This Land Is Your Land, This Land Is Mine Land
USA Lance Thompson
http://newmediajournal.us/staff/l_thompson/01112007.htm

January 11, 2007
On 3 January 2007, an hour before midnight, an American National Guard unit operating as a US Border Patrol entry Identification Team, operating in a known drug smuggling corridor between Nogales and Lukeville on American soil, was overrun by an unknown number of gunmen who attacked from south of the border. It is unreported whether shots were fired by the invaders, but the National Guard, following their orders, did not fire on the intruders, and retreated. The National Guardsmen suffered no casualties.
This incident emphasizes not only the importance of controlling our borders, but also the increasingly severe consequences if we fail to do so. We cannot patrol our 1951-mile border with Mexico, let alone our 5525-mile border with Canada. An effective wall or fence system is prohibitively expensive.

Yet there is a comparatively affordable, highly effective means of controlling border incursions available to us. We could reduce unauthorized border crossings to an insignificant level by the installation of a barrier of land mines.

The United States, along with Russia and communist China, never signed the 1997 treaty outlawing land mines. This is fortunate, because one of the few unquestionable advantages of these weapons is to defend one’s territory against mass invasion.

We have tried to stop immigration with federal and local law enforcement, the National Guard, and private citizens’ groups. We have enacted legislation that penalizes illegal aliens, those who hire illegal aliens, and those who aid and abet illegal aliens. Various states have passed laws to refuse entitlements, education, free hospital care and official identification to illegal aliens. We have tried negotiation with the Mexican government and "one-time" amnesties for illegal aliens. The net result of all these measures is that illegal border crossings have increased steadily over time.

"Controlling the border is a national security priority. It is not selfish, cruel or racist to insist that those who enter this country do so by following the regulations we have enacted for that purpose."

There are economic arguments on both sides of the illegal alien debate. Proponents maintain that illegal alien labor fills jobs that legal citizens will not do. Opponents point to the added costs to school districts, emergency rooms, and welfare programs caused by those who use the systems but don’t pay for them.

In any event, the economic considerations are not at issue here. The only issue to be solved is that of illegal entry into this country.

Controlling the border is a national security priority. It is not selfish, cruel or racist to insist that those who enter this country do so by following the regulations we have enacted for that purpose. We do not force anyone to enter the country illegally–the illegal alien defies our laws, trespasses in our country, and knowingly commits a crime literally the moment he sets foot on American soil. Deterring such people is the right and duty of the American government.

It remains only to identify the best deterrent to illegal immigration. A quarter-mile wide barrier along the border sewn with land mines certainly merits strong consideration. Mines are cost effective, indiscriminate, technologically advanced, and immensely discouraging to those who make illegal incursions.

Mines are cost effective compared to human enforcement. It would take a budget-busting ten-fold increase in the Border Patrol to monitor just our southern border with Mexico twenty-four hours a day. A fence or wall across the same territory can be defeated with a single breach. Any barrier must be 100% effective over every foot of its span, or it is useless. Weak spots are easily spotted, created and exploited.

Land mines have none of those disadvantages. Once placed, they remain effective indefinitely. They need replacement only if used, and each use merely reinforces their effectiveness. They need not cover every inch of the border–their mere presence is discouraging enough. Unlike a fence or wall that can be circumvented, or human guards who can be avoided, mines are invisible until detonated. The uncertainty of their location multiplies their deterrent power.

Opponents of a secure border argue that security measures are discriminatory or racist because they unfairly target Mexicans or Hispanics. Land mines cannot discriminate. Anyone who steps on one is penalized. This also highlights another cost-savings factor. The violation and penalty are inextricably linked, with no need for hearings, trials, deportation or appeal. Anyone who trespasses in the mine barrier accepts the risk of immediate, severe punishment.

Naturally, the Mexican government would be informed of the mine barrier, warnings would be posted, and there is certain to be a significant amount of media coverage, thanks in advance to the ACLU. Just as illegal immigrants are familiar with our employment opportunities, our laws pertaining to illegal aliens, and every possible maneuver to circumvent them, so too will information about the mine barrier spread quickly to all concerned.

Technological advancements like GPS and satellite imagery will allow the US government to pinpoint exactly the location of all mines, in the event that we would ever need to remove or reposition them. They could be deactivated in situations that require authorized passage through the mine barrier for maintenance or official business.

The deterrence factor of a mine barrier is immensely greater than that of any other disincentive to illegal trespass across our borders. First, the severity of the penalty is greater than any previously enacted or proposed. Second, the penalty is the same for illegal aliens and those who guide or lead them across the border. Third, very few mines would actually have to be placed. With the first incidence of an illegal alien detonating a mine in the barrier, the entire cost-benefit analysis of entering the United States illegally would have to be recalculated.

A mine barrier is cheap, effective, and doesn’t even mar our scenic Southwest vistas. It presents prospective trespassers a much more risky proposition than any previous barrier or deterrent employed or proposed. It also forcefully asserts that the boundaries of the United States are to be respected, and that our laws are to be observed. This would be completely contrary to the situation we have lived with over the last century. That in itself is argument enough for the mine barrier’s implementation.