by "gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
Published 06/01/2017 at 00:56
by "gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
Published 06/01/2017 at 00:56
Tags: Borders
STARS: 0
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
I’ve already had friends get their phones searched without grounds when crossing the border, but demanding social media passwords too? This is some weird shit you guys.
"DrJohannVegas" (drjohannvegas)
06/01/2017 at 00:58, STARS: 2
Folks wanted weird, apparently.
"Berang" (berang)
06/01/2017 at 01:03, STARS: 6
the world can go fuck itself
"CB" (jrcb)
06/01/2017 at 01:04, STARS: 4
I’m currently refusing to go to the US because this shit is bananas. B-a-n-a-n-a-s.
"gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
06/01/2017 at 01:05, STARS: 0
That seems to be the idea, and judging by the lack of tourism the states is getting compared to pre-trump, I’d say it’s working.
"Xyl0c41n3" (i-am-xyl0c41n3)
06/01/2017 at 01:16, STARS: 1
If your friends had their phones confiscated and taken out of their sight by border agents you can be assured everything on those phones was seen. Even if the phones were password/passcode protected. Even if they were protected by biometric locks (like iPhone fingerprint locks).
"gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
06/01/2017 at 01:19, STARS: 0
If I remember correctly, they were told to unlock and hand over their phones, or else they wouldn’t be allowed to cross the border
"TheHondaBro" (wwaveform)
06/01/2017 at 01:28, STARS: 3
You don’t want to be here anyway.
"Berang" (berang)
06/01/2017 at 01:30, STARS: 4
why do we let one man ruin so much
"Stef Schrader" (stefschrader)
06/01/2017 at 01:34, STARS: 11
Well, I ain’t sayin’ 420penisballs69n!ce aloud, so I guess I’d never be allowed back in.
(OH! WHOOPS. FORGET WHAT I JUST WROTE. NOBODY SAW THAT.)
"Stef Schrader" (stefschrader)
06/01/2017 at 01:35, STARS: 0
Weird is our mayoral candidate who used to publicly chill in a thong.
This is just bad.
"DrJohannVegas" (drjohannvegas)
06/01/2017 at 01:39, STARS: 0
Please don’t, even indirectly and accidentally, ask for “this” in a thong. I beseech you.
"DrJohannVegas" (drjohannvegas)
06/01/2017 at 01:40, STARS: 1
Nice.
"DrJohannVegas" (drjohannvegas)
06/01/2017 at 01:40, STARS: 0
It’s not one man, though.
"Berang" (berang)
06/01/2017 at 01:57, STARS: 5
why do we let one animate anal fissure ruin so much
"DrJohannVegas" (drjohannvegas)
06/01/2017 at 02:18, STARS: 1
the shit and the blood seem to have gotten all over the bandages, preventing them from stopping the weeping.
"Svend" (svend)
06/01/2017 at 06:20, STARS: 0
From what I’ve seen border agents in Canada, America, Australia, New Zealand and the U.K. can ask to see contents of your phones for illegal and illicit material if they have reason to believe there may be some on.
One American even had his NASA phone taken off him and ordered to give his password or he wouldn’t be allowed into the country, his own country.
And that was on the 30th of January, 2017.
http://gizmodo.com/border-agent-demands-nasa-scientist-unlock-phone-before-1792275942
Border Agents and TSA were already crossing their remit, now it’s being made into law.
"TorqueToYield" (torquetoyield)
06/01/2017 at 07:21, STARS: 1
The ACLU is recommending you encrypt and ship the phone to yourself and cross the border with no electronics.
I wish I was joking. https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/can-border-agents-search-your-electronic-devices-its-complicated
"Stapleface" (patrickgruden)
06/01/2017 at 07:23, STARS: 0
Me showing someone my phone should have no bearing on my being allowed in to a country. That’s just insane. I live a boring life and have nothing to hide, but it’s principle. Why do they need to see my phone? And, is it even legal?
"Rainbow" (rainbeaux)
06/01/2017 at 07:34, STARS: 0
I wish I had 420 penis balls.
"jariten1781" (jariten1781)
06/01/2017 at 07:44, STARS: 0
Yeah, it’s most likely legal (though a specific case hasn’t gone all the way through the wringer yet). Supreme Court has ruled (many times over many decades) that the 4th amendment does not apply at the border. They can search your car/person/papers/effects/etc. without a warrant. The govt will argue and the court will likely agree that this is no different than searching a car for contraband (drugs, explosives, counterfeit money/goods, illicit material, smuggled goods, animal parts, foreign plants etc.) at the crossing.
"Your boy, BJR" (jerseyshoreben)
06/01/2017 at 07:48, STARS: 0
#weelectednazis2017
#gestapocreep
"DipodomysDeserti" (dipodomysdeserti)
06/01/2017 at 07:49, STARS: 0
Keep in mind that regular people (border patrol and ICE agents) are the individuals actually carrying out these searches and seizures. They’ve been treating people coming in from our southern border like this looong before Trump was in office. I had a coworker who used to get his entire car tore apart by BP every time he crossed because, accordingly to the agents, he drove a drug dealer car (Chrysler 300).
"Stapleface" (patrickgruden)
06/01/2017 at 07:52, STARS: 0
Well, that’s a pretty liberal interpretation of the law. But, really, should I be surprised? And, while this is legal (due to the aforementioned 4th amendment), perhaps they should close the loophole. Why do people have less rights at a border? I get it, for some things. But a digital device should not be subject to the same search. I’m not hiding a kilo in my cell phone.
"KusabiSensei - Captain of the Toronto Maple Leafs" (kusabisensei)
06/01/2017 at 08:03, STARS: 0
Can I just point out that this is actually very embarrassing for those of us who actually realise that finding a needle in a haystack by doing cell phone and social media searches is at best futile?
Please don’t take away my NEXUS card.
"jariten1781" (jariten1781)
06/01/2017 at 08:48, STARS: 1
Well, it’s way more nuanced than I put it in the first comment attempting brevity. It’s not that people have less rights at the border...I said ‘4th amendment does not apply...’ but more accurately you’d say that the court has ruled that 4th amendment does still apply but is not violated by searches of any type at a border crossing.
The argument (with a lot of precedent behind it) states that border crossings and their surrogates (international airports, shipping ports) are unique locations. They offer specific opportunities to undermine the sovereignty of the State and her people that are not instantiated within the borders of the country. Thus, in those locations the balance tilts and the interests of the government (and, by extension, the capital P People) outweigh any single individual’s private interests. Thus, while the fourth amendment does apply, searches at international borders are ‘reasonable’ and therefore not a violation of the ‘unreasonable search and seizure’ clause.
There’re a pile of cases running around the circuit courts right now discussing whether electronics should be considered differently than physical searches. We may see the court rule that searching those items is overly onerous by virtue of the sheer quantity of private data they may hold and that, in fact, personal interests do outweigh the govt’s in that situation...but I doubt it. Precedent is strong and they’ve previously ruled that body cavity searches and involuntary X-rays are allowed so I doubt they’d rule that searching your phone is worse than either of those. Who knows though, the court drifts over time and perhaps they’ll overturn or rule that there is a new ‘test’ that must be followed before searching items that potentially contain a vast cache of private information.
"gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
06/01/2017 at 09:55, STARS: 0
Wow. That’s pretty screwed up
"gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
06/01/2017 at 09:57, STARS: 0
What a time to be alive
"gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
06/01/2017 at 10:00, STARS: 0
Ugh, that’s really frustrating. The concept of that being good enough reason to search someone’s car is insane
"gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
06/01/2017 at 10:02, STARS: 0
I would imagine so, I mean I’m feeling a bit embarrassed that my government isn’t doing more to protect Canadians privacy.
"DipodomysDeserti" (dipodomysdeserti)
06/01/2017 at 10:06, STARS: 0
Legally, they don’t need any reason or probable cause to search your stuff at the border, US citizen or not. Constitutional rights are suspended at ports of entry. The real sketchy part is what areas are defined as “ports of entry”. On the southern border it has been taken to mean areas pretty far away from the actual border.
https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone
"gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
06/01/2017 at 10:20, STARS: 0
I knew that, I just still find I’d disturbing. I didn’t know about the border zone thing though, that’s even more disturbing
"DipodomysDeserti" (dipodomysdeserti)
06/01/2017 at 10:32, STARS: 0
Yeah, when I lived in Tucson it was pretty common to see Border Patrol roaming around the city. I have even seen them up on the I10 in between Phoenix and Tucson.
"gmctavish needs more space" (gmctavish)
06/01/2017 at 11:10, STARS: 0
Wow. I’m not sure what to say, other than, that continues to be disturbing