Will the Border Ever Be Completely Secure?

This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," April 29, 2010. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Arizona sheriff Clarence W. Dupnik calls the new immigration law racist and stupid, and that's not all. He also calls the new law "fornickaboobery." Now, what does that mean? Pima County Sheriff Clarence W. Dupnik joins us live.

Sir, before we even get to the substance, I'm a little bit curious what that word means. It's sort of an interesting word. What does that mean?

CLARENCE DUPNIK, SHERIFF OF PIMA COUNTY, ARIZ.: Well, I think it's a word that has been made up to express certain feelings. It's a very flexible word. As a matter of fact, it's not in the dictionary.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, it's a very colorful word, and we even looked it up and we thought we'd have a little fun with it only because we couldn't find it, as well. OK, now, you don't like this new immigration law. Is that correct, sir?

DUPNIK: It is. But before we get there, could I interject a couple of things into the previous discussion that we just heard?

VAN SUSTEREN: Sure. Go ahead, sir.

DUPNIK: Well, there was a discussion about the security of the border. And I think the statement of, like, 200,000 -- over 200,000 people were arrested in the -- or was it 2,000 - 200,000 arrested in the Tucson sector last year, and that was an indication of how severe the problem is and the border is unsecure. The fact of the matter is that is the lowest number in about 15 years. In 2000, that number was two thirds...

VAN SUSTEREN: Which means either -- either means you're really getting good at your work or you're really not doing well at your work and others are slipping in.

DUPNIK: Well, in 2000, there were two thirds more people arrested in the Tucson sector than there was last year. So in my judgment, they've -- and it's not the state and locals that really are making that kind of an impact on the border. It's, in fact, the border patrol. I think they do a very good job. And I think the border is more secure today than it was in the year 2000.

Is it ever going to be completely secure? Not in my opinion. But there are a lot of things that ought to be done to make it more secure, and I don't think that the federal government has done that in the last 15 years, the things that ought to be done. To your question...

VAN SUSTEREN: And let me just say, sir -- let me -- let me just say sir, I've been down to the border. I've seen how hard everybody does work at the border. And I don't mean to take away from any one of them and all the hard work they've done. My question -- my more pointed questions are, is the fact that, you know, it's much more still has to be done. And there can be an awful lot of heartbreak, whether it's drugs being brought into the country or whether (INAUDIBLE) a chase into this country where you're chasing a drug dealer and there's a car accident and some innocent person - - I mean, I don't mean to take away from the hard work, but rather to point out that we got a lot more work to do and that Mexico is incredibly violent and it's right there at our border.

But go ahead, sir. I don't want to eat up all the time talking. Why don't you like this law?

DUPNIK: No doubt about it, Greta. But let me ask you a question. You know, the national media has been covering this story now for a couple of days, reference to the law, which I'll be happy to talk about. But why do you think the legislature enacted that law?

VAN SUSTEREN: Why do I think -- here's my sort of curious thought, is that I think that there's a lot of frustration. California has -- and Texas have gotten a little more support, I think. And I think that Arizona is getting hit pretty hard, and I suspect it's somewhat of a wake-up call. It's sort of a call from desperations because you could say it was political, but the -- and Governor Brewer signed it, but Governor Napolitano was likewise complaining about it.

And I know Senator McCain and Senator Kyl have been complaining for years about it. And I know going back to many different administrations, people have been complaining about it. So it may have some political element for it, but it also is a wake-up call by the state to the feds, like, you know, Get off your whatever and do something.

But anyway, we got to go, so I'm going to give you a quick 30 seconds, and then I want you to come back, sir, because we haven't talked enough.

DUPNIK: Yes, I don't doubt that at all. But the fact of the matter is, we already have the authority to stop and detain and turn over to the border patrol or to ICE illegal aliens. And this law simply has a lot of provisions in there that are incredible. You, as a lawyer, I think would recognize this. I know your previous guest said -- kept using the word "reasonable" grounds, or "reasonable cause," I think he said.

VAN SUSTEREN: And you know what? I'm...

DUPNIK: The problem he had is...

VAN SUSTEREN: ... getting the -- will you come back again, sir, because I got to go and I'm getting the music. But you and I really -- we have much more. And I'm getting the music, so we're going to get cut off by the computer. We got to have you come back. Next week, sir, let's have more of a talk, sir. I got to go. I'm sorry. Thank you, sir.

Content and Programming Copyright 2010 Fox News Network, Inc. Copyright 2010 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.