TexasCHLforum.com

duns wrote:What I find surprising is that there isn't a sufficient fleet of manned aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to continuously monitor the borders. Maybe most of them are in Iraq and Afghanistan and the threats coming across the US borders are not considered of sufficient importance to bring some of them back home?

Another camera in the air or otherwise wil not do anything but take pictures, unless we arm it with some .50 cals or rocket launchers then maybe it will do some good.

suthdj wrote: Another camera in the air or otherwise wil not do anything but take pictures, unless we arm it with some .50 cals or rocket launchers then maybe it will do some good.

I was thinking of many more than one more camera in the air. Also I was thinking that when the cameras in the air detect humans crossing the border, a Blackhawk helicopter or two with men and guns could be quickly dispatched to intercept them. If I understood the reports correctly, armed drug runners were crossing up to 80 miles of desert on foot. That must take quite a while (days) and would seem to allow plenty of time to deploy a response. My best guess would be that like the fence such an idea is not currently considered cost-effective. Or maybe we have the resources but they are mostly deployed overseas at present?

duns wrote:

suthdj wrote: Another camera in the air or otherwise wil not do anything but take pictures, unless we arm it with some .50 cals or rocket launchers then maybe it will do some good.

I was thinking of many more than one more camera in the air. Also I was thinking that when the cameras in the air detect humans crossing the border, a Blackhawk helicopter or two with men and guns could be quickly dispatched to intercept them. If I understood the reports correctly, armed drug runners were crossing up to 80 miles of desert on foot. That must take quite a while (days) and would seem to allow plenty of time to deploy a response. My best guess would be that like the fence such an idea is not currently considered cost-effective. Or maybe we have the resources but they are mostly deployed overseas at present?

Well trained squads can cover 80 miles in a (long) day easy if they don't encounter resistance. (Which is sort of the point, isn't it?)

You can walk a mile in fifteen minutes at a leisurely pace, so covering 80 miles would only take two ten hour days for a normal person. Even with breaks, an average person could walk that distance in two sunup to sundown days and still get a good meal and plenty of rest at night.

The problems on the southern border offer a golden opportunity for training our military. It's just not politically feasible at the present (although more revelations like this could make it so.)

baldeagle wrote:Well trained squads can cover 80 miles in a (long) day easy if they don't encounter resistance. (Which is sort of the point, isn't it?)

You can walk a mile in fifteen minutes at a leisurely pace, so covering 80 miles would only take two ten hour days for a normal person. Even with breaks, an average person could walk that distance in two sunup to sundown days and still get a good meal and plenty of rest at night.

But if the surveillance of the border area (aerial or otherwise) is continuous or nearly so (every few hours?), 20 hr still seems like a good window of opportunity to respond by helicopter.

baldeagle wrote:You can walk a mile in fifteen minutes at a leisurely pace, so covering 80 miles would only take two ten hour days for a normal person. Even with breaks, an average person could walk that distance in two sunup to sundown days and still get a good meal and plenty of rest at night.

Care to demonstrate in rough terrain?

4 miles per hour is a VERY brisk walk -- almost a jog. Probably not something most people would want to do for a solid 20 hours straight.

jester wrote:

baldeagle wrote:You can walk a mile in fifteen minutes at a leisurely pace, so covering 80 miles would only take two ten hour days for a normal person. Even with breaks, an average person could walk that distance in two sunup to sundown days and still get a good meal and plenty of rest at night.

Care to demonstrate in rough terrain?

Not now, at the age of 62 and fat and out of shape, but there was a time not that long ago when I covered that distance in mountainous terrain (in New Mexico). The desert presents a different set of challenges because of the heat and lack of humidity, but with proper preparation, it's definitely doable.

sjfcontrol wrote:4 miles per hour is a VERY brisk walk -- almost a jog. Probably not something most people would want to do for a solid 20 hours straight.

With a HUGE pack of contraband on your back as seen in the videos.

duns wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:4 miles per hour is a VERY brisk walk -- almost a jog. Probably not something most people would want to do for a solid 20 hours straight.

With a HUGE pack of contraband on your back as seen in the videos.

Yes, and they are young guys, in good shape, doing this over and over again and motivated by good pay. As I said, a "well trained squad" wouldn't find this all that difficult. Now, doing it over and over again without any rest, that would be a different story. Since they're not expecting any resistance at all, they wouldn't be slowed by having to walk point or scout ahead, worry about being seen or take circuitous routes to avoid detection. If you watched the video I posted, you can see that they aren't even very alert, as if they know they won't be challenged.

baldeagle wrote:Yes, and they are young guys, in good shape, doing this over and over again and motivated by good pay. As I said, a "well trained squad" wouldn't find this all that difficult.

That's true of the coyotes, but how about the folks they're bringing across? Women and kids, especially, can't make a pace anywhere close to that.

Or are we strictly talking about the drug smugglers?

Illegals with their false id's and SS#'s pay into the Govt good for Govt, they also work very cheap good for big bussiness. So does anyone think this problem will ever be solved. Not by our Fed Govt it is only going to change if the sates step up and or the people.

suthdj wrote:Illegals with their false id's and SS#'s pay into the Govt good for Govt, they also work very cheap good for big bussiness. So does anyone think this problem will ever be solved. Not by our Fed Govt it is only going to change if the sates step up and or the people.

Many of them work strictly for cash and don't pay income tax. Back when we had non-citizen lawn workers, one of them told my wife that he made something like $30K a year and his wife made about the same cleaning houses -- strictly cash, no tax, so their take-home was nearly the same as mine.

The situation is likely similar for day laborers. If a company is dishonest enough to hire people "off the books", and there are certainly some that do, that's another bunch of $$$ that isn't subject to income tax.

I'll admit they do pay sales tax.

LarryH wrote:

suthdj wrote:Illegals with their false id's and SS#'s pay into the Govt good for Govt, they also work very cheap good for big bussiness. So does anyone think this problem will ever be solved. Not by our Fed Govt it is only going to change if the sates step up and or the people.

Many of them work strictly for cash and don't pay income tax. Back when we had non-citizen lawn workers, one of them told my wife that he made something like $30K a year and his wife made about the same cleaning houses -- strictly cash, no tax, so their take-home was nearly the same as mine.

The situation is likely similar for day laborers. If a company is dishonest enough to hire people "off the books", and there are certainly some that do, that's another bunch of $$$ that isn't subject to income tax.

I'll admit they do pay sales tax.

I worked(past) for a big name company that farmed out most of the work to 3PL (3rd party labor) in other words temp agencies well those 3pl's did a very poor job of insuring the people they employed were legal. They pretty much accepted documents as long as they appear correct, for about $150 an illegal could get fake docs. These were the ones I was refering to, but you also made a very valid point about the cash side of it.

As Deep Throat said in the movie, "Follow the money."

Ensuring.

Insuring is protecting against loss. Ensuring is making sure that something happens.