America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 7 years ago by Covfireman. 27 replies replies.
Leaked DHS report reveals barely half of illegal border crossers caught
Burner02 Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,876
SAN DIEGO (AP) — Immigration authorities caught just over half of the people who illegally entered the U.S. from Mexico last year, according to an internal Department of Homeland Security report that offers one of the most detailed assessments of border security ever compiled.

The report found that 54 percent of people who entered illegally between border crossings got caught in the 2015 fiscal year. That's much lower than the 81 percent success rate that Homeland Security cited publicly using a different counting method.

The 98-page report was completed in May, and Homeland Security officials have declined to release it, despite urging from some members of Congress. The Associated Press obtained a copy from a government official involved in border issues who acted on condition of anonymity because the department has not made the report public.

The department said Thursday that the report was "one building block provided by a research organization" toward developing more reliable measures of border security and that its methodology needed refinement.

"DHS does not believe it is in the public interest to release, and it would be irresponsible to make policy or other judgments on the basis of analysis that is incomplete and remains a work in progress," spokeswoman Marsha Catron said.

The report offers some of most detailed measures yet of how secure the border with Mexico is — a major issue in a presidential campaign that features Republican nominee Donald Trump calling for a wall along the entire 1,954-mile border. The report includes enough material to argue that the government has made big strides or that it is falling woefully short.

In terms of people, 170,000 got away from the Border Patrol during the 2015 fiscal year, 210,000 the previous year and 1.7 million in 2005. The huge drop over the last decade is largely explained by the decline in job opportunities since the Great Recession, with more Mexicans now leaving the United States than arriving here.

During that time, there has also been a massive increase in border enforcement, including jail time and other serious consequences for those who get caught, and significant increases in the number of people getting deported. The drop in illegal entries continued well after the economy rebounded. The government now spends $14 billion annually on border security.

The number of people who got away is larger when including those who escaped detection at border crossings or who entered by sea, which is the responsibility of Homeland Security agencies outside the Border Patrol. Adding those, 200,000 people got away last year, 260,000 in 2014 and 1.9 million in 2005.

The Border Patrol's capture rate on the Mexican border was 55 percent in 2014 and 36 percent in 2005, according to the report prepared for Homeland Security by the Institute for Defense Analyses, a federally funded research organization. The Border Patrol achieved an 11-point improvement in 2014 after years of slow but steady gains. The report does not offer an explanation for the sudden improvement.

The report, which includes an appendix of more than 100 pages on methodology and a review of previous efforts to count border crossers, offers detailed analysis going back to 2000, shortly before the U.S. erected hundreds of miles of fences along the Mexican border, added surveillance gear and doubled the number of Border Patrol agents. Homeland Security has been under pressure to show if those multibillion-dollar investments yielded results.

The primary measure that Homeland Security has released for public consumption is the number of Border Patrol arrests, which tells how many people got caught but not how many got away. Arrests dropped to the lowest level in 44 years in 2015, down 80 percent from a peak of nearly 1.7 million in 2000.

For the last two years, the department has released an "interdiction effectiveness rate" that measures the percentage of people who got caught among all who attempted to enter between crossings on the Mexican border. The figure includes those who set foot in the U.S. and turned around and asylum-seekers. It was 81 percent in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, 2015.

The report obtained by the AP takes a different approach. It does not credit the government for people who turn around or turn themselves in to agents to seek asylum, a common occurrence among Central American women and children who have entered the country in large numbers over the last five years, many of them fleeing drug-fueled violence.

The report says there were 140,000 asylum seekers on the Mexican border last year and 170,000 in 2014, compared to about 20,000 a year a decade ago. Homeland Security's practice of counting those as captures goes a long way toward explaining why its success rate was so much higher.

The report also counts people who entered the country illegally at border crossings — typically by presenting fake or stolen documents to immigration inspectors. Homeland Security does not publish those numbers. The report says 28,000 escaped detection last year, down from 46,000 in 2014. The capture rate improved to 39 percent from 29 percent.

Counting border crossers who elude capture is a mammoth and imprecise task but one that many experts believe is necessary to judge whether the border is secure. Homeland Security approaches the job by tracking physical evidence, such as footprints in the desert and other signs of human presence, and by agent sightings. The internal report uses that information, along with migrant surveys and techniques developed by social scientists.

jjanecka Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 12-08-2015
Posts: 4,334
50% sounds pretty good actually
DrafterX Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,535
Victor hasn't analyzed these figures yet... Mellow
tailgater Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
DrafterX wrote:
Victor hasn't analyzed these figures yet... Mellow


And TW hasn't anal-ized them, either.

teedubbya Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I'd like to see the report and more importantly why it hasn't been released. Is it politics or something else. Could be either.
DrafterX Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,535
How can they possibly know for sure how many came across... there's the first flaw in da stats... but even if it's close I'd say 50% was a pretty good catch.. Mellow
tailgater Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
DrafterX wrote:
How can they possibly know for sure how many came across... there's the first flaw in da stats... but even if it's close I'd say 50% was a pretty good catch.. Mellow


But many didn't meet the size limit and had to be thrown back.

DrafterX Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,535
Or they bagged the limit and stopped counting.. Mellow
ZRX1200 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,580
I'd like to know where the landmines are, and why aren't there bull sharks in the Rio Grand
jjanecka Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 12-08-2015
Posts: 4,334
Because Texas has Instituted it's own "navy" by purchasing gunboats to patrol the rio grand. That's 90% of why the media is pitching such a fit about the police. They want to limit TXdot's power on controlling our State's border. I for one am in support of the State of Texas purchasing APCs and tanks in order to combat the drug cartels.

God bless Texas!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/07/04/have-you-seen-the-bulletproof-texas-gunboats-equipped-with-automatic-machine-guns-that-will-battle-drug-cartels-on-the-water/
Brewha Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,161
ZRX1200 wrote:
I'd like to know where the landmines are, and why aren't there bull sharks in the Rio Grand

Z, the whole idea is that NO ONE knows where the landmines are - that's how they are supposed to work.

If it makes you fell better, last time I was at the Rio Grand I saw a Bull **** in the water......
ZRX1200 Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,580
I like going to boarder crossing and leaving 6 packs or Corona's that I filled with pee.
MACS Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,741
Yeah, you think that's bad?

Our war on drugs is less than 1% effective. We spend billions on that. I'd like to know why?

Here's a question for the folks against decriminalizing drugs: If they made meth and heroin legal would you do it? I'm going to assume your answer is the same as mine... hell no. (same as the vast majority of people)

So then, why would we not want to allow the retards doing drugs to do them until their heart is content... instead of paying to incarcerate them for years at a time?

California made mere possession an infraction. Cite and release. They thought that would decrease the population in jail/prison. Nope. The dopers need money to buy dope. So they commit felonies and end up in jail anyway.

I say instead of spending billions on the war, and millions more to incarcerate them... just spend millions on the dope and give it to the dopers for free. They'll do it until it kills them and we'll save the billions on the war on drugs.

I'm here to help balance the budget, folks...
frankj1 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
MACS wrote:
Yeah, you think that's bad?

Our war on drugs is less than 1% effective. We spend billions on that. I'd like to know why?

Here's a question for the folks against decriminalizing drugs: If they made meth and heroin legal would you do it? I'm going to assume your answer is the same as mine... hell no. (same as the vast majority of people)

So then, why would we not want to allow the retards doing drugs to do them until their heart is content... instead of paying to incarcerate them for years at a time?

California made mere possession an infraction. Cite and release. They thought that would decrease the population in jail/prison. Nope. The dopers need money to buy dope. So they commit felonies and end up in jail anyway.

I say instead of spending billions on the war, and millions more to incarcerate them... just spend millions on the dope and give it to the dopers for free. They'll do it until it kills them and we'll save the billions on the war on drugs.

I'm here to help balance the budget, folks...

why does this make sense to me?
free drugs, less crime, save tons of money...oddly coherent!
jjanecka Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 12-08-2015
Posts: 4,334
Sounds like a f'kin nightmare
TMCTLT Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
jjanecka wrote:
Because Texas has Instituted it's own "navy" by purchasing gunboats to patrol the rio grand. That's 90% of why the media is pitching such a fit about the police. They want to limit TXdot's power on controlling our State's border. I for one am in support of the State of Texas purchasing APCs and tanks in order to combat the drug cartels.

God bless Texas!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/07/04/have-you-seen-the-bulletproof-texas-gunboats-equipped-with-automatic-machine-guns-that-will-battle-drug-cartels-on-the-water/



I'm all for it as well, because not only do they engage in drug trafficking but worse in my mind is the Human trafficking they're involved in.
Mr. Jones Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,410
Somebody send a picture of one of those
TXdot gunboats to
The
Pictures: EVERYTHING ELSE forum
MACS Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,741
frankj1 wrote:
why does this make sense to me?
free drugs, less crime, save tons of money...oddly coherent!


Somebody is still 4 lower division classes shy of a BS in criminal justice... Anxious

I did a few papers on this subject. I should fire up my old laptop and see if they're still on there. I think I saved them all.
teedubbya Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I hope you did macs. I still go back to my health care relate ines to see how my thoughts have changed or solidified over time.
frankj1 Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
jjanecka wrote:
Sounds like a f'kin nightmare

Dooood! Free Drugs!
Stinkdyr Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 06-16-2009
Posts: 9,948
MACS wrote:
Yeah, you think that's bad?

Our war on drugs is less than 1% effective. We spend billions on that. I'd like to know why?

Here's a question for the folks against decriminalizing drugs: If they made meth and heroin legal would you do it? I'm going to assume your answer is the same as mine... hell no. (same as the vast majority of people)

So then, why would we not want to allow the retards doing drugs to do them until their heart is content... instead of paying to incarcerate them for years at a time?

California made mere possession an infraction. Cite and release. They thought that would decrease the population in jail/prison. Nope. The dopers need money to buy dope. So they commit felonies and end up in jail anyway.

I say instead of spending billions on the war, and millions more to incarcerate them... just spend millions on the dope and give it to the dopers for free. They'll do it until it kills them and we'll save the billions on the war on drugs.

I'm here to help balance the budget, folks...



See....now there u go again.....trying to use commonsense with Duhmericans.

Beer
Buckwheat Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 12,251
I have noticed that Trump hasn't mentioned the Wall or deportation of illegals in a while. I think his staff has convinced him that this isn't a realistic plan. fog
ZRX1200 Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,580
Or the Chamber of Commerce wing of the Republican party that loves slave labor promised to support him if he relented some ground.
jjanecka Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 12-08-2015
Posts: 4,334
Slave labor? Lol republicans don't want slave labor, that's a democrat concept. They're the people who want to tax 50% of your earnings.
Covfireman Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
jjanecka wrote:
Slave labor? Lol republicans don't want slave labor, that's a democrat concept. They're the people who want to tax 50% of your earnings.



That earning taxing thing isn't that a republican invention?
tailgater Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:
I hope you did macs. I still go back to my health care relate ines to see how my thoughts have changed or solidified over time.


Those aren't your thoughts solidifying.
Those are just solid BM's.

Covfireman Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
tailgater wrote:
Those aren't your thoughts solidifying.
Those are just solid BM's.




Wouldn't that make his thoughts **** ?
Users browsing this topic
Guest