Shoot 'em down. Any drone or ultralight which crosses into our airspace is illegal invasion of our soverign nation. Same as walking across the border.
Will the folks on the ultralights die? Maybe. Same as someone breaking into a home and being shot by the homeowner.
Drones? Keep knocking them out of the sky and it will soon stop. They are not cheap.

Update: Mexico Agrees With Trump's New Border Plan

http://americanactionnews.com/article...

Drones have apparently been common. And we know about the notorious tunnels.

Wanting something for free is not a problem without emotional appeals to altruism and collectivism to demand it as a moral duty. That is why we have welfare statism to begin with. That won't go away without changing the wrong philosophical ideas so widely accepted.

One of the more intense, if not typical nationwide, problems with illegal border crossings is the violent gang attacks on private property owners along and near the Mexican border. Telling the victims that they have "second amendment rights" to engage in gun fights is not an answer.

Of course people have a right to defend themselves when necessary -- the police can't be everywhere. But protection against criminals is a major function of government, and government should be where crime is expected and common so innocent people do not have to engage in gun fights.

Besides, leftists own property, too, and if "no trespassing or we shoot" is the only policy for illegal immigration, leftists owning property along the border are happy to say, "here is gateway, come on in".

Anarchy relying on private gun fights to resolve problems isn't a solution to anything. Part of the problem is that we already have border anarchy in many areas as a consequence of border policy anarchy.

Getting rid of the free stuff is more complex, and you describe it well, but it is the free stuff that is the problem.

Also agree that the wall is a substitute. They are attempting to deny the reality that the free stuff is the problem, and then the reality that the whole culture has to change to remove the free stuff.

Go around it our fly over apparently.
By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Wednesday, December 19, 2018
Border Patrol agents tracked an ultralight aircraft as it crossed the U.S.-Mexico border and made it 30 miles into the country early Tuesday morning — and when they got to the landing spot, they found two Chinese men who had been smuggled in by the aircraft.
The ultralight had escaped, lifting back off and returning to Mexico, but agents say they did manage to nab a Mexican man waiting in a vehicle near the landing zone in southern California, apparently ready to pick up the Chinese men and deliver them to their destination.
Experts said they had seen ultralights, small aircraft powered by lawn mower-sized engines, used to drop loads of drugs in the U.S. But they were surprised to see them being used to ferry illegal immigrants.
“It’s disturbing,” said Chris Harris, who retired this year after a two-decade career as a Border Patrol agent in San Diego and who suggested it could be a way for cartels to get dangerous people across the border. “If you want to get some operatives in this country very quickly, that’s a way.”
Gloria I. Chavez, chief patrol agent in the El Centro sector of the Border Patrol, agreed that ultralights pose a threat to “national security.”

I just donated!
NOTICE...In just three days, Brian Kolfage’s GoFundMe campaign, “We The People Will Fund The Wall,” has racked up more than $2 million from more than 34,000 people, with a goal of raising $1 billion.
https://thebeardedpatriot.com/border-...

https://www.gofundme.com/TheTrumpWall

PS...donations were up to 5 million when I donated.

Voluntary walls with "no trespassing violators will be shot upon sight" work everytime they are built. Deed all public lands that boarder international boundaries back to private property. Allow the land owner to 2nd amendment rights.

Your crazy old live in and aunt is constantly going through your drawers and taking stuff then giving what she takes to her friends, and you’re so fixated on getting your new fence put up.
(An Analogy)

Well said.

I hardly think that we are in position here to make practical solutions, only high level suggestions.

As to whether or not this comes to a Civil war. I believe that we are basically in a cold civil war right now. I also do not believe that there is any hope of our side winning in a cold civil war. The other sides rhetoric is to loud and their systems are to entrenched. And while I do not wish for the bloodshed that I firmly believe will be necessary to turn things around. I also know that our side isn't ready as yet. We have not gelled together into a cohesive group. Too many on the Right think that the Left is only a little out of line and are willing to compromise in order to avoid violence. Too many feel that the Left is wrong but not about things that affect them so they do not care. Too many are just to darn passive. Not sure what it is going to take to get our side "Woke" but until it happens we will be forced to endure ever worsening violations of our rights.

So it's not a practical means to deal with the border problem now. If we -- or more precisely our followers -- eliminate welfare statism it will be because enough people have adopted a better philosophy after a long intellectual battle.

But there may very well ultimately be a civil war. Ayn Rand thought that it might come as a sense of life revolt against the intellectuals imposing collectivism, which would result in either civil war or dictatorship. Today it seems more likely to come (not now, but sometime in the future) as a senseless breakdown -- either from the left seeking more power, or from whatever is left of the 'right' opposing the practice of some form of statism but not knowing what to support and with no good principles behind it, leaving no "side" worthy of support.

Not certain that I believe that the elimination of welfare statism will happen at all. Much as I desire to see this. I believe that nothing short of Civil War can change this.

The "wall" has become a symbolic replacement for policy because Trump's emotional thinking is incapable of conceptual principles and policies. A lot of his emotional followers take it literally and are fixated on "The Wall" as if that were a solution, substituting a physical "wall" for rational principles and policies.

It is good that Trump is continuing to fight without backing down, at least so far, but his jumbled goals and slogans also include bad criteria like economic protectionism. The result is an anti-intellectual zoo that buries rational discussion of the proper principles and policies for an orderly implementation of the right to immigrate without threatening us with more welfare statism.

Yup.

Exactly.

The thought, work, and results to eliminate welfare statism also require time. The wall controversy is contemporary. Appeal to resentment and opposition to the looting to help motivate those with the best sense of life, but don't expect eliminating welfare statism to happen anywhere near soon enough to stop the invasion by invitation from the left.

I have written about this many times, including on this page. In particular, a wall is only as useful as the policy behind it.

You explained the full meaning quite thoroughly.

Obviously I have over simplified the matter but this doesn't mean that the solution isn't viable it only means that it would require significantly more thought and work.

I personally believe that we should end ALL forms of welfare. Both internally and externally. That would free up significant revenue and end the incentive to come for many of those who ride the system presently.

Yet it did, but it wasn't enough to explain the meaning.

A strategy of "cutting off aid" to Mexico with the expectation that the money would be used for a wall is not a practical solution because the money is not the reason a wall isn't being built.

If it's all but impossible to achieve an end to foreign aid welfare in the foreseeable future (not forever) then it's not a practical solution as a source of money for anything, let alone a border wall. And even with money not diverted to Mexico, with the current welfare magnet and the ongoing threat of an 'invasion by invitation' to help enact socialism here, they would still come. Regardless of saving money not sent to Mexico, Congress would still have to appropriate funding for a wall before it could be built, and more importantly, enact rational immigration laws to make a wall meaningful. Money no longer going to Mexico would not be enough for that to happen since collectivism, not money, is why the immigration problem is not being addressed.

Your suggestion versus a criticism.

Yep. And Israel's policy is united while USA politics behind a border policy is sharply divided.