Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Texas to Provide Online 'Bordercams' 730

Dr_Barnowl writes "The BBC reports that Texas intends to erect a network of online webcams at its border to Mexico. The intention is apparently to use viewers as a kind of distributed processing network, with a free phone number to report border-jumpers." From the article: "'A stronger border is what Americans want and it's what our security demands and that is what Texas is going to deliver,' Mr Perry said. The cameras will cost $5m (£2.7m) to install and will be trained on sections of the 1,000-mile (1,600km) border known to be favoured by illegal immigrants " Hey, it's working for Britain, right?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Texas to Provide Online 'Bordercams'

Comments Filter:
  • by lbrandy ( 923907 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @10:16AM (#15453651)
    Says who? I suspect an honest poll of real-life ordinary Americans would reveal that they want affordable social security, the end of the war in Iraq, sensible energy policies and a range of other things first...

    Feel free to browse here [pollingreport.com] to see what Americans think the biggest problems are. War in Iraq, gas prices, immigration are all high on every poll...
  • by smilemaster_12 ( 812877 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @10:25AM (#15453752)
    There is no need to spend billions on a fence or other border devices. All that is needed is a crackdown on the demand side of the equation. Shut down a few businesses that hire illegal workers, and the demand for them will dry up overnight. Far fewer illegal immigrants will spend the time to come here if there are no jobs for them.
  • by Kohath ( 38547 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @10:37AM (#15453843)
    Illegal immigration is unfair to folks from other countries like China and India and other regions like South America, Africa, and SE Asia. These other folks can't just jump a fence or hike a few miles. They should have the same opportunities to immigrate to America as folks from Mexico if they want.

    The law needs to be changed to make illegal immigration difficult and legal immigration a lot easier. Border enforcement is necessary for that.
  • by goldspider ( 445116 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @10:45AM (#15453938) Homepage
    The Mexican government actively encourages their citizens to enter to the U.S. illegally, and often assists them in doing so. From my point of view, our relations are hardly "benign".
  • by wiggles ( 30088 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @10:57AM (#15454050)
    Usually when people say "I suspect an honest poll of real-life ordinary Americans..." they really mean "Because I'm right and everyone else in the country has the same political agenda as me..."

    Not trying to knock you for your agenda, mine is very similar, but you should be aware that most of the time, the rest of the country does not have the same agenda as you do. Consulting a recent poll (below), I see that you're right about the war, but wrong about the other two.

    Stolen from Polling Report [pollingreport.com] and modified to make it past the lameness filter:
    CBS News Poll May 16-17, 2006. Sample size is 636 adults nationwide. Margin of error plus or minus 4.

    "What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?" Open-ended

                        Percent
    War in Iraq -- 28
    Economy/Jobs -- 15
    Immigration -- 12
    Gas/Heating oil crisis -- 6
    Terrorism (general) -- 5
    Health care -- 4
    Defense/Military -- 3
    President Bush -- 3
    Other -- 20
    Unsure -- 4
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 02, 2006 @10:59AM (#15454075)
    Mexico is an extremly unfriendly country to average US people, going way way back, we weren't even supported in WW2.

        Check *their* immigration policies out, check their work status policies out, and what they do to tourists who run afoul of some drunken policeman demanding a bribe. And we also are facing a future serious confrontation with the aztlan reconquista KKK styled nutjobs, and don't tell me they don't exist or that it isn't taught in mexican schools about how huge areas of the US are really mexcico still, because I have sen translations of the texts. I've read several of their leaders "manifestos", they want an actual forced takeover eventually once the installed base numbers are high enough, I have *seen* the placards carried at some of the illegals demonstrations showing drawings of anglos with their heads macheted off, and they have a LOT of support which is minimized and denied by too many head in the sand ostriches.

    I'd like to see what would happen if some US legal family snuck across the border into mexico and started demanding free schooling in english and free medical care at the local hospital. My guess is, locked up immediately if not shot outright.

    I am all for slow controlled legal immigration, sure, that makes sense, but living in an area that has become saturated with illegals in just the past few years I will note a few things: very little to none wanting to integrate or assimilate, they just want mexico norte. Huge crime problem, I mean large as in now we got mexican gangs here. Huge burden on local public infrastructure that the rank and file local tax payer has to pick up the tabs for. The bullshit about "jobs Americans won't do" is totally false (I am a blue collar worker in a mostly blue collar area, I guarantee you this is a big problem, that lie about the jobs is spread by *completely and utterly clueless white collar workers* and by the illegals themselves). We can and have always done these jobs!

    Huge uncontrolled immigration was sort of OK 150 years ago when we still had a lot of open land and free homesteading, etc, today?? Nuts. No more "free land". We already had a full amnesty for illegals back in 86 and all it did was allow 10-20 million more in for the next round of anticipated "full amnesty".

    If the hispanic "culture" was all that great, mexico would be so popular that the situation would be reversed, you'd be seeing millions of US residents sneaking across the border to go down there and live and work in economic and social paradise, but it isn't happening, for the obvious reason it just sucks hard, sad to say. I say let the folks there clean up their own messes,re-arrange their own society better, take care of their own ridiculous and utterly racist billionaire "castillian" fatcats and corrupt government that has screwed up their nation and make their own nation better. Between the legal immigrants and the legally born here, we can handle the work, and perhaps wages will remain strong then, too. We have a situation now all over where a normal legal family has two adults, mom and dad, both working, and still can't make ends meet. What is the alternative after that, once you are already in the lowest economic strata, go live a dozen to an apartment like the illegals do-I see this all the time around here. Why should we be forced to do that? Screw that noise, ain't happening, we'll be going to plan B once it gets that bad and it is damned close now.

    I tell you, people are minimizing the HUGE potential for actual widespread "social disruption" if this illegal immigration isn't stopped pronto.
  • by giafly ( 926567 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @11:05AM (#15454137)
    Re: You do realize, that Mexico has a fence, with armed guards, at their southern border. And they shoot trespassers on sight. Funny how that fact never makes it into the US media.

    There are plenty of stories [google.co.uk] about that border. Just not on Fox News, apparantly [google.co.uk]. Don't confuse one with the other.
  • Re:Slight Difference (Score:5, Informative)

    by geobeck ( 924637 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @11:13AM (#15454219) Homepage
    As a Texas resident I can guarantee you we wouldn't use a 20 gauge. Most likey we'd use a 12 gauge ..or a 30-06.

    The difference, for those unfamiliar with shotgun gauge measurements:

    12 gauge:
    - BLAM!!
    - *croak*

    20 gauge:
    - bang!
    - Hey!
    - bang!
    - Stop shooting me, man!
    - bang!
    - Ow! That one broke the skin!
    - bang!
    - Okay, okay! We'll take the cameras down, just put the gun away, Mr. Vice President!

    (Actually Cheney shot his 'friend' with a 28-gauge, at close range. If it had been a 12-gauge, the guy would have no head.)

  • by A beautiful mind ( 821714 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @11:27AM (#15454388)
    It is not contradictory as much as you seem to think so.

    Public privacy is almost as expected as private privacy. I don't think too many people would be happy about constantly being followed around by a camera, no matter how public, recording every action of theirs (hint: the photocamera version of it are called the paparazzis).

    Also, situations like placing cameras in the floor, recording the people passing by and selling the female underwear shots to porn sites would be perfectly acceptable by you?

    Being in public doesn't mean that you don't have privacy, it only means you've got less of it than when being at home in your "private" sphere.

    Can see you != should observe you / should record your every move and use that for certain goals they want to achieve.
  • by DiegoLM ( 838648 ) on Friday June 02, 2006 @01:32PM (#15455637)
    USA=Third Reich Texas=Nuremberg Minuteman=SA Hay que joderse, y luego creen que España esta en Sudamerica.

"The one charm of marriage is that it makes a life of deception a neccessity." - Oscar Wilde

Working...