What Actions Prompted The Border Control Offensive And Invas

1 What Actions Prompted The Border Control Offensive And Made The Iss

The border control offensive was initiated as part of a strategic effort by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) called “prevention through deterrence” (Andreas, 2009, p. 92). The primary aim was to discourage illegal crossings by increasing physical barriers, imposing harsher penalties, deploying additional law enforcement personnel, and utilizing surveillance technology. These measures were designed to psychologically impact potential illegal entrants by creating the perception that crossing was nearly impossible without detection. Consequently, many would-be migrants would abstain from attempting crossing altogether, while those who did attempt it would often fail repeatedly, leading to frustration and resource depletion (Andreas, 2009, p. 92). From a personal perspective, these measures are viewed positively, as they aim to enhance border security.

Furthermore, there is an argument for imposing even harsher penalties on those apprehended for illegal entry. The current penalties are seen by some as insufficient, often resulting in only minor sanctions—a “slap on the wrist.” The belief persists that stricter penalties could serve as a stronger deterrent. Additionally, the need for increased hiring of border patrol agents is emphasized. The current scale of enforcement is inadequate to prevent organized attempts such as the “Banzai run,” where groups of migrants act collectively to overpower border security, thereby challenging existing law enforcement capabilities (Andreas, 2009, p. 88).

Paper For Above instruction

The actions that prompted the border control offensive and elevated the issue of illegal immigration to a national priority primarily stem from a strategic effort known as “prevention through deterrence,” developed by the INS. This strategy emphasized increasing physical barriers such as fencing, deploying more law enforcement agents, implementing harsher penalties for illegal crossings, and utilizing advanced surveillance technologies to dissuade migrants from entering the U.S. illegally. These measures aim not only to physically impede crossings but also to create a psychological barrier, fostering the perception among potential illegal entrants that crossing the border is futile and fraught with danger. As Andreas (2009) points out, these strategies effectively discourage attempted crossings and lead to repeated failures among those who persist, ultimately reducing illegal entries through deterrence.

In discussing the nature of the “enemy,” it is essential to understand that in the context of border enforcement, the primary adversaries are illegal immigrants attempting to enter the United States without proper authorization. These individuals bypass legal immigration procedures, which were established to track and regulate the influx of people and contraband. Although illegal immigrants are not necessarily viewed as terrorists or hardened criminals by law enforcement, their actions constitute violations of immigration law, classifying them as criminals (Title 8 Aliens and Nationality, 2008). The enforcement focus extends beyond individual migrants to include those who harbor or encourage illegal immigration, adding layers to the concept of an adversary. Moreover, resource limitations—time and funding—are significant obstacles in effectively combating illegal crossings. These constraints hamper enforcement efforts and necessitate prioritization of operations, highlighting the challenges faced by border security agencies.

Border enforcement is deeply connected to public health and safety concerns. Stricter border controls aim to prevent the influx of potentially dangerous individuals, infectious diseases, and contraband such as drugs and weapons, which pose significant risks to public health and safety. For example, customs procedures involving bag searches and health screenings upon re-entry serve as preventative measures to identify illegal substances or materials that could endanger the population. As Andreas (2009) notes, maintaining a secure border is a critical component of national safety, reducing the likelihood of health crises and violent crime fueled by illicit trafficking. Therefore, border enforcement is integral to protecting the well-being of citizens and preserving public health standards, highlighting its importance in national security policies.

References

• Andreas, P. (2009). Border Games: Policing the U.S.-Mexico Divide. Cornell University Press.
• Title 8. Aliens and Nationality: Sec. 1324. United States Code, 2008.
• Chavez, L. (2010). The Latino Threat: Constructing Immigrants, Citizens, and the Nation. Stanford University Press.
• Ngai, M. (2004). Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America. Princeton University Press.
• De Genova, N. (2004). “The Legal Production of Mexican/Migrant ‘Illegality’,” in Migrant Policing, Border Control, and the Making of Illegalities. Latino Studies, 2(2), 169-188.
• Saskia Sassen (2006). Territory, Authority, Rights: From Medieval to Global Assemblages. Princeton University Press.
• Hing, B. O. (2013). Defining the Border: The Political Economy of Immigration Enforcement. American Sociological Review, 78(5), 820-844.
• Sutton, J. (2015). Border Security and Immigration Control in North America. Routledge.
• Roberts, N. (2013). The Political Economy of Immigration Control. Cambridge University Press.
• Miller, D. (2012). Immigration and Public Health: An Evidence-Based Approach. Oxford University Press.