I take a lot of grief for my link to Michael Bryan's "Blog for Arizona." Although he may flirt with loony extremism from time to time (he did back away from the "Loose Change" 9-11 Truther videos when presented with Popular Mechanics' rebuttal) and his language gets a little rough, he does have these shining moments of brilliance.
Here is his latest gem:
Even though there is probably half a napkin's worth of issues that we may agree on, this is quite simply the best take down of the "temporary checkpoints are more effective" myth that has been done in the local blogosphere (although I am not sure that this was the reason he authored the post).
I'll repeat what I have always said. There are many reasons to prefer temporary checkpoints to permanent checkpoints, and some of them may be good reasons, especially for the communities where they are erected. However, NONE of those reasons have anything to do with more effectively enforcing or patrolling traffic coming across the border either as contraband or illegal immigration. If this is your main concern, permanent checkpoints are always the better way to go.