Canada/US Border Integrity Thread

[brihard]

Why would you need to operate in the states? You just stand on our side of the fence and don't let them cross.

How precisely do you ‘not let them cross’? Because I just addressed this.

I can assure you that the entire Roxham Road situation was not simply because Canadian police didn’t know how to say “stop; you can’t enter here”.

 

[lenaitch]

Clearly the problem and the solution is a minefield

FTFY

Why would you need to operate in the states? You just stand on our side of the fence and don't let them cross.

View attachment 90533View attachment 90532View attachment 90534

The corridor may be 6m wide but the border is a line. When someone is on the US side, Canadian law enforcement are limited to 'stop, stop I say'. When they cross onto our side, Canadian law and responsibilities apply. Since the actual line is theoretically one-dimensional, and not actually marked on the ground between monuments in most places, I suspect most LEOs would give themselves a bit of a 'grace space'.

Pus come to shove (and it might), hoping for a benefit of the doubt from a court, SUI, etc. might be a tad naive. I know of no law, treaty or court ruling that addresses that level of minutiae.

 

[KevinB]

How precisely do you ‘not let them cross’? Because I just addressed this.

I can assure you that the entire Roxham Road situation was not simply because Canadian police didn’t know how to say “stop; you can’t enter here”.

Put up a fence

 

[QV]

Put up a fence

Or... "build a big beautiful wall"

Sometimes the solutions are easy. One thing is for sure, a country without control of it's border won't be a country for long.

 

[KevinB]

Or... "build a big beautiful wall"

Sometimes the solutions are easy. One thing is for sure, a country without control of it's border won't be a country for long.

You don't need a wall - but it would make sense to put up access denial fencing on areas of the border that are being commonly used for unlawful border crossings.

 

[Booter]

RCMP leases Black Hawk helicopters as part of plan to patrol Canada-US border

The Black Hawks will join nine existing helicopters in the RCMP fleet, plus 60 new drones that will patrol Canada's border with the United States.

verticalmag.com

It's crazy how fast the government was able to procure 2 black hawks (even if leased) when there is a fire under their butt.

Managing to negotiate the lease & have those helicopters in RCMP opeeation by as early as this Friday (so since it's 1:25am here, technically tomorrow) is crazy fast

2 helicopters, however, is a symbolic gesture.
Best case scenario that puts one bird in the air at a time, and if given some advance warning we could put both helos in the air simultaneously for a 'surge' period

...

It's funny how when the government prioritizes something how quickly it can be done.

Freezing people's bank accounts? No problem, they'll take the initiative on that.

Quietly creating a Canadian digital ID? No problem there either...

New fleet of helicopters for the Coast Guard? No problem at all. Just quietly signs the contract without a bunch of press releases & nonsense...


...BUT...can we, the CAF, replace a single Chinook or Cyclone aircraft without it being some insurmountable deal? Oh no, that's apparently waaaaayyyyyy too big of an ask!

(Which is ridiculous considering the military's whole reason for existing is to provide that federal government with capabilities and options to execute what they want done)

They weren’t procured, they were leased as you said. And contrary to the narrative- the Blackhawk lease proposal is older than this trump/border stuff, it’s just been attached to it.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I don't think you'll get as much resistance and people think will happen.

I think a lot of people wouldn't GAF. The myth that some Canadian Mujahideen will rise up to take on Uncle Sam is just that, a myth.

I personally want a 100% open border and an economic union like the EU. That would be peak awesomeness.

You realize his wish to buy Greenland, as with Canada and Panama, has already borne fruit. Denmark has entered into discussions about the US using tactical areas of Greenland. That was accomplished with the simple sales tactic of coming in really high and leaving room to negotiate down. The US already has use of Canada’s north for security purposes, nothing wrong with expanding that. Considering Canada is completely incapable of providing that sovereign security ourselves, and likely never will. There is no political will. Not to mention the coziness our government seems to have with Red China up there (and everywhere else). That should be considered a global concern. Before we bring the cannon in Kingston back into serviceable condition, it behooves the smart person to not panic and at least listen to what the other side has to say. I, myself, would like to see a much stronger economic union with an end goal of true free trade. We'll never know if we don't listen and instead put on the blinders while singing Oh Canada.

Like Mr Wonderful says. You need to separate the noise from the signal.

Like Denmark/Greenland did.

Dude, places like Queens Park & Ottawa don't even want to invest any money North of highway 7 and we are less than a days drive from the centre of the universe.... ToRoNTo!

 

[GR66]

Or... "build a big beautiful wall"

And make the Americans pay for it!

 

[YZT580]

Why would you need to operate in the states? You just stand on our side of the fence and don't let them cross.

View attachment 90533View attachment 90532View attachment 90534

you have no authority to do so until they actually step onto Canadian soil. The Americans don't want them back so they aren't going to help by grabbing onto their shirt collars and dragging them clear. Perhaps keep the old airbuses as shuttle craft and them drive them, in handcuffs to the airport and load them straight onto a flight to their home countries. Far fetched? absolutely but there is no good answer

 

[Fishbone Jones]

you have no authority to do so until they actually step onto Canadian soil. The Americans don't want them back so they aren't going to help by grabbing onto their shirt collars and dragging them clear. Perhaps keep the old airbuses as shuttle craft and them drive them, in handcuffs to the airport and load them straight onto a flight to their home countries. Far fetched? absolutely but there is no good answer

I was going to mention that also. However, I've about had enough "You can't do that" with nothing positive or possible solutions being fielded to fix things. Just negatives. No sense tossing another possible solution into the mix.

 

[KevinB]

you have no authority to do so until they actually step onto Canadian soil. The Americans don't want them back so they aren't going to help by grabbing onto their shirt collars and dragging them clear. Perhaps keep the old airbuses as shuttle craft and them drive them, in handcuffs to the airport and load them straight onto a flight to their home countries. Far fetched? absolutely but there is no good answer

Dig in large catapults (leaving fence gaps to channel them into the launch pad) -- then boom, they immediately get catapulted back down here, probably now with a medical issue - that they won't the able to 1) afford down here 2) won't be able to escape CBP coming for them.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I think a lot of people wouldn't GAF. The myth that some Canadian Mujahideen will rise up to take on Uncle Sam is just that, a myth.

I personally want a 100% open border and an economic union like the EU. That would be peak awesomeness.

That is my end state also. I didn't want to tie it to the EU. We can do without the Gnomes of Brussels.

 

[KevinB]

That is my end state also. I didn't want to tie it to the EU. We can do without the Gnomes of Brussels.

I want to be able to take my guns with me when I go to visit some of you up there.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Dig in large catapults (leaving fence gaps to channel them into the launch pad) -- then boom, they immediately get catapulted back down here, probably now with a medical issue - that they won't the able to 1) afford down here 2) won't be able to escape CBP coming for them.

 

[MrWhyt]

And make the Americans pay for it!

given trumps history of stiffing contractors I think it's more likely you'll get mexico to pay for it.

 

[GR66]

I want to be able to take my guns with me when I go to visit some of you up there.

Are you talking a friendly visit, or...

 

[brihard]

I was going to mention that also. However, I've about had enough "You can't do that" with nothing positive or possible solutions being fielded to fix things. Just negatives. No sense tossing another possible solution into the mix.

I’ll only say “you can’t do that” with things I happen to be qualified to speak to. Since I’m qualified to speak to police arrest powers and legal authorities for use of force, that’s why I offered the insight that I did. I did ask you how you proposed actually doing what you suggested, and I notice you don’t have an answer to square the circle of “what if they don’t stop when we tell them to?”

The viability of loading people on planes and forcibly bringing them back to Nigeria or Haiti is outside of my arcs. In that case police will still be responsible for arresting them, and seizing and examining and then subsequently safeguarding their effects.

 

[KevinB]

I’ll only say “you can’t do that” with things I happen to be qualified to speak to. Since I’m qualified to speak to police arrest powers and legal authorities for use of force, that’s why I offered the insight that I did. I did ask you how you proposed actually doing what you suggested, and I notice you don’t have an answer to square the circle of “what if they don’t stop when we tell them to?”

The viability of loading people on planes and forcibly bringing them back to Nigeria or Haiti is outside of my arcs. In that case police will still be responsible for arresting them, and seizing and examining and then subsequently safeguarding their effects.

I'm still not getting the issue with erecting cyclone fencing on those paths - then tasering them if they try to climb the fence (fence would be in Canada, but they would fall back into America once tasered - or less lethal round).
There seems to be some fairly common footpaths people are using - and there doesn't seem to be any rational reason for not fencing those.

 

[brihard]

I'm still not getting the issue with erecting cyclone fencing on those paths - then tasering them if they try to climb the fence (fence would be in Canada, but they would fall back into America once tasered - or less lethal round).
There seems to be some fairly common footpaths people are using - and there doesn't seem to be any rational reason for not fencing those.

We’ll build a wall. We’ll make America pay for it.

But yeah. You can absolutely build fences. Just be prepared to spend a ton of time fixing and patrolling fences, because getting through most fences isn’t hard. And we have a much longer land border than the U.S. and Mexico.

Don’t get me wrong; build barriers where it makes sense to deter and canalize. But also be prepared to deal with tens of thousands who’ll just send it anyway.