[Ginaz]

It appears US customs agents can seize and detain anyones laptop, cell phone or any other type of electronic device without a warrant or without reasonable grounds. Apparently, they can do this whenever they want for whatever reason they want. If you don't allow them access to the device voluntarily, like giving them your password, then they can take it from you. Wow.

http://www.cbc.ca/co...r-searches.html

Edit: I'm not sure if this is the way things are in Canada. Its very possible.

[Shayde]

The patriot act gave a lot of powers like this.

[Ohlo Da'Aguia]

The reality is, this isn't really any different than them being able to look through your luggage or any packages you have. They've long had the right to search whatever you're bringing into the country.

Where this becomes a perceived invasion into privacy is that we carry far more personal "things" (info) on our laptops than we would in our suitcase. But then, back in the day of file cabinets holding all your info, you didn't take that with you on international flights and if you did, you could bet they'd reserve the right to search it. I mean, already they have the right to ask you to unlock a secure briefcase that might contain personal information or documents. This just takes that to the electronic storage level.

I'm not surprised by this at all, and I'm not nearly as outraged as many others since I see it as a natural progression. It's simply society catching up with technology. I'm also not worried about it, because the reality is that they simply don't have the manpower to go through everything and while they "can" search/seize anyone's, they aren't going to unless you give them cause for suspicion.

And I guarantee that within the next few years, EVERY country will have a policy like this. This isn't just a Patriot Act thing.

[Shayde]

It's a patriot act thing, because they can't do this within the US without a warrant, and they used to not be able to do it at all. They should still require a warrant.

Checking for drugs is one thing. There is NOTHING routine about searching a laptop or cel phone. You can bring nothing illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat or a controlled substance on either item.

It's a clear violation that gets a pass because we've given up our basic rights since 9/11.

The only reason they're even trying this is because they're already sifting through ALL e-mails going through the internet, and they thought there's ONE way they can't access.

[Astrolite]

Edit: I'm not sure if this is the way things are in Canada. Its very possible.

They do this in Canada too. When I went to Ottawa the border agent searched one of my laptops (personal, not business) for what he said was "child pornography and propaganda". All he did was search for image extensions while I taunted them for their search techniques.

[Shayde]

Propaganda? Did he really say PROPAGNDA??

Hope you didn't have Fox News links.

[Ohlo Da'Aguia]

You can bring nothing illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat or a controlled substance on either item.

It always amuses me how blind to the truth you become when you feel that you're being unfairly persecuted.

[Shayde]

You can bring nothing illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat or a controlled substance on either item.

It always amuses me how blind to the truth you become when you feel that you're being unfairly persecuted.

It always amuses me when you attack me personally when your argument falls flat.

[Ohlo Da'Aguia]

You can bring nothing illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat or a controlled substance on either item.

It always amuses me how blind to the truth you become when you feel that you're being unfairly persecuted.

It always amuses me when you attack me personally when your argument falls flat.

Saying that you're blind to the truth is not a personal attack. But hey, that's nothing new. Every single time that someone contradicts you, it's a "personal attack" according to you. Every single time someone tells you that you're wrong (which is very, very often), you either accuse them of making personal attacks, or at the least you fall back on the "you're just being a dick/asshole/whatever".

Here's today's short lesson for you. A personal attack would be something along the lines of "You're an overly paranoid sheep that simply jumps on the latest cause to be enraged about because you find it satisfying to fight the system even when you don't truly understand why you're fighting it". Being a dick would be to say something like "Shayde, you're an idiot. Everything is unfair or unjust to you."

Let me ask you this, Shayde... can a computer virus be stored on a laptop or a cell phone? Can a computer virus cause catastrophic economic damage if it infects the right systems?

The answer, to both questions, is "yes". So clearly you CAN bring something illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat on either item. And don't give me any of that "yeah, but what are the chances of that" garbage... the point is that it COULD happen, and that's merely one example. There are actually plenty more. So the truth of the matter is clearly something you're unwilling to see. You're blind to it.

Whether or not that's enough of a justification for the policy is a matter that could be argued. And it quite likely will be. But to simply dismiss it as non-exist is the only arguement that's come up so far in this thread that actually falls flat.

[Shayde]

"blind to the truth" is an attack on my ability to comprehend the situation.

"when you feel that you're being unfairly persecuted" is an attack on my beliefs in the situation.

I stated clearly that there is nothing on a laptop or cel phone that can't be e-mailed over the internet, burned to any medium, etc. That there is no contraband that can be passed through a computer that border security has any legal business trying to stop. Period.

So using this for an excuse to search laptops or cel phones without a warrant is the EXACT SAME as searching without probable cause. Searching for drugs is one thing, because you can't e-mail those.

This is the government using its power against us and removing yet another right step by systematic step, and your attitude towards it is just another example of enabling this to happen.

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;

And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;

And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;

And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up." - Martin Niemöller

Now they're coming for our RIGHTS one by one. When are you going to speak up?

[Ohlo Da'Aguia]

"blind to the truth" is an attack on my ability to comprehend the situation.

"when you feel that you're being unfairly persecuted" is an attack on my beliefs in the situation.

And I suppose that when you got a question wrong in high school, that was an attack on your knowledge, right? According to you, anything that's not agreement or praise is an attack.

"Blind to the truth" is an assement. You can't/don't/won't see (you say it doesn't exist) the truth (which is that illegal things can be transported via laptop or cell phone).

Now, had I said "because you have the cognizance of a bowl of fruit"... that's an attack on your ability to comprehend.

"When you feel that you're being unfairly persecuted" is an observation. Do you feel that you're being unfairly persecuted if your laptop is searched? Apparently you do. You think it's unjust, ie unfair. You think it's persecution since you feel that by having it done is akin to calling you guilty prior to the evidence of you actually doing anything illegal. And, is this all your opinon? Seems to be, so it must be how you "feel".

Again, had I followed up with something like "whenever your Chicken Little syndrome kicks in and you freak out about the sky falling because you're a paranoid nutjob", that would have been more along the lines of an attack on your beliefs.

I stated clearly that there is nothing on a laptop or cel phone that can't be e-mailed over the internet, burned to any medium, etc.

No. Once again, and this is all too common an occurance with you, that's NOT what you said, and NOT what I contradicted. You said

You can bring nothing illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat or a controlled substance on either item.

Those are clearly entirely different statements.

Now... because I know you have trouble retaining the same opinion from one post to the next (as can be demonstrated in many other threads on these very boards, therefor making that statement an observation and not an attack)... had you actually said that there's nothing that can be transported via laptop that cannot also be transported other ways, I'd have agreed. But you didn't say that, you said there's nothing that can be transported via laptop... period. And that's where you're wrong. And that's where you're blind to the truth, since the truth is that you CAN transport illegal things via laptop or cellphone, and you deny this truth.

But of course, pointing out your inconsistency of view, and the inaccuracy of your statement, is just an attack. So fine, if anything is an attack, then from now on I'll just say "You're a paranoid nutjob" leave it at that. At least then when you say I'm just attacking you, you'll actually be right. Which will be a first.

[Ginaz]

The reality is, this isn't really any different than them being able to look through your luggage or any packages you have. They've long had the right to search whatever you're bringing into the country.

Where this becomes a perceived invasion into privacy is that we carry far more personal "things" (info) on our laptops than we would in our suitcase. But then, back in the day of file cabinets holding all your info, you didn't take that with you on international flights and if you did, you could bet they'd reserve the right to search it. I mean, already they have the right to ask you to unlock a secure briefcase that might contain personal information or documents. This just takes that to the electronic storage level.

I'm not surprised by this at all, and I'm not nearly as outraged as many others since I see it as a natural progression. It's simply society catching up with technology. I'm also not worried about it, because the reality is that they simply don't have the manpower to go through everything and while they "can" search/seize anyone's, they aren't going to unless you give them cause for suspicion.

And I guarantee that within the next few years, EVERY country will have a policy like this. This isn't just a Patriot Act thing.

I can see doing this, maybe, for foreigners trying to gain entry into a country, but doing it to their own citizens seems over the line. What are they going to do if their returning citizens refuse to let them look through their laptops? They have to let them back into their country at some point. The fact is no police officer can randomly come up to you on the street and demand to look into your computer or cell phone without a warrant. Why should they be able to do it at the border?

[Ozz]

A little too close to illegal search and siezure for my tastes. The less government involvement in anything the better. Big brother is watching you.

And to stir the pot a little more in the same vein.

Insurance Companies are Watching You Too!

Health and Life insurance companies are starting to use your private medical data, in this case perscription history, to decide whether to cover you or not (more than likely not). Personal privacy and freedoms are taking a major dump in this country. So much for the ideals of the founding fathers.

[Shayde]

I stated clearly that there is nothing on a laptop or cel phone that can't be e-mailed over the internet, burned to any medium, etc.

No. Once again, and this is all too common an occurance with you, that's NOT what you said, and NOT what I contradicted. You said

You can bring nothing illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat or a controlled substance on either item.

Those are clearly entirely different statements.

Because your comprehension of my first statement was incorrect, I clarified with the second statement. You're focusing on the trivial differences of the grammar of one sentence in a larger post, more than the substance of the message, which both times was...

There is nothing dangerous that can be brought on either medium that you can't transmit another easier way. So a search of a laptop or cel phone is ludicrous because it's not the standard means of transporting either item. What this boils down to is an illegal search because there is NO PROBABLE CAUSE, since there is no probability that a virus or even kiddie porn (which ISN'T their intent to stop) would be transported in that medium. They're not looking for those items.

You can search for drugs when entering a country because that is one primary way drugs are imported. You can get kiddie porn and viruses from the airport's own free Wi-fi.

It's all about the need for probable cause to perform a warrantless search. They just removed that right. One of many since 9/11.

First it was the non-americans who have lost their rights,
Now it is Americans who travel,
Next it's everyone else.

[Shayde]

A little too close to illegal search and siezure for my tastes. The less government involvement in anything the better. Big brother is watching you.

And to stir the pot a little more in the same vein.

Insurance Companies are Watching You Too!

Health and Life insurance companies are starting to use your private medical data, in this case perscription history, to decide whether to cover you or not (more than likely not). Personal privacy and freedoms are taking a major dump in this country. So much for the ideals of the founding fathers.

Auto insurance companies are using the computerized black box in newer cars that monitor all your speed data to refuse coverage as well. Hello Big Brother!

[Ohlo Da'Aguia]

The reality is, this isn't really any different than them being able to look through your luggage or any packages you have. They've long had the right to search whatever you're bringing into the country.

Where this becomes a perceived invasion into privacy is that we carry far more personal "things" (info) on our laptops than we would in our suitcase. But then, back in the day of file cabinets holding all your info, you didn't take that with you on international flights and if you did, you could bet they'd reserve the right to search it. I mean, already they have the right to ask you to unlock a secure briefcase that might contain personal information or documents. This just takes that to the electronic storage level.

I'm not surprised by this at all, and I'm not nearly as outraged as many others since I see it as a natural progression. It's simply society catching up with technology. I'm also not worried about it, because the reality is that they simply don't have the manpower to go through everything and while they "can" search/seize anyone's, they aren't going to unless you give them cause for suspicion.

And I guarantee that within the next few years, EVERY country will have a policy like this. This isn't just a Patriot Act thing.

I can see doing this, maybe, for foreigners trying to gain entry into a country, but doing it to their own citizens seems over the line. What are they going to do if their returning citizens refuse to let them look through their laptops? They have to let them back into their country at some point. The fact is no police officer can randomly come up to you on the street and demand to look into your computer or cell phone without a warrant. Why should they be able to do it at the border?

Doing it to returning citizens does initially seem to be taking things a lot further than just doing it to visiting foreigners, but then you run into some complications if you start saying that certain people are exempt. You could get people with falsified documents making them appear to be citizens, you could get citizens who are moles or who have simply been paid enough to do a job, or even become disgruntled and decided to act out against domestic interests. There's also the inevitable law-suit where visiting foreigners cry out about discrimination or something. (I don't agree with those lawsuits being allowed, but they do unfortunately happen).

Yeah, it does make it very vague and easier to abuse the policy, but there's something to be said for rules that effect everyone equally, regardless of nationality.

As to the whole thing about police randomly searching you on the street... true, they can't just do that. But passing through customs isn't really equavalent to that. It's more like entering a courthouse, where they can search you. It's a specifically designated gateway to an area that, without proper identification, credentials, or screening, you could be denied access to. That's why I see crossing the border as something totally different. Going back to the courthouse example, once you're inside, they won't continue to randomly search you and such... because by being in it's assumed that you didn't get anything in past the borders (door) since that's where everyone is checked.

The real issue that should probably be addressed is why do policies this general need to exist. This current administration has its issues, no doubt... but as stated early, this isn't just the US doing this now. So it's not entirely because of some control freaks in DC that go overboard. I think a lot of this stuff stems from all those cases where there's obviously been a crime but for whatever reason the suspect (who really is guilty) walks because of some technicality that makes the evidence inadmissable. So often it's a very small minute detail that caused the evidence to become inadmissable, and so it almost seems to me that policies like this are really just attempts to remove the possibilities of those technicalities existing.

Here's kind of an example of what I mean. Here in Oregon, we are a "right to work state". There's a lot of legal definition behind that, but one of the guiding results is that an employer can fire you at any time, without prior notice, for no reason at all if they choose. What that did is it helped elimate a lot of those "wrongful termination" lawsuits where someone was a totally useless jackass that deserved to be canned, but they were able to sue their former employer because maybe they didn't feel they'd been given enough "warning in advance" of possible termination. I've seen cases like that where some guy that works the graveyard shift at a gas station gets fired because he's caught on camera stealing from the register, and his suit claims that he was never given a written warning and a chance to "correct the behavior". It's silly, but it happens. So they make the law more open ended and say there doesn't have to be a reason or warning, and suits like that stop. There are still discrimination suits and such where there's evidence, but the inane ones go away because they lose all their supporting loopholes.

I could be wrong, but it seems to me that these sort of open-ended policies about searches at airports are similarly motivated. Make the law say "anyone, anytime for any reason" and you remove the possibility of something claiming that they were just being profiled or something when they are actually caught doing something illegal. There may be a better way, but one has yet to be presented, honestly.

[Supra Boy]

Whats interesting is the company I work for does work for the DOJ and DOHS, we carry electronic data from outside the country that is protected by the "US Protective Order" which means Mr. Homeland Security man doesn't have clearance to see it, you should see their face when you show them the document stating who you work for, they get all like whoa, why are you flying commercial airlines, lol. Then you get fast tracked through all the security. We even travel within the states with this data, we don't ship it, we don't check a bag with it, we carry it on the plane with us, we don't have to put the data through the scanners we don't have to do anything once we show them our credentials we just walk on through. I've only ever done it once, but we have guys thats all they do is travel collecting and transporting data between our facility and various locations.

[creeva]

It's a patriot act thing, because they can't do this within the US without a warrant, and they used to not be able to do it at all. They should still require a warrant.

Checking for drugs is one thing. There is NOTHING routine about searching a laptop or cel phone. You can bring nothing illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat or a controlled substance on either item.

It's a clear violation that gets a pass because we've given up our basic rights since 9/11.

The only reason they're even trying this is because they're already sifting through ALL e-mails going through the internet, and they thought there's ONE way they can't access.

I agree and I am a big nay sayer of the patriot act - this however wasn't given to customs because of the patriot act - this is because until you are inside and past customs you are not techinically within the united states - so constitutional law doesn't exist. Now the mentality of the patriot act allows this to continue, so that part continues true......

[creeva]

It's a patriot act thing, because they can't do this within the US without a warrant, and they used to not be able to do it at all. They should still require a warrant.

Checking for drugs is one thing. There is NOTHING routine about searching a laptop or cel phone. You can bring nothing illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat or a controlled substance on either item.

It's a clear violation that gets a pass because we've given up our basic rights since 9/11.

The only reason they're even trying this is because they're already sifting through ALL e-mails going through the internet, and they thought there's ONE way they can't access.

If you worried about the government encrypt your email locally with a non-federally funded and supported encryption software (preferably something open source and vetted by non american and american programmers together) - and only communicate with others using the same.

[creeva]

You can bring nothing illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat or a controlled substance on either item.

It always amuses me how blind to the truth you become when you feel that you're being unfairly persecuted.

It always amuses me when you attack me personally when your argument falls flat.

Saying that you're blind to the truth is not a personal attack. But hey, that's nothing new. Every single time that someone contradicts you, it's a "personal attack" according to you. Every single time someone tells you that you're wrong (which is very, very often), you either accuse them of making personal attacks, or at the least you fall back on the "you're just being a dick/asshole/whatever".

Here's today's short lesson for you. A personal attack would be something along the lines of "You're an overly paranoid sheep that simply jumps on the latest cause to be enraged about because you find it satisfying to fight the system even when you don't truly understand why you're fighting it". Being a dick would be to say something like "Shayde, you're an idiot. Everything is unfair or unjust to you."

Let me ask you this, Shayde... can a computer virus be stored on a laptop or a cell phone? Can a computer virus cause catastrophic economic damage if it infects the right systems?

The answer, to both questions, is "yes". So clearly you CAN bring something illegal into this country that is an extraordinary threat on either item. And don't give me any of that "yeah, but what are the chances of that" garbage... the point is that it COULD happen, and that's merely one example. There are actually plenty more. So the truth of the matter is clearly something you're unwilling to see. You're blind to it.

Whether or not that's enough of a justification for the policy is a matter that could be argued. And it quite likely will be. But to simply dismiss it as non-exist is the only arguement that's come up so far in this thread that actually falls flat.

Actually I want to see the "right" system that would cause an economic catatrophy actually running windows - most banks and finacial companies that I worked with on the inside mostly used UNix databases and such with special front ends- yes VT100 terminals are very 1980's - but they still use them - so out of the 3 unix viruses that exist none of them cause economic damage.

That geing said - there was the time when the blaster virus made it into the nuclear plant.....but the control software for the plant still didn't run on windows.