Subject: Border Controls (was Re: Vermont - Quebec)<br/>
Date: Oct 04, 2002 @ 23:26<br/>
Author: Kevin Meynell (Kevin Meynell &lt;kevin@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="7492.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="7504.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic7185.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="7502.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="7504.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1077109754">Averill,<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt;When dealing with sovereign nations, i.e. US and Canada, you can&#39;t make a <br/>
&gt;law but must have a treaty. That&#39;s why when I said earlier that there <br/>
&gt;should be a customs/immigration union between the two nations, it would <br/>
&gt;have to be negotiated among &quot;equals&quot;<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>Sure, but there&#39;s still no inherent reason why you need border controls <br/>
between some countries (USCA is the most obvious example), and why <br/>
Schengen-type agreements couldn&#39;t be negotiated. In fact, it really only at <br/>
the start of the 20th century that countries started thinking about <br/>
regulating the movement of people across their borders, something that <br/>
gained rapid momentum after the outbreak of the First World War.<br/>
<br/>
Regards,<br/>
<br/>
Kevin Meynell</div>