• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

What happened to the caravan after the midterm elections?

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
They were not welcome on either side of the border. Many of them have gone home for Christmas. Christmas is big in Latin America.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
They want the US to take out the Honduran president and give them 50,000 dollars each to move them to go home and start a business - that is the home they left due to corruption and danger - the home they fear to live in.

To laugh or to cry, that is the question.

"There but by the grace of God..."

I believe their anguish, but we should also know that evil men have motivated them to risk life and limb giving them a false hope with these hopes dashed upon arrival, thereby driving them deeper into their misery.
 
Last edited:

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
In the big picture the caravan isn't even a drop in the bucket....

US Border Crisis: 100,000 Illegal Immigrants in 60 Days

"Smuggling groups exploit loopholes in US immigration laws amid congressional inaction

WASHINGTON—A caravan’s worth of illegal immigrants cross the border every day—as has been the case for years. But the numbers are currently on a sharp upward trend.

The recent caravan of around 8,000 migrants mostly from Honduras—an anomaly because of its size and propensity for violence—created a media frenzy for a couple of weeks, but while the coverage has waned, the illegal border crossings haven’t.

In the past two months alone, more than 100,000 people have been apprehended for illegally crossing into the United States. That’s the highest number for October and November in four of the past five years (the end of 2016 spiked before President Donald Trump took office).

During fiscal 2017, almost 400,000 people were apprehended along the southwest border after crossing illegally—averaging out to almost 1,100 per day. A further 124,500 turned up at ports of entry without documentation.

Driving the increase are family units from Central America.

A snapshot of the border crossings on Dec. 3 highlights the trend, according to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Kevin McAleenan.

“The highest numbers of arrivals at our southwest border in years—3,029 illegal entries and inadmissible persons—arrived at our border last Monday. 85 percent of them crossed illegally,” McAleenan said during a Senate oversight hearing on Dec. 11.

He said the numbers included 1,731 members of family groups and 350 unaccompanied children.

“We will more than double last year’s record number of family units at this rate,” he said. A family unit consists of at least one child and one adult.

Less than a decade ago, most illegal border-crossers were single adult males from Mexico.

Now, it’s family units and unaccompanied minors seeking asylum, which presents a whole different set of challenges. These groups made up fewer than 10 percent of illegal border crossings up until the year 2012. Last month, they made up 59 percent, according to McAleenan.

Before 2013, fewer than one percent of illegal immigrants claimed asylum. Now, it’s more than one in 10, he said.

“These increases and demographic changes in crossings are direct responses to the vulnerabilities in our legal framework that have become well-known to smugglers and migrants,” he said.

While 89 percent of asylum-seekers from Central America pass an initial credible-fear screening at the border, only 9 percent are subsequently granted asylum by an immigration judge, according to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).

Of those who pass their initial screening, 40 percent then fail to lodge an official asylum application and 31 percent fail to show up for their immigration court hearing, according to the DOJ. And, of those, most remain in the wind.

“Indeed, only 1.5 percent of family units from Central America apprehended [in fiscal] 2017 have been removed to their countries of origin, despite the fact that most will not end up having valid claims to remain in the United States when their court proceedings conclude,” McAleenan said.

“That perception—that our system will allow them to stay in the United States indefinitely—is clearly the driving pull factor for those making the journey to our border. Along with important push factors, which include challenging conditions in many parts of Central America.”...……"
 

FollowTheWay

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Do you see this as a good thing, or do you believe more people need to be deployed at the border (or perhaps a wall built to compensate)?
I see this as once again Trump talking a big game but having negative results. The wall is a ridiculous waste of money. More agents and more electronic surveillance are much better ways to help the problem.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The number of U.S. border control agents is less under Trump than it was under Obama.
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2017-Dec/BP Staffing FY1992-FY2017.pdf
Yeah, he also approved of building a wall.
President Donald Trump will be able to order the construction of a wall on the Mexico border Wednesday with the stroke of a pen, because of a 2006 law passed with the help of Democrats including Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton.

Top Democrats Voted For The Border Wall Trump Is Building
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The Dems are unconcerned about border security. They only want more cheap labor and more illegal votes. Mexico has a better voting ID system than the USA. Pelosi is a abortionist deluxe. Shumer is a beta guy.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Are you saying that reducing the number of border agents makes the border more secure? Please explain.
No. I don't really think it will make a difference but it certainly won't make it more secure.

Here is my idea for the border:

All across the US we have radioactive waste. And it is costing us a lot of money. Let's move out our towns a bit from the border and use the property (on our side) in a 3 mile wide strip to dump this nuclear material. Then we can let anyone cross if they want. They can dig under. They can sprint three miles.....whatever. If they make it through let them stay.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The wall is a waste of money. It's a 19th century solution to a 21st century problem. Trump is always coming up with those like emphasizing the use of coal when there are cheaper and better energy solutions.
Nations keep building them. Nations (especially China) still love coal.
 

Wesley Briggman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I see this as once again Trump talking a big game but having negative results. The wall is a ridiculous waste of money. More agents and more electronic surveillance are much better ways to help the problem.

Build the wall high enough, wide enough and deep enough to make it impenetrable. Our border agents will confront the illegals only after they are on U.S. soil. The resulting legal action(s) will be at taxpayer expense. Same outcome with surveillance - interdiction after the fact. More expense passed on to taxpayers.

I say, keep them out. Build the wall; high, wide and deep!
 

Adonia

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The wall is a waste of money. It's a 19th century solution to a 21st century problem. Trump is always coming up with those like emphasizing the use of coal when there are cheaper and better energy solutions.

Okay, so what are the "cheaper and better" energy solutions? Solar? Nope, it just cannot provide the amount of power needed. Wind generation? Not that one either, just another "pie in the shy" alternative. The fact is, coal IS the cheaper option which is why it has been used for so long, plus it has been said that we have 300 more years of the stuff just laying around ready for mining.

We also have natural gas, but many people are against that also because of the process called "fracking" that is used to get it out of the ground.
 
Top