Posted on 05/09/2018 1:02:28 PM PDT by BeauBo
President Donald Trump said on Wednesday his administration will begin work on a section of his promised U.S.-Mexico border wall in San Diego, at the request of the major California county.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
And build it TALL!
Funny, but most don't know that was an official referendum voted by the dumbass electorate in California. It was not a law passed by the Cali Legislature. Cali has a referendum system that appears on the ballots once enough signatures are signed on a petition.
However, once on the ballot, the big money lobbyists kick in with never ending commercials. Blue Californians will vote on anything if presented in simple terms to their little minds. "Oh goody, a bullet train from LA to SF. We can do an intra-state Rainbow Ride soon!".
Once the referendum becomes law, the Legislature can fund it any way they want. And that's why the "train to nowhere" keeps doubling in cost and time, not to mention buying private property and the countless eminent domain lawsuits.
If blue Californians had any sense, they would have petitioned for a high-speed train to Las Vegas. The track is already there along with State owned property/easements for additional track and depots. Think of the jobs and tax revenue for the counties it crosses. The arrogance and stupidity of Cali voters/officials is just.......no words.
You want to know about this boondoggle?: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/12/californias-77-billion-high-speed-rail-project-is-in-trouble.html
Correct me if I'm wrong here, Jim.
I'm not sure BP wants actual bollards since the definition says short posts used for protecting buildings and such. You see them all the time now. I think BP has been very happy with the double fencing in San Diego. I'll check to see what their current thinking is, but it's not bollards unless they have their own definition.
They are often filled with concrete, and very difficult to attack with sledgehammers, chisels, saws or torches. They stand up much better than other barriers that have been tried - they will stop a truck. Border Patrol places a high value on being able to see what is on the other side.
Start on top of a truck and you’ve shrunk 30 feet to about 20-22.
Thanks
>>Has anyone checked in on Egghead McMuffin?<<
New one to me: Who’s Egghead?
At some point, we’re gonna have to deal much more seriously with “fence jumpers and sitters”. They should be given ample warnings in both Spanish and English, then one warning shot, then finally a full facade of lead. We will have very few “jumpers and sitters” once that happens and the word gets out.
>>Congress wants to fund 100 miles per year (which frankly is pretty good)<<
It is? Wouldn’t it take over a decade to complete the job?
I’ve personally been to that “wall” and I can assure you; they don’t have “fence jumpers and sitters” there....at least none that live long enough to tell about it.
That wall works, but it works because Israel is serious and will not hesitate to shoot anyone that tries to compromise it. We’re too “politically correct” to have that “kind” of a wall.
They are also easy to climb. Didn’t you see the videos of those Hondurans sitting on top of the fence.. Solid reinforced Concrete with a Barrier at the top!!
That sounds tough, but I agree with you.
I’d have our military training down there too.
Fecal position, more likely...
Heads in mysterious dark places...
Plans.. it’s been over a year and all we have is plans? How embarrassing! Other tiny countries have been building walls and we are still just planning? I call midterm kabuki.
Clearly if trump wants something done, it is.. mysteriously the wall hasn’t even been funded. However we have trillions in chuck n Nancy spending and Syrian rapefugees, a bunch of invaders bragging they are waltzing in and they did. Impotent or incompetent on the wall.. plans? Gee thanks.
Evan McMullien.
“Wouldn’t it take over a decade to complete the job?” (at 100 miles per year)
Yes, it would. So in a way, they would be slow-rolling Trump until he is out of office.
When I say 100 miles per year is good, that is only in comparison to historical norms - not in terms of getting it done optimally.
100 miles of strong barrier, with patrol roads, lights, cameras and sensors; placed where it is most needed; has a strong effect. That is pretty good. In the great majority of years, almost nothing gets done to strengthen the border.
If you want to make sure that the job gets effectively done though, before political winds blow the other way, 100 miles per year won’t do it.
These midterms are probably the biggest determinant. President Trump likely gets one more lump of funding in the coming budget (FY19), before the next Congress is seated. Congress will likely try to default to another $1.6 billion, but the President will likely push for a $10 or $20 billion lump sum. If Democrats take the house in the midterms, then $1.6/yr is probably the best case.
If the President gets only two years of funding at $1.6 billion, the net effect will be that the urbanized parts of the border (San Diego, El Paso, Laredo, and the Rio Grande Valley) will be much stronger, forcing the main migrant flows to shift to less convenient (often difficult) routes.
It will also significantly harden against a “wave attack” like the recent caravan, or what used to be the situation in San Diego, before the current barrier. They need urban areas to stage, before making a run.
So in my view, if we only get 200 miles of Trump-style barrier before political disaster halts construction (my worst case scenario), it will still be a pretty good improvement. I anticipate that we will do better than that.
If Republicans do well in the mid-terms, $1.6 billion per year (~100 miles) would likely be the baseline, with upside potential.
The President has FY19 and FY20 left to contract construction during his first term, on top of the 100 miles getting contracted this year.
If the President can get a large lump sum in the next (FY19) budget, I would estimate 300 miles (a challenging increase) could get put on contract in 2019 (200 is a more conservative estimate, 400 or more is possible in rural, Government-owned land). If this happens, then FY20 would likely be a big year too (300-500).
If the President gets 700 miles or more of strong barrier contracted in his first term, then illegal border crossing will become a difficult rural trek, and will likely plummet in volume. But every 100 miles is a significant help.
A hundred miles was funded in the last Omnibus, and construction has started (2.25 miles in Calexico, CA; 20 miles heading West from El Paso are going up now). Significant projects to close the gaps in the Rio Grande Valley around McAllen Texas (33 miles), and the whole San Diego area border (two 14 mile barriers, with an enforcement/exclusion area between them), were also funded, and will be put on contract this year.
The San Diego project will be a permanent (50 year) improvement (bigger, stronger, more durable), but won't reduce immigration that much compared to the existing barrier. The Rio Grande Valley project will make a major impact on the highest traffic area of the border.
The liberal press will say things like "it is fence, not wall - it doesn't count", but the reality is that it will strongly reduce illegal immigration and smuggling where it is installed. The Trump-style border barrier going up this year is 18 to 30 foot steel bollards, with patrol roads, lights, cameras and sensors which are very effective in practice.
We did get a nice taste this year, but much more is needed to secure the whole border.
Here's what the new stuff looks like:
Just Build the Wall & Deport Them ALL!
Two passive improvements will make a big difference.
1. Thirty foot height. Currently eighteen foot bollards are considered big barriers. These are the ones we see a few guys boosting another guy over, and see folks sitting on top of for pictures. Almost none of the people who fall from 18 feet will die from such a fall. More than half of people who fall from 30 feet, will die from the fall - those that don't die, are badly hurt/handicapped.
As an object falls, it accelerates. The difference in total speed/impact force between an 18 and 30 foot fall is dramatic. The psychological reaction when viewing those heights is hard-wired into our brains. 30 feet is much scarier than 18.
At eighteen feet, an untrained team of young men can boost each other, standing on their shoulders, three high. Forget about that at 30 feet - you would need circus acrobats, and lots of them.
2. Barrel top. If you watch shows like American Ninja, where people run obstacle courses, you can see that certain shapes and distances just exceed human reach and grasp. A three foot diameter barrel top is a showstopper to free climb over. It also provides no purchase for a grappling hook.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.