100k preventable deaths a year

one BIG one

 

The airplane has to land someplace. We track all the airplanes coming across that southern border.

 

Any preventable death is a human tragedy.
I just don't understand why Democrats act like death by guns is any more important than death by illegal drugs or automobiles when they are all preventable and the people are all just as dead and it doesn't matter how they get that way.

The end result is always the same

 

Helicopter.

 

We also track all helicopters. It would be easier to find a helicopter than people sneaking across the border. Plus helicopters don't cary large numbers of people. It would take more helicopters than they have in Mexico.

 

Post your data and information.
I haven't seen a single shred of evidence of drugs being brought in by illegal immigrants crossing the border that exceeds 5% of the overall drugs brought into country.

 

Stupid is as stupid does.

Provide any evidence you have of your claim. Just 1 time.
My links show all the ways drugs get into country. You evidence so far is ZERO!!!

 

No... not playing the game... you will not put your lame posts.... you will not turn this on me... you claim water and then ports of entry

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/
@dairyair
How does that address 95% of the drugs come via the water?
You know, Gulf of Mexico, and the 2 Oceans.
↑
It's less wide open than 8 yrs ago. Didn't trump and obama add to the wall.
Do you have data that shows how drugs enter the country has changed?If it worked well 8 yrs ago, it still works well today.
You haven't thought your posts out very well....
MARTIN: So, first of all, just walk me through it. How do most illegal drugs enter the U.S.?
KERLIKOWSKE: So the drugs that are actually taking the lives of people here in the United States - methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin, fentanyl - almost universally come through the ports of entry along the southern border - so that is people that carry them on their bodies or even in their bodies or cars or vehicles. And then the second way is through the international postal mail service.
MARTIN: And when you say most, what do you mean? Like, 50 percent, 60 percent, 90 percent?
KERLIKOWSKE: Oh, well over 90 percent. People don't backpack or try to sneak those drugs across the border between the ports of entry because, one, they could be caught by the Border Patrol. Number two, they don't really trust those people to do that. So it's much better for them to have somebody that is taking the drugs through a port of entry where they're met on the other side of the port here in the United States, and those drugs are immediately taken.
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/06/710712195/how-do-illegal-drugs-cross-the-u-s-mexico-border

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

And still me claim a wall/sensor/camera/drone will allow some resources to be repositioned to the ports of entry

 

It is plain ole common sense.. Which seems to be the "ZERO!!!" some folks on here have. That fact common sense that working smarter and not harder by putting up a wall reduces agents in that area that can be used else where is the idea...

 

Where's your evidence of how drugs get into the country?

NOTE - ???????????? is not evidence.
Is that the best you have?

And what the hell does ---- "And still me claim" even mean?
Are you speaking English?

 

Done playing this silly game...

 

What difference does it make whether it is 100% or 1%? You stop it where you can. Small amounts can still kill thousands of our young people.

 

Duplicate

 

Good. It's your game and you lost it.
You have no idea how drugs get into the country. No matter how many links you are provided from different sources over different years.

The only thing you've had to do and you can't, is provide your proof.

 

Why spend billions to stop 1%? 99% getting in still kills thousands.

It's always about where is the best bang for the buck.

 

That kind of sounds like letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

A common argument that gun banners like to use

 

Because those saved are worth saving.

 

Then go after the 99%. Where even more are saved and money better spent.

 

No... just looking for an adult debate and conversation but not finding it. But this is the MO of some posters on here.. The proof is common sense.

 

You can't find an adult conversation. You never have proof of claims made. At least anything from reputable sources.

It is the MO.

Remember this?
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...e-deaths-a-year.610660/page-8#post-1074227714

 

They are going after the 99% and every once in a while we hear about them stopping some massive shipment. A massive shipment that results in thousands of lives saved.

 

Even a shoe box size full of fentanyl taking off of the market can probably save hundreds of thousands of lives

 

The drug cartels are intelligent. If we concentrate on one area at the expense of other areas, they will just shift to another less difficult area.

 

Of course. Which is why a wall is mostly useless.
There's a Gulf of Mexico, 2 oceans, air space, a norther border, and tunnels that will make any wall mostly useless, to try and stop 1%, per you.
That is money, time, and resources wasted. For 1%

 

If walls were so useless.... You would live in a pole barn instead of having four walls on your house.

I noticed that a lot of ritzy neighborhoods tend to have walls all around them.

Kind of like every politicians property has lots of walls all around it.