brick wall ran through Berlin only. The border between Texas and Mexico is 1,969 miles.

Let's join the fabulous group of walled off countries like North Korea! By the way NK can afford their walls because the government spend all the money in the country on the military. Most of the people in NK are starving to death.

 

[meltdown75]

quite an impressive set of photos. thanks for the link OP

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Legalizing marijuana would work to stop this in a couple of ways.

1) Marijuana is extremely easy and cheap to grow for personal use. Demand would drop through the floor if it became legal.

2) If drugs like marijuana are easily available, people migrate to the easiest option, dropping demand for other drugs too.

Hard drugs like cocaine and heroin shouldn't be legalized. Marijuana is not a hard drug (when is the last time you heard of someone overdosing on weed? on alcohol?)

Additionally, a lot of the dealers selling pot are the same people selling harder drugs. Eliminate pot from the chain, which is by far more popular than the hard stuff, and you reduce the "gateway" effect.

I wonder, how much money would be diverted from the prison systems and spent on other things if pot enforcement were stopped and old convictions overturned and inmates released?

What kinds of crime statistics would we see with the sudden (or even phased) release of thousands of inmates?

How much effect would that have on the power of prison gangs with fewer "recruits" coming in to the system and needing protection"

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Legalizing marijuana would work to stop this in a couple of ways.

1) Marijuana is extremely easy and cheap to grow for personal use. Demand would drop through the floor if it became legal.

2) If drugs like marijuana are easily available, people migrate to the easiest option, dropping demand for other drugs too.

Hard drugs like cocaine and heroin shouldn't be legalized. Marijuana is not a hard drug (when is the last time you heard of someone overdosing on weed? on alcohol?)

Additionally, a lot of the dealers selling pot are the same people selling harder drugs. Eliminate pot from the chain, which is by far more popular than the hard stuff, and you reduce the "gateway" effect.

I wonder, how much money would be diverted from the prison systems and spent on other things if pot enforcement were stopped and old convictions overturned and inmates released?

What kinds of crime statistics would we see with the sudden (or even phased) release of thousands of inmates?

How much effect would that have on the power of prison gangs with fewer "recruits" coming in to the system and needing protection"

Very few people actually go to jail over cannabis.

The "gateway" effect is a myth.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Legalizing marijuana would work to stop this in a couple of ways.

1) Marijuana is extremely easy and cheap to grow for personal use. Demand would drop through the floor if it became legal.

2) If drugs like marijuana are easily available, people migrate to the easiest option, dropping demand for other drugs too.

Hard drugs like cocaine and heroin shouldn't be legalized. Marijuana is not a hard drug (when is the last time you heard of someone overdosing on weed? on alcohol?)

Additionally, a lot of the dealers selling pot are the same people selling harder drugs. Eliminate pot from the chain, which is by far more popular than the hard stuff, and you reduce the "gateway" effect.

I wonder, how much money would be diverted from the prison systems and spent on other things if pot enforcement were stopped and old convictions overturned and inmates released?

What kinds of crime statistics would we see with the sudden (or even phased) release of thousands of inmates?

How much effect would that have on the power of prison gangs with fewer "recruits" coming in to the system and needing protection"

Very few people actually go to jail over cannabis.

The "gateway" effect is a myth.

The gateway effect is the fact that the same source for pot is often the same source for harder drugs, and that dealer is the gateway...not the drug itself.

 

[Ns1]

nm

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

The gateway effect is the fact that the same source for pot is often the same source for harder drugs, and that dealer is the gateway...not the drug itself.

Sorry, I was unaware you redefined "gateway" in this context.

Most of the drug dealers I have known or interviewed dealt in one thing or another not both or multiple. In fact most coke dealers won't go near M. M is big, smelly, and has a far lower profit margin. More risk less reward is not what drug dealers really go for. Most M dealers are just potheads themselves who are connected to the source, which is as likely local as foreign. M trade and C trade are completely different; I don't think your point is valid.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

The gateway effect is the fact that the same source for pot is often the same source for harder drugs, and that dealer is the gateway...not the drug itself.

Sorry, I was unaware you redefined "gateway" in this context.

Most of the drug dealers I have known or interviewed dealt in one thing or another not both or multiple. In fact most coke dealers won't go near M. M is big, smelly, and has a far lower profit margin. More risk less reward is not what drug dealers really go for. Most M dealers are just potheads themselves who are connected to the source, which is as likely local as foreign. M trade and C trade are completely different; I don't think your point is valid.

this is true.

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...ation.drugs/index.html

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Misc/roe1.htm

You are a fool to believe just legallizing drugs would end the cartel violence.

A few select people control the MAJORITY of the drugs flowing into the US. They are MORE powerful than the governments of South America. They have tens of thousands of police, military and government officials on their payroll. 70% of the police force in Cidudad Juarez was on various cartel payrolls back in 2007.

The reason this current cartel war is going is is the #1 man went down a couple years ago and no everyone wants to be the new #1 man. They will continue their war because of $$$.

Diamonds are legal. They still spark tremendous violence in Africa. This violence has nothing to do with drugs and everything to do with money and control of supply.

Heh. Im just trying to figure out how people rationalize changing our laws when the issue being discussed is another countries issues. Maybe its Mexico that needs to decriminalize.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...ation.drugs/index.html

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Misc/roe1.htm

You are a fool to believe just legallizing drugs would end the cartel violence.

A few select people control the MAJORITY of the drugs flowing into the US. They are MORE powerful than the governments of South America. They have tens of thousands of police, military and government officials on their payroll. 70% of the police force in Cidudad Juarez was on various cartel payrolls back in 2007.

The reason this current cartel war is going is is the #1 man went down a couple years ago and no everyone wants to be the new #1 man. They will continue their war because of $$$.

Diamonds are legal. They still spark tremendous violence in Africa. This violence has nothing to do with drugs and everything to do with money and control of supply.

Heh. Im just trying to figure out how people rationalize changing our laws when the issue being discussed is another countries issues. Maybe its Mexico that needs to decriminalize.

We're the market.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

The gateway effect is the fact that the same source for pot is often the same source for harder drugs, and that dealer is the gateway...not the drug itself.

Sorry, I was unaware you redefined "gateway" in this context.

Most of the drug dealers I have known or interviewed dealt in one thing or another not both or multiple. In fact most coke dealers won't go near M. M is big, smelly, and has a far lower profit margin. More risk less reward is not what drug dealers really go for. Most M dealers are just potheads themselves who are connected to the source, which is as likely local as foreign. M trade and C trade are completely different; I don't think your point is valid.

*shrug* Maybe it's not, I don't know the statistics. Most dealers I scored from in my college days sold a variety of substances.

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...ation.drugs/index.html

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Misc/roe1.htm

You are a fool to believe just legallizing drugs would end the cartel violence.

A few select people control the MAJORITY of the drugs flowing into the US. They are MORE powerful than the governments of South America. They have tens of thousands of police, military and government officials on their payroll. 70% of the police force in Cidudad Juarez was on various cartel payrolls back in 2007.

The reason this current cartel war is going is is the #1 man went down a couple years ago and no everyone wants to be the new #1 man. They will continue their war because of $$$.

Diamonds are legal. They still spark tremendous violence in Africa. This violence has nothing to do with drugs and everything to do with money and control of supply.

Heh. Im just trying to figure out how people rationalize changing our laws when the issue being discussed is another countries issues. Maybe its Mexico that needs to decriminalize.

We're the market.

Now think reaaaaly hard. If its legal here and illegal there nothing will change. This is the mexicans problem. They created it let them deal with it.

The crooked fucks accused me of drunk driving threw me in prison and stole my car. Let them stew in thier own shit.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...ation.drugs/index.html

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Misc/roe1.htm

You are a fool to believe just legallizing drugs would end the cartel violence.

A few select people control the MAJORITY of the drugs flowing into the US. They are MORE powerful than the governments of South America. They have tens of thousands of police, military and government officials on their payroll. 70% of the police force in Cidudad Juarez was on various cartel payrolls back in 2007.

The reason this current cartel war is going is is the #1 man went down a couple years ago and no everyone wants to be the new #1 man. They will continue their war because of $$$.

Diamonds are legal. They still spark tremendous violence in Africa. This violence has nothing to do with drugs and everything to do with money and control of supply.

Heh. Im just trying to figure out how people rationalize changing our laws when the issue being discussed is another countries issues. Maybe its Mexico that needs to decriminalize.

We're the market.

Now think reaaaaly hard. If its legal here and illegal there nothing will change. This is the mexicans problem. They created it let them deal with it.

The crooked fucks accused me of drunk driving threw me in prison and stole my car. Let them stew in thier own shit.

Actually they did legalize there, 1 day later they had a meeting with Bush, and unleagalized. It was the silliest bit of diplomacy ever. Was only pot, but it WAS a start. Start over...

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI...ation.drugs/index.html

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Misc/roe1.htm

You are a fool to believe just legallizing drugs would end the cartel violence.

A few select people control the MAJORITY of the drugs flowing into the US. They are MORE powerful than the governments of South America. They have tens of thousands of police, military and government officials on their payroll. 70% of the police force in Cidudad Juarez was on various cartel payrolls back in 2007.

The reason this current cartel war is going is is the #1 man went down a couple years ago and no everyone wants to be the new #1 man. They will continue their war because of $$$.

Diamonds are legal. They still spark tremendous violence in Africa. This violence has nothing to do with drugs and everything to do with money and control of supply.

Heh. Im just trying to figure out how people rationalize changing our laws when the issue being discussed is another countries issues. Maybe its Mexico that needs to decriminalize.

We're the market.

Now think reaaaaly hard. If its legal here and illegal there nothing will change. This is the mexicans problem. They created it let them deal with it.

The crooked fucks accused me of drunk driving threw me in prison and stole my car. Let them stew in thier own shit.

Actually they did legalize there, 1 day later they had a meeting with Bush, and unleagalized. It was the silliest bit of diplomacy ever. Was only pot, but it WAS a start. Start over...

Maybe they should talk to Obama. He strikes me as a guy that might indulge. I think hes high every time I read about his plans for the economy.

 

[QueBert]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Worked for booze.

No one should be prevented from putting whatever they want to into themselves either. I am for this for MANY more reasons than the FACT that it will ELIMINATE street gangs in the US withing 1 year.

You logic that not legalizing because there are corrupt politicians is flawless...

huh? Most gangs in the US have nothing to do with drugs at all, if US had zero drugs we'd still have a huuuuuge gang problem. If you believe legalizing drugs will eliminate gangs I don't know what to tell you. There are plenty of gang members in my neighborhood and they fight over colors, not Cocaine or any other drug.

You do realize that most of the biggest and most violent gangs in the country get most of their money from drug trafficking, right?

he said it would ELIMINATE street gangs, the bigger ones are funded by drugs, but the smaller ones are the ones you need to worry about. Why? because there are 100 times the numbers of small ones. Look at all the gang related shootings in Detroit, I would bet any amount of money that less than 5% are due to these large gangs you speak of which are funded by drugs. If drugs were legal the larger gangs in the US would just find a new main source of income. Prostitution & GTA come to mind or maybe even selling children into slavery. Organized gangs - which make up a very small percentage of gangs in the US are very intelligent when it comes to making money, and they will always find a new outlet for $$$ when one dries up.

You will never get rid of gangs in America, never.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha
Very moving pictures.

SphinxnihpS is spot on. And we would need to legalize all drugs, not just marijuana. If you only legalize marijuana, trafficking in cocaine, heroin, etc. will continue (even increase).

The reason many of these drugs are "dangerous" is because they are produced in a completely unregulated fashion for the black market, and there is no way to know the purity or additional ingredients they contain. This is similar to moonshine, which blinded or killed people during Prohibition. Today, when you go to a bar or liquor store, you know exactly how much alcohol you are purchasing, and you know it is free from dangerous additives.

Many of these drugs have in fact been used responsibly throughout history - Peruvians chewing coca leaves, the Chinese smoking opium, Mexicans smoking marijuana, etc. For an example closer to home, US WWII pilots took meth to be more alert during combat.

It may surprise the pro-drug war types that it is possible (though difficult) to withdraw from a heroin addiction "cold turkey" without risking death. However, without detox and assistance, alcoholics can die from withdrawal.

If drugs are legal, then those who develop addictions (and who could be addicted to anything) can freely seek assistance (clean needles, rehabilitation) without fear of reprisal from the state. This is simply smart health care policy, rather than driving them into hiding, and increasing the likelihood of spreading HIV, Hepatitis and other diseases.

I do not identify as a Libertarian, but it is hypocritical that in a country such as the US, which prides itself on civil liberties and freedom of choice, that people are so adamantly against the freedom to let people ingest any substances they choose. Some people die an early death from heroin; some from a heart attack after gorging at McDonald's on a daily basis. Does that mean that people shouldn't be allowed to ingest heroin or McGangBangs as they choose, and seek help if their choice becomes an addiction?

On a slightly related tangent, I can't believe people are actually backing the "border wall" between the US and Mexico as a good idea. Besides being horrendously expensive, it doesn't solve the root problems of either the drug war or immigration issues.

Surely you all remember what a resounding success the Berlin Wall was :roll:.

I recall that once they had the double wall up with minefield and armed sentries you no longer tried to cross in berlin.

The entire border between East and West Germany was 858 miles, the double brick wall ran through Berlin only. The border between Texas and Mexico is 1,969 miles.

Let's join the fabulous group of walled off countries like North Korea! By the way NK can afford their walls because the government spend all the money in the country on the military. Most of the people in NK are starving to death.

germany is a small country. fine, their population is smaller as well. so what. the berlin wall is quite different, it was a wall through a city. if you got over, you were where you needed to be right away, yet they were able to defend it anyways. much of our border is just desert land on both sides, which is technically much easier to defend if we wanted to. you don't have to stop them at the fence, you only have to detect them really because on foot theres only so far they can run into the scrubland before you send forces out to round them up. you can use automated detection as well as a fence. and we have every right and need to control the borders. don't even compare this to nk or berlin, those were walls to keep people in not out. the idea that this or that is impossible or too hard is just the limitations of small minds.

 

[IGBT]

just remember. if you buy from drug dealers you contributed to this problem.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Worked for booze.

No one should be prevented from putting whatever they want to into themselves either. I am for this for MANY more reasons than the FACT that it will ELIMINATE street gangs in the US withing 1 year.

You logic that not legalizing because there are corrupt politicians is flawless...

huh? Most gangs in the US have nothing to do with drugs at all, if US had zero drugs we'd still have a huuuuuge gang problem. If you believe legalizing drugs will eliminate gangs I don't know what to tell you. There are plenty of gang members in my neighborhood and they fight over colors, not Cocaine or any other drug.

You do realize that most of the biggest and most violent gangs in the country get most of their money from drug trafficking, right?

he said it would ELIMINATE street gangs, the bigger ones are funded by drugs, but the smaller ones are the ones you need to worry about. Why? because there are 100 times the numbers of small ones. Look at all the gang related shootings in Detroit, I would bet any amount of money that less than 5% are due to these large gangs you speak of which are funded by drugs. If drugs were legal the larger gangs in the US would just find a new main source of income. Prostitution & GTA come to mind or maybe even selling children into slavery. Organized gangs - which make up a very small percentage of gangs in the US are very intelligent when it comes to making money, and they will always find a new outlet for $$$ when one dries up.

You will never get rid of gangs in America, never.

Prostitution should also be legal, but that is tangential to this thread. Now, I understand that legalization does not solve all problems (you can't outlaw cars or children to reduce GTA or kidnapping), but by removing drugs and prostitution from the available revenue stream for gangs, you dramatically reduce the amount of money they can earn, and thus the influence they can exert.

You're right, there will always be gangs and criminal activity, but this is a proposal for drastically reducing the number of ways for those criminals to make money. Any remaining gangs will be small-time.

 

[SphinxnihpS]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha
Very moving pictures.

SphinxnihpS is spot on. And we would need to legalize all drugs, not just marijuana. If you only legalize marijuana, trafficking in cocaine, heroin, etc. will continue (even increase).

The reason many of these drugs are "dangerous" is because they are produced in a completely unregulated fashion for the black market, and there is no way to know the purity or additional ingredients they contain. This is similar to moonshine, which blinded or killed people during Prohibition. Today, when you go to a bar or liquor store, you know exactly how much alcohol you are purchasing, and you know it is free from dangerous additives.

Many of these drugs have in fact been used responsibly throughout history - Peruvians chewing coca leaves, the Chinese smoking opium, Mexicans smoking marijuana, etc. For an example closer to home, US WWII pilots took meth to be more alert during combat.

It may surprise the pro-drug war types that it is possible (though difficult) to withdraw from a heroin addiction "cold turkey" without risking death. However, without detox and assistance, alcoholics can die from withdrawal.

If drugs are legal, then those who develop addictions (and who could be addicted to anything) can freely seek assistance (clean needles, rehabilitation) without fear of reprisal from the state. This is simply smart health care policy, rather than driving them into hiding, and increasing the likelihood of spreading HIV, Hepatitis and other diseases.

I do not identify as a Libertarian, but it is hypocritical that in a country such as the US, which prides itself on civil liberties and freedom of choice, that people are so adamantly against the freedom to let people ingest any substances they choose. Some people die an early death from heroin; some from a heart attack after gorging at McDonald's on a daily basis. Does that mean that people shouldn't be allowed to ingest heroin or McGangBangs as they choose, and seek help if their choice becomes an addiction?

On a slightly related tangent, I can't believe people are actually backing the "border wall" between the US and Mexico as a good idea. Besides being horrendously expensive, it doesn't solve the root problems of either the drug war or immigration issues.

Surely you all remember what a resounding success the Berlin Wall was :roll:.

I recall that once they had the double wall up with minefield and armed sentries you no longer tried to cross in berlin.

The entire border between East and West Germany was 858 miles, the double brick wall ran through Berlin only. The border between Texas and Mexico is 1,969 miles.

Let's join the fabulous group of walled off countries like North Korea! By the way NK can afford their walls because the government spend all the money in the country on the military. Most of the people in NK are starving to death.

germany is a small country. fine, their population is smaller as well. so what. the berlin wall is quite different, it was a wall through a city. if you got over, you were where you needed to be right away, yet they were able to defend it anyways. much of our border is just desert land on both sides, which is technically much easier to defend if we wanted to. you don't have to stop them at the fence, you only have to detect them really because on foot theres only so far they can run into the scrubland before you send forces out to round them up. you can use automated detection as well as a fence. and we have every right and need to control the borders. don't even compare this to nk or berlin, those were walls to keep people in not out. the idea that this or that is impossible or too hard is just the limitations of small minds.

The idea of putting a wall around a country that has the credo:

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land,
Here at our sea-washed, sunset- gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome, her mild eyes
command
The air-bridged harbor that twin-cities frame.
?Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!? cries she,
With silent lips. ?Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore;
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!?

is so lol...