by Alan Fernald

Created on: March 28, 2007   Last Updated: April 19, 2007

In the argument over a Southern fence, many people use foolish and misleading arguments to justify their opposal to the building of a barrier between the United States and Mexico.

I agree that there should be no wall, however, I prefer to base my opinion upon something other than rhetoric and fallacious statements.

Before I can explain why there should be no wall, let me first debunk some of the more twisted myths that have been developed:

Myth #1: A border fence would be racist!
Reality: A wall between countries has nothing to do with race, it has everything to do with National Sovereignity. When Saudi Arabia announced it's plan to build a wall on it's Northeastern border with Iraq, did anybody consider it racist? The fact is, the largest percentage of people entering our country illegally are crossing our Southern border. Common sense would dictate that this is the area that requires the highest levels of security.

Myth #2: A border fence would be like the Berlin wall that we wanted torn down!
Reality: The Berlin wall was built to keep people in, not out. This argument is similar to comparing a fence around your house with a fence around a prison. One is to keep people out, the other is to keep people in. A wall built to keep people from escaping is in essence, a denial of liberty and freedom.

Myth #3: A border fence will do no good
Reality: When the first fences were constructed on the US/Mexican border many years ago, the impact on illegal crossings for the purpose of trafficking in illicit drugs dropped to near zero.

As far as valid reasons why we should not build a fence, there are many.

#1: The amount of money spent to build a fence could more constructively be used to purchase additional sensor systems and to hire more personnel. Detection, capture and return to home country should be the goal of our border patrol. Physical barriers are appropriate for certain locations, however, they should not be depended upon to stop all illegal crossings, but rather, utilized to deter people from crossing in certain particular areas.

#2: Utilization of National Guard (after all, they are supposed to guard our nation, correct?) units capable of defending themselves and providing a protection force to our border patrol units would improve our border control for a significantly lower incremental cost. The National Guard is already being paid for, the border patrol is already being paid for, why not use them in a productive manner?

#3: The wall, as proposed, would require those wishing to cross our border illegally to perform their crossings at locations that are physically inhospitable. Despite my desire to stop illegal immigration and drug smuggling, unless the threat of force is indicated by those crossing illegally, we should not be forcing them to risk their lives to make the crossing through the deserts/mountains along our Southern border.

I agree that building a wall is not the way to resolve the issue of illegal immigration, though it has proven effective in combatting the smuggling of drugs. However, there are many other ways to spend this money which would have a much greater impact on the free flow we currently have on our Souther border.

Learn more about this author, Alan Fernald.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.