Jezter13 wrote:My wall has always had sensors. You even quoted my saying as much.
And my wall always had cameras. In your "test", however, it was wall only vs camera only. You can go back and read it yourself.
Jezter13 wrote:Vibration and noise monitoring sensors.
What do you think they do?
What they say they do, I'd imagine. You're still basically arguing that a blind man (vibration/noise sensors) on the wall would be better at detecting illegals than a deaf man (camera).
Jezter13 wrote:Oh, and so you know. I design bridges and roads for a living. I also dabble in vertical construction as well. Part of what we do, when In urban environments, we have to set up Noise and Vibration monitoring plans as well as the setup. So, to answer your snarky remark in a prior post and before you do it again? Yeah, I'm probably a little bit more informed than are you and the idiots in D.C. that live comfortably in their walled in communities and homes.
:2thumbs
Good for you! I work with passive infrared / ultrasonic motion sensing technology. Sounds like we both know a good bit about things that would not necessarily work for border security. Let me ask you this:
What frequency would you use to detect the following?:
Tunneling under the wall (keeping in mind all means of tunneling)
Clumsily banging a ladder up against the wall
Lightly resting a ladder up against the wall
Wrapping the top of the ladder with towels and lightly resting it against the wall
Throwing a hook over the wall and climbing it
Taking your sweet ass time building some 10' stairs at various distances from the wall, carrying the stairs over to the wall and jumping over
Are you telling me that with all the variables covered above, there is not a single thing that could cause a false alarm AND that all of the above would set it off enough to be effective? I know I've asked this before, but that sounds like some pretty serious technology. Not your run-of-the-mill "someone broke my window" sensor. Could get expensive.
Jezter13 wrote:Cameras do not work. We have an endless supply of police records that prove cameras do not stop crime.
Cameras provide increased security, which is why everyone uses them.
Jezter13 wrote:"The path of least resistance" yeah, that invoke camera fear. Lmao.
I doubt many people are afraid of cameras or walls.
Jezter13 wrote:Walls are near 100% effective. Cameras will do what? Nothing. It'll just give us evidence of crossings and potentially the totals.
Which way do you think the cameras would be facing? The US side? :crazy The point of cameras is to detect people
approaching the wall so border security can be there to deter them or nab them when they come over. It also vastly improves the area covered, exactly what you claim vibration/noise sensors would do. I could be wrong, but I'm guessing there's a reason people use cameras over vibration/noise sensors at a rate of 100,000 to 1 (I'm guessing, of course).
PLEASE REMEMBER: I am not, nor was I ever, saying we should use cameras alone. That would be retarded. Walls PLUS detection. Look at all your anti-camera arguments. Now imagine how much LESS effective they would be if they were vibration/noise sensors. Is
that going to stop someone from robbing the liquor store? The argument here (again) is walls + cameras vs walls +vibration/noise sensors. We're not really having a conversation if you continue to remove the wall from my side of the debate.