A border patrol of Davids: Texas enlists ‘Net users to catch illegals
posted at 2:14 pm on June 2, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
It’s a fine line between stupid and clever, and this idea is straddling it. Glenn Reynolds by way of Tom Tancredo:
Texas residents and law enforcement officials will be able to monitor video footage of some of the most isolated and dangerous stretches of the Texas-Mexico border under a border security plan announced Thursday by Gov. Rick Perry…
The video, which will include night vision, will be available to state, local and federal authorities and will be posted on the Internet in real time, Perry said.
“When citizens witness a crime taking place, they will be able to call an 800 number that will be routed to the appropriate law enforcement agency,” he said.
Neighborhood watch on a national scale. Brilliant. But, er, if millions of illegal immigrants and their supporters are willing to march in the streets for amnesty, won’t they also be willing to prank-call a toll-free number that’s being used to catch them? I give the program, oh, about six minutes before it’s rendered completely useless by the volume of false tips.
On the positive side, though, the Freepers have something to do with their nights now. I KID! I kid because I fear.
It’s fun to imagine Bush’s reaction when he hears that Texas, of all states, has decided it needs a little more border protection than he’s giving them.
Anyway, let’s see how it goes. I’m just tired of all the hate.
Update: Expecting the first ACLU lawsuit to be filed any minute now…
Update: Small Town Veteran points to this article from 2005, which answers the stupid/clever question pretty decisively.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
It seems to me that there would/should be some process of verifiying the caller’s identity prior to routing the call to the relevant agency, similar to when you call 911. If you prank, they have your number and might pay you a call. Also, each webcam image should have onscreen camera ID and timestamp data that could be referenced for verification by law enforcement. They could rely on additional calls to confirm an initial report.
These are steps that would discourage a lot of prank calls, but nothing could eliminate all pranks. I for one would monitor these cameras, at least occasionally.
inmanjh on June 2, 2006 at 2:33 PM
Sounds like a great way to cure insomnia.
Marvin on June 2, 2006 at 2:37 PM
Yeah, the key would be whether they could organize collective action against it. No one, especially no one who’s here illegally, would prank a border-patrol hotline from his home phone. But if they got thousands of people to do it and overwhelmed the BP with calls, there’d be plenty of volunteers. Same principle as the protests in April: do it in large enough numbers and the cops won’t touch you.
Allahpundit on June 2, 2006 at 2:37 PM
Large enough numbers these days is maybe, what, two?
clyde on June 2, 2006 at 2:46 PM
I am waiting with baited breath for someone to scream “racist” or “unconstitutional.”
pullingmyhairout on June 2, 2006 at 3:09 PM
From the liberal left:
This is OBVIOUSLY racist because it is aimed at, profiles, and will catch only illegal immigrants.
Errr. . . I mean migrants. Ummm. . .I mean temporary workers. Uhhh. . .I mean guest workers. I mean. . .
ForYourEdification on June 2, 2006 at 3:27 PM
ForYourEdification,
you forgot “workers whose status is unverified” LOL
pullingmyhairout on June 2, 2006 at 3:30 PM
The term “wetbacks” was replaced with the non-racist term “illegal aliens,” which is now itself considered racist. Look for “undocumented worker” to be considered racist in the next few years.
inmanjh on June 2, 2006 at 3:43 PM
Hmm. Allah, my last comment doesn’t make much sense since you “moderated” the comment to which I was responding. I guess I’m next on the chopping block…
inmanjh on June 2, 2006 at 3:46 PM
“It’s fun to imagine Bush’s reaction when he hears that Texas, of all states, has decided it needs a little more border protection than he’s giving them.”
Jorge Boosch is not a true Texan. His family and roots are in Kennebunkport, Maine. Money and savvy politics got him elected governer. This is becoming all to apparent to the non-believers here in Texas as GW shows his true self. All hat, no cattle.
brtex on June 2, 2006 at 3:53 PM
That link to the Madison Times article contains the word ‘illegal’ how many times? Take a wild guess.
Hoodlumman on June 2, 2006 at 4:07 PM
“Undocumented Aliens” was still hip when this monster of a law was signed by our presidente in 2003 – read Section 1011 only if you have a ‘stable’ constitution (a physical/mental one):
https://www.trailblazerhealth.com/section1011/Default.aspx?
Look how much fake ID sellers care about the current or new laws in this country:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060602/ap_on_re_us/immigration_fake_documents;_ylt=AmXzhlPj7FkJaZfb5Ky7D4ys0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MjBwMWtkBHNlYwM3MTg-
Entelechy on June 2, 2006 at 4:24 PM
Sorry, but this is a complete waste of time and money. It is a DUMB idea.
If they don’t have a ’strike team’ with arrest powers within five minutes of each camera, the invaders will be long gone by the time anyone official responds, if indeed anyone ever does actually respond.
They will have made a nice target for vandals though.
More useless political maneuvering; a dog and pony show designed to fool the masses without having any actual effect on the illegal alien invasion.
LegendHasIt on June 2, 2006 at 4:28 PM
The idea isn’t cleaver at all; it is just stupid. We don’t need to spend millions to expose a problem that we already know we have. This is nothing more than pandering by a RINO in an election year.
coffee on June 2, 2006 at 4:42 PM
“When citizens witness a crime taking place, they will be able to call an 800 number that will be routed to the appropriate law enforcement agency,” [Perry] said.
Why do I sense that illegally trespassing on American soil won’t be considered “a crime?”
Aunt B on June 2, 2006 at 5:21 PM
A few thoughts:
1) So, knowing where the cameras are (do you think THAT will be a well kept secret?)Juan and Jose run across the border, knock them out and a few dozen of their compadres run on through. Meanwhile, Juan and Jose go back to get paid for their efforts by el coyote, thus the two guys the authorities are looking for are nowhere to be found. But not to worry, they’ll be back another night to do more of the same.
2) Another scenario; some illegals are spied by Granny Greensprings and she makes the call. Will the response be quick enough to stop them or will they be halfway to Omaha before someone answers the phone? Having once waited 20 minutes for the police after making a 911 call, I have my doubts. Oh yeah, I made the call less than two miles from the station in a whitebread suburban neighborhood.
3) What are the chances someone making the call is answered by a recording that begins, “Press 1 for English, Press 2 for Spanish”.
The term “posturing” comes to mind.
SSvet on June 2, 2006 at 5:31 PM
You’re correct LegendHasIt,
This is a waste of time and money .
But if they want to be stupid i’m willing to sell those cameras to them, that is exactly what my husband and I do for a living…
That still won’t work because you have to call the 800 # and how long will it take for a border patrol to get there.
And did the patrol officer call mexico to see if it’s legal to arrest them right there and now…Mexico just paid our leaders
they own us now…
alyce on June 2, 2006 at 5:38 PM
The update link goes to the Madison WI column again.
Alex K on June 2, 2006 at 7:11 PM
How long before the left accuses the minutemen of plotting to enhance the cameras with this:
http://www.engadget.com/2004/11/17/internet-hunting-coming-to-texas/
papermelech on June 2, 2006 at 8:12 PM
Was it the Democrats who proposed using high techs to secure the border instead of building walls? ACLU better talk to Chuck Schumer before suing.
easy87us on June 2, 2006 at 10:29 PM
Jose can you see
By the dawn’s early light
In the sun’s early glare
Not a border guard there
What a beautiful sight
Oh so proudly we hail
All detectors rigged to fail
And Minutemen sent to jail
And just you wait and see
We’ll rig a National Guard atrocity
Forcing all gringos to flee
From the land of the free
And the home of the formerly brave
MaiDee on June 2, 2006 at 10:51 PM
http://www.kirotv.com/investigations/4081213/detail.html Hat tip: Papa Ray
bdfaith on June 3, 2006 at 12:50 AM
You could neutralize the entire system with a case of spray paint.
A cute idea until you realize that it will never work.
Pablo on June 3, 2006 at 9:15 AM
There are already enough videos of illegal aliens coming across the border to fill a library. Filming them is not the same as STOPPING them. This is just one more zany idea to assuage the public, when in fact, nothing is being done and nothing will be done.
gary on June 3, 2006 at 9:51 AM
The border between Texas and Mexico in Texas is a river. Ranchers on both sides of the border use this river as the main watering source for their livestock. You cannot fence this river. In some areas, the river passes through warrens of canyons that would be impossible to fence. West Texas is a dry and dusty place where the Rio Grande is the only watering source for hours. I think the private property rights of ranchers will trump the fence building in some of these areas.
Sometimes realism will intrude on the politics of a situation, as it has to in the case of illegal immigration.
Stormy70 on June 3, 2006 at 10:46 AM
Putting up those cameras, will that be anything like good
old fashioned window shopping?
As to the border between Texas and Mexico, many of those land owners now are being forced to sell out so the coyotes and drug runners will have easier access to the internals of this country. The ranchers down there don’t go anywhere unarmed
either.
The camera angle is just another way of tickling the ears of
the angry taxpayers. Cameras don’t physcially stop anyone.
quark2 on June 3, 2006 at 12:10 PM
Noone goes unarmed in West Texas, and haven’t for one hundred years.
Stormy70 on June 3, 2006 at 12:18 PM
quark has a point about the coyotes and drug mules causing huge problems, but stormy is right to raise the issue of the river. I mentioned this problem on another blog, and nobody seemed very interested, and I haven’t heard anyone address the problem of fencing off the river.
The river is a huge agricultural and recreational resource that a lot of people need access to, and building a minuteman-style fence along it would disrupt many folks’ lives. Plus, as Stormy mentioned, the miles and miles of deep canyons, and the two reservoirs, would pose their own set of problems.
A fence may indeed have to be built, but there seems to be no discussion of the tradeoffs involved.
BTW, since 2002, over $13,000,000 worth of marijuana has been seized on my grandparents’ ranch, which is north of the border, but near a BP checkpoint. Thanks a lot to all you potheads out there for providing the market for these creeps, so that my family can’t go on certain parts of the ranch at night.
juliesa on June 3, 2006 at 2:40 PM
Comment pages: