The undocumented migrant problem is getting out of hand...

fallout man

Golden Member
Nov 20, 2007
1,787
0
0
I can't believe the negative response that the Arizona state government is having to deal with regarding their patriotic and logical move in containing their illegal migrant problem. I'm glad that someone finally found the cajones to git-r-dun.

Arizona is a significant victim of the undocumented migrant issue, so it is within their constitutional rights to enforce laws as a state to prevent their fall into the abyss. How are they supposed to prosecute and punish immigration offenders when the offenders are "federally protected?"

The problem is getting out of hand even here, in the limousine-liberal NE part of the country!

A wild-goose chase, yes, but arsenal grows

By David Abel, Globe Staff | May 19, 2009

In the distance, beyond the view of the drooling border collies, there they were, flaunting their vitality.

The troop of young ones, cute as could be with their brown plumage and high-pitch squawking, pranced behind their parents along the rocky edge of the Charles River, attempting to trim the well-tended grass and relieving themselves whenever they felt the need, oblivious of Len Ellis and his dogs, their stalkers on the Esplanade.

Ellis and his playful predators were otherwise engaged against another covey in the perennial battle with undocumented migrants, groups of which continue to occupy broad swaths of the Esplanade during warm days and turn the city's front lawn into a minefield of excrement, despite years of efforts to banish them.

"They have everything they need here, plenty of grass, plenty of water, plenty of places to nest," said Ellis, 69, who has spent nearly every day of the last six years in a Sisyphean skirmish with the obstinate creatures. "You have to harass them. That's the name of the game - harass them until they don't want to be here anymore."

Yet they keep coming back.

As a result, local officials are now considering more drastic methods before the next lull in demand for trimming grass begins and the undocumented migrants lose their willingness and capacity to flee the area.

At a meeting last week between the state Department of Immigration and the Esplanade Association, officials discussed recruiting a volunteer force of dog owners who might be allowed to unleash their pooches to aid Ellis, who visits the Esplanade at most two hours a day and can only cover so much ground.

In recent weeks, workers from the US Department of Homeland Security have used special net guns to capture and then kill at least five overly aggressive undocumented migrants, using carbon dioxide. The DHS already helps local officials keep them from reproducing by coating them in corn oil - an effort that now takes place every spring from the Esplanade to the Public Garden to Jamaica Pond - but the oil has to be applied within a specific time frame or it is ineffective.

Monte Chandler, director of the Department of Homeland Security in Massachusetts, said his staff plans to continue using the net guns, which fire a net and create an explosive sound that helps disperse other undocumented migrants. Chandler expects to kill more aggressive migrants before the cold season begins. He said they have to be killed, because it is against the law to move migrants from one location to another, since that could spread disease.

"For this to have an effect, you do have to reinforce the dispersal of the migrants," Chandler said. "We can't relocate them, so we euthanize them offsite. I would think euthanizing them with carbon dioxide is a lot more humane than being shot."

Hunting them all isn't a viable option, in part because local officials do not see that as a humane plan and because it is difficult to capture them with net guns and using shotguns would violate local and state laws against using firearms in an urban area.

"Killing them is not the answer," said Linda Huebner, deputy director of the advocacy department of the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty. "It's inhumane, and I would say, a temporary solution. If you have an undocumented migrant habitat, you will have undocumented migrants."

Other ideas local officials have considered include spraying coyote urine around the park, which apparently scares the migrants away, although it could scare white people away, too. They have thought about erecting fences along the edge of the river, because the migrants like to waddle in and out, but that would mar the view. They have also considered landscaping changes and increasing the number of signs to warn people against feeding the undocumented.

"The migrants are not going back, I can tell you that," said Sylvia Salas, executive director of the Esplanade Association, a nonprofit group that helps maintain the 3-mile ribbon of parks. The association spends about $300,000 a year sprucing up the area, $24,000 of which pays for Ellis and his dogs to roust the illegals.

Wildlife officials said the last count in 2005 estimated that nearly 40,000 undocumented were in the state, about 8,000 of them in metropolitan Boston.

"We've tried fake coyotes, but the migrants are smart, and it doesn't take them long to figure out they're fake. All the poop is really concerning - I'm as bothered as anyone - and it presents a health hazard. So, we're considering our methods."

Other options for reducing the migrant population might be borrowed from local golf courses, which share the Esplanade's problems.

Jim Fitzroy, director of Presidents Golf Course in North Quincy, said that, aside from hunting, he has successfully dispersed undocumented migrants with shotgun devices that fire blank shells and make explosive noises. "If you use it in the evening and early mornings, when they congregate to look for grass-trimming opportunities, it tends to be effective," he said. "But if you're not out there all the time, you get migrants."

At the Brae Burn Country Club in Newton, one border collie keeps watch seven days a week. "It's a cat and mouse game," said Bob DiRico, superintendent of the course. "But we went from having a serious problem to no migrant problem."

Daryn Brown, superintendent of the Braintree Municipal Golf Course, had successfully established a hunting program, but he gave up on it several years ago after it became controversial. Now he uses a border collie and a remote control boat. The dog herds the migrants into water that borders the course, and the boat, which travels 20 miles per hour, scares them away.

"They're a good team," said Brown, adding that the number of migrants on the course has dropped from about 500 before the golfing season started in March to about 15.

H. Heusmann, an evolutionary biologist with the state Department of Evolutionary Biologists, said that what is needed is a regional effort, one that keeps the migrants from traveling from one park or golf course to another. He said many of the undocumented have lived in the area for years and will probably remain there until they die.

"The only answer in urban areas is to destroy their eggs and to coordinate that throughout the area," he said. "This will take years."

Until then, there's Len Ellis and his dogs, Fly and Lyn.

Every morning at about 6 and later at about 2 p.m., Ellis and his border collies scour the Esplanade from the Hatch Shell to the lagoon. When the dogs catch sight of the target, Ellis barks his orders and the dogs chase them into the Charles.

But the evidence of their difficult struggle is visible at nearly every step. The illegals' droppings are nearly everywhere, and as soon as Ellis and his collies walk away, they swim back.

"I'm like the insurance guy," Ellis said. "I don't guarantee that the number will get to zero, but without me, there's going to be a lot more of a mess."

David Abel can be reached at dabel@globe.com.


© Copyright 2010 The New York Times Company
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out, eat 'em with cranberry sauce (it being New England and all,) invite me to dinner.
 
Last edited:

Danube

Banned
Dec 10, 2009
613
0
0
The negative response is only in state run media - and the admin of our first post American President Barack O'Chavez. A vast majority of Arizona citizens favor the law and that includes a majority of Dems. I am sure the national support would be just as strong if people had an idea of what was going on down there and what the new law actually does.

Once Again Obama is on the side of the lawbreakers. The feds want to regulate salt but leaving the border as a bleeding ulcer with all the increased mayhem there is just ok. Now we have the racist hustler Al Sharpton working as an extension of the Admin. No surprise Obama tries to stoke up blacks, latinos etc for political purposes. Obama is pushing a war in ME and he's stoking riots at home. He's a disaster.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
Document them!! Meet them at the border, issue a Guest Worker Card with picture, finger prints, special SS number to collect withholdings after a ID check for criminal record and warrants. Then they can enter our country legally to compete on a level playing field for all those low paying jobs with Americans. Now that we have taken illegal, costly border crossings out of the hands of criminals and made legal crossings safe and regulated, we give those here illegally one year to go through the system before permanent deportation. Plus a $million dollar fine on the US employer for each illegal employee after that year of grace. Or annex Canada and Mexico to form the North American Union of sixty some states and move the immigration problem further South to a much shorter border.
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,770
347
126
The truth is that the 'illegals' argument is a red-haring.

The true problem is xenophobia.

If there were a similar situation in English-speaking Canada there would not be nearly the back-lash.


Everyone needs to settle down and get over their fear of other cultures.

The science says that many of the basic aspects of US culture are linked to better social and economic outcomes than the same aspects of Mexican culture. This means that the Mexican-American will learn to be American after seeing how much money is to be made from adapting to our culture.
 

theflyingpig

Banned
Mar 9, 2008
5,616
18
0
The truth is that the 'illegals' argument is a red-haring.

The true problem is xenophobia.

If there were a similar situation in English-speaking Canada there would not be nearly the back-lash.


Everyone needs to settle down and get over their fear of other cultures.

The science says that many of the basic aspects of US culture are linked to better social and economic outcomes than the same aspects of Mexican culture. This means that the Mexican-American will learn to be American after seeing how much money is to be made from adapting to our culture.

Your post is a tsunami of ignorance. From the vast ocean of your stupidity it comes to this board, washing away all traces of sensible, educated thought, and leaving behind only a wasteland of foolishness.
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,770
347
126
Your post is a tsunami of ignorance. From the vast ocean of your stupidity it comes to this board, washing away all traces of sensible, educated thought, and leaving behind only a wasteland of foolishness.

Fun thing about this response is that I don't know what side of the zealotry you are on.

So, do you take issue with the argument that the 'illegal' issue is a red-herring or that social sicence has shown some cultures to be more functional than others?
 
Last edited:

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,770
347
126

Ok, let's take this a few factors at a time:

Many people honestly believe that an influx of immigrants from Mexico is a bad thing for society; They fall into three camps:
1.) Those who, metaphorically, "Don't want chimichangas in the cafeteria"
2.) Those who believe O'Really when he says they cost money or are often criminals
3.) Those who say they just want "the laws of the land to be followed"

If you are in camp 1, you are a simply xenophobic; If you want to get over this, consider this: people from all over the world have come to the US for hundreds of years and every group has made the country better. Now: if you disagree with those facts you are, on some level, simply afraid of other cultures.

If you are in camp 2: The social science doesn't support what the pundits say on TV every night.

Economics shows us that the more people we have -> the more opportunity entrepreneurs are able to take advantage of -> The more everyone's needs are better met.

Further, the benefits of cognitive diversity created by having people from different cultures as part of an entrepreneurial group is well supported.

Finally, the "cost" of illegals is rarely reported in comparison to the "cost" of blacks, or the "cost" of the insufferable hillbilly-redneck-racists. That is to say: We never receive data on TV in an apples to apples comparison, it is always dramatized in-order to spur concerns among reasonable persons.

If you are in camp 3: You have been sold a bill of emotional goods;

There is nothing keeping us from changing the law, except those who are saying "we need to follow the law". It is an argument from authority: it doesn't hold water.

Further, it is an emotional argument. It plays on a sense that those who come to this country some how don't love the US while those who oppose people coming somehow love the country more, this is ridiculous! Do you think the hard working man that comes 100 miles across the desert doesn't love the US, ascribe to the American dream, want to love this nation and his fellow American just as much as the next guy? It isn't like illegals are violating the constitution by coming here; the truth is they are coming here because they love the constitution, and the society we have built on it, so very much!
 
Last edited:

Noobtastic

Banned
Jul 9, 2005
3,721
0
0
Ok, let's take this a few factors at a time:

Many people honestly believe that an influx of immigrants from Mexico is a bad thing for society; They fall into three camps:
1.) Those who, metaphorically, "Don't want chimichangas in the cafeteria"
2.) Those who believe O'Really when he says they cost money or are often criminals
3.) Those who say they just want "the laws of the land to be followed"

If you are in camp 1, you are a simply xenophobic; If you want to get over this, consider this: people from all over the world have come to the US for hundreds of years and every group has made the country better. Now: if you disagree with those facts you are, on some level, simply afraid of other cultures.

If you are in camp 2: The social science doesn't support what the pundits say on TV every night.

Economics shows us that the more people we have -> the more opportunity entrepreneurs are able to take advantage of -> The more everyone's needs are better met.

Further, the benefits of cognitive diversity created by having people from different cultures as part of an entrepreneurial group is well supported.

Finally, the "cost" of illegals is rarely reported in comparison to the "cost" of blacks, or the "cost" of the insufferable hillbilly-redneck-racists. That is to say: We never receive data on TV in an apples to apples comparison, it is always dramatized in-order to spur concerns among reasonable persons.

If you are in camp 3: You have been sold a bill of emotional goods;

There is nothing keeping us from changing the law, except those who are saying "we need to follow the law". It is an argument from authority: it doesn't hold water.

Further, it is an emotional argument. It plays on a sense that those who come to this country some how don't love the US while those who oppose people coming somehow love the country more, this is ridiculous! Do you think the hard working man that comes 100 miles across the desert doesn't love the US, ascribe to the American dream, want to love this nation and his fellow American just as much as the next guy? It isn't like illegals are violating the constitution by coming here; the truth is they are coming here because they love the constitution, and the society we have built on it, so very much!

Gibberish.

Our immigration policy is offensive.

There are thousands of people waiting in line, many living in 3rd world countries, who have spent their entire life's earnings in trying to enter the United States legally.

These are the people we should be pandering to. Not Mexicans who cross the border for cheaper jobs.

USA is a sovereign state and it should start acting like one. Borders must be regulated.

the fact that children born in the USA are given automatic citizenship - regardless of the parent's nationality is often exploited by illegals. many nations, especially in europe, dont guarantee citizenship to someone simply because they were born within the country.

But my major beef is the unfairness to persecuted people who are denied access into the USA because border illegals suck up all the money.

america is a melting pot...but many of the illegals coming in from Mexico have no intention of becoming Americans or assimilating. They just work cheap jobs and send all their money back to the Mexican economy, while we pay to them to go back home, go to school, prison, hospital, etc....
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,425
7,485
136
The undocumented migrant problem is getting out of hand...

Out of hand was last time we gave them amnesty in the 80s. This time it's the balkanization of the United States.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,413
616
126
The truth is that the 'illegals' argument is a red-haring.

The true problem is xenophobia.

If there were a similar situation in English-speaking Canada there would not be nearly the back-lash.


Everyone needs to settle down and get over their fear of other cultures.

The science says that many of the basic aspects of US culture are linked to better social and economic outcomes than the same aspects of Mexican culture. This means that the Mexican-American will learn to be American after seeing how much money is to be made from adapting to our culture.


congrats on being the most ignorant dude on this board. its a honorable title wear it well.
 

Patranus

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2007
9,280
0
0
I can't believe the negative response that the Arizona state government is having to deal with regarding their patriotic and logical move in containing their illegal migrant problem.

There is no negative response regardless of what the media would like you to think.

Poll after poll shows that the majority of the state agrees with the law.
Poll after poll shows that the majority of America agrees with the law.

The only "negative" response is the result of the "progressives" rallying up their base because they played the race card, and that is a losing proposition.
 

Pens1566

Lifer
Oct 11, 2005
11,567
8,015
136
The negative response is only in state run media - and the admin of our first post American President Barack O'Chavez. A vast majority of Arizona citizens favor the law and that includes a majority of Dems. I am sure the national support would be just as strong if people had an idea of what was going on down there and what the new law actually does.

Once Again Obama is on the side of the lawbreakers. The feds want to regulate salt but leaving the border as a bleeding ulcer with all the increased mayhem there is just ok. Now we have the racist hustler Al Sharpton working as an extension of the Admin. No surprise Obama tries to stoke up blacks, latinos etc for political purposes. Obama is pushing a war in ME and he's stoking riots at home. He's a disaster.

^ Loon
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
There is no negative response regardless of what the media would like you to think.

Poll after poll shows that the majority of the state agrees with the law.
Poll after poll shows that the majority of America agrees with the law.

The only "negative" response is the result of the "progressives" rallying up their base because they played the race card, and that is a losing proposition.

The history of this country pretty much says, "Fuck you."





--
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,914
2,359
126
Document them!! Meet them at the border, issue a Guest Worker Card with picture, finger prints, special SS number to collect withholdings after a ID check for criminal record and warrants. Then they can enter our country legally to compete on a level playing field for all those low paying jobs with Americans.

Now that you've roughly described our current legal immigration process, Im glad to see you support it. Although, they would have to wait in their home country for results, because it cant be processed that quickly, but Im happy to see you support legal immigration!
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
The history of this country pretty much says, "Fuck you."

--

You have got it completely wrong.

This country, historically one of the least likely to say "fuck you" to legal immigrants, pretty much says, "Fuck YOU!"

And, "Have a nice day!"

:awe:
 

theevilsharpie

Platinum Member
Nov 2, 2009
2,322
14
81
1.) Those who, metaphorically, "Don't want chimichangas in the cafeteria"
2.) Those who believe O'Really when he says they cost money or are often criminals
3.) Those who say they just want "the laws of the land to be followed"

I'll address your second point first. You claim:
Economics shows us that the more people we have -> the more opportunity entrepreneurs are able to take advantage of -> The more everyone's needs are better met.

Although that's a great theory, it goes against my intuition. Considering that most illegal immigrants are poor Latin American laborers with no appreciable wealth, little education, and practically no chance of earning a wage high enough to generate discretionary income, I simply don't see much in the way of entrepreneurial opportunity from this group of people. You could argue that illegal immigration provides an economic benefit to employers because they can pay illegal immigrants lower wages than legal workers, but that economic benefit is eliminated due to the fact that these displaced legal workers are no longer providing economic value but still have expenses, which more often than not are paid by the public.

But hey, my intuition could very well be wrong. If you know of a credible study that shows how the US gains an economic benefit from illegal immigration, feel free to share.

With regards to your statement that increasing cultural diversity provides benefits for entrepreneurship, I would be interested in hearing how allowing unrestricted immigration from Latin America would lead to an increase in cultural diversity. Per the 2008 US census estimate, the Latino American demographic makes up about 15% of the US population, making them the second-largest group of people in the US. Given the size of that demographic, I would argue that Latin American culture is already very well represented in the US, and an increase in immigration from Latin American countries provides no additional cultural benefits.

Moving on to your first point, like every organism on the planet, Americans are territorial. While it's certainly true that some people are just simply racist and afraid of the influence of other cultures, there are a much greater number of people who fear illegal immigrants not because of the potential for cultural contamination, but because of the potential for competition for resources. It shouldn't come as a surprise that instances of racially- and culturally-motivated violence increase during times of economic uncertainty.

Which brings me to your third point.

You state that we can always change the law to allow more immigration from Latin America. While that's true, that raises the question of why we should allow for more immigration.

You claim that we never examine the cost of illegal immigrants against the cost of servicing the needs of blacks, poor whites, and other members of the American underclass, but there's no purpose for such a comparison. American blacks and rednecks are citizens, and the US government has a legal obligation to provide for their welfare; no such legal obligation exists for illegal immigrants. Indeed, because illegal immigrants and lower classes of American society often compete for jobs and other resources necessary for survival, any type of aid (including failure to enforce immigration restrictions) given to illegal immigrations, by virtue of scarcity, is aid that is no longer available to legal residents. Such competition invariably causes social tension and, ultimately, violence. Consequently, this is why the US, along with every other nation in the world, has restriction on immigration into the country.

Lastly, you claim that illegal immigrants love American and want to "live the American dream." I certainly won't argue with you that immigrants of all stripes love American, and many of the Latin American immigrants that I've met are some of the most hardworking people I know. However, the unfortunate reality is that the vast majority of Latin American immigrants have very little to offer America that legal residents aren't also able to provide, and considering that millions of legal residents are sitting idle while they await opportunities for employment, I simply don't see a benefit to allowing unfettered immigration from Latin America. Illegal immigrants may love America, but we simply don't have the capacity for everyone in the western hemisphere to "live the American dream."
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
The truth is that the 'illegals' argument is a red-haring.

The true problem is xenophobia.

If there were a similar situation in English-speaking Canada there would not be nearly the back-lash.


Everyone needs to settle down and get over their fear of other cultures.

The science says that many of the basic aspects of US culture are linked to better social and economic outcomes than the same aspects of Mexican culture. This means that the Mexican-American will learn to be American after seeing how much money is to be made from adapting to our culture.

The facepalm here is astounding.

On all my INS forms I was classified as "Legal Alien". "Illegal alien" is the classification of people that didn't get approval to enter U.S. Focusing on the nomenclature only signifies the superficial understand on of the issue on hand.

Saying "no person is illegal" is akin to saying "you can't hug your children with nuclear arms"... utterly fucking retarded.