Us Border Control: Fence
In the name of national security and immigration regulation, the United States has undertaken a massive project to build physical barriers along portions of the border dividing the United States and Mexico. Yet, there is some disparagement surrounding the concept of outspreading the border fence. However, research has shown that border fencing is not only an achievable option, but is also more successful and safer than other forms of deterrence.
In the past 10 years, there has been increased awareness about the influx of illegal immigrants from South America and Mexico in particular. One of the foremost reasons a border fencing option is unsurpassed is that the other options simply don’t work. For example in 2007, Janet Napolitano, then the governor of Arizona, gave a speech at a press conference swaggering about the capabilities of a “virtual fence.” (DeMint) “"We can shore up our border gaps with ground-based sensors, radar and unmanned aerial vehicles," she said. "Any combination of the above will work far better than any 10 or 20 or 50 miles of wall."” Conversely, she was wrong. Reports published in 2009 from the GAO showed that “virtual fencing was a virtual disaster.” (DeMint) The reports showed that cameras suffered signal loss, the system was unable to “distinguish humans and vehicles from livestock and bushes” and the number of new deficiencies with the virtual fences “outpaced the number that were being fixed.”(Tancredo) Alan Bershin, the USCBP chief called it a “complete failure” in a Senate meeting. (DeMint) Another solution many think is practicable is an intensification of U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents. This solution is tremendously costly, however. On average agents make $50,000 per year plus an “excellent Federal Government benefits package including life insurance, health insurance, liberal retirement benefits, and a thrift savings plan.” (FAQ) It is also an extremely hazardous occupation. A fence can stop a vehicle transporting
In the past 10 years, there has been increased awareness about the influx of illegal immigrants from South America and Mexico in particular. One of the foremost reasons a border fencing option is unsurpassed is that the other options simply don’t work. For example in 2007, Janet Napolitano, then the governor of Arizona, gave a speech at a press conference swaggering about the capabilities of a “virtual fence.” (DeMint) “"We can shore up our border gaps with ground-based sensors, radar and unmanned aerial vehicles," she said. "Any combination of the above will work far better than any 10 or 20 or 50 miles of wall."” Conversely, she was wrong. Reports published in 2009 from the GAO showed that “virtual fencing was a virtual disaster.” (DeMint) The reports showed that cameras suffered signal loss, the system was unable to “distinguish humans and vehicles from livestock and bushes” and the number of new deficiencies with the virtual fences “outpaced the number that were being fixed.”(Tancredo) Alan Bershin, the USCBP chief called it a “complete failure” in a Senate meeting. (DeMint) Another solution many think is practicable is an intensification of U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents. This solution is tremendously costly, however. On average agents make $50,000 per year plus an “excellent Federal Government benefits package including life insurance, health insurance, liberal retirement benefits, and a thrift savings plan.” (FAQ) It is also an extremely hazardous occupation. A fence can stop a vehicle transporting