| Pages:
1
2 |
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by DaliDali  | The anarchist blew it big time...
Using a Turkish national, a two time loser no less, and pulling off a third arms parts smuggling again for a third, as an example of unwarranted
electronic searches.
Perfectly legit and totally warranted.
Great job CBP
|
DaliDali, the Fourth Circuit’s ruling isn't just about the Turkish National, who was caught smuggling arms parts a few times.
This is a court precedent ruling that now extends to to international travelers regarding digital right that some of us applaud.
I'm shocked, just shocked, there are not more liberals, and/or civil libertarians who are enjoying this ruling as much as me. Thanks you, Goat, and
SF and H, but is this it?
Often times there are people like Ernesto Arturo Miranda, caught up in the legal system, that are later convicted, but their court case is precedent
setting case, that later extends to all of us. Now because of Ernesto Miranda, cops have to give us everybody their "Miranda" rights when they are
arrested. I don't know about the rest of you, but I like the fact that cops have to give read you your Miranda, rights when anybody gets arrested in
the US. ( it evens the law, since cops are allowed to lie to you)
But back to the Turkish National, I don't think what he did was that bad. It's not against the law to carry your gun in your luggage, as long as it's
not carry on, and it's in hard-sided container that's lock. The same thing with gun parts.
The problem with the Turkish National, is that Turkey, has some tough gun laws, and if the Turkish National, is not a gun dealer, and therefore, it's
against the law for him to put gun, and gun parts in his luggage back to Turkey.
So slap him on the wrists, which looks like exactly what the CBP did twice, before they got tough on the 3rd attempt. ( I bet the guns, and gun parts
were for personal use, or he was a black market gun dealer in Turkey)
BTW, personally I believe the CBP did have both reasonable suspicion, and probable cause in this case, and I'm not sure what the Turkish National's
lawyer, was trying to do, but I'll enjoy the ruling just the same, because now the CBP will need at least reasonable suspicion if they decide to do
intrusive
forensic searches on our cell phones.
[Edited on 5-13-2018 by JoeJustJoe]
|
|
|
DaliDali
Super Nomad
Posts: 1132
Registered: 4-21-2010
Location: BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by JoeJustJoe | | Quote: Originally posted by DaliDali | The anarchist blew it big time...
Using a Turkish national, a two time loser no less, and pulling off a third arms parts smuggling again for a third, as an example of unwarranted
electronic searches.
Perfectly legit and totally warranted.
Great job CBP
|
But back to the Turkish National, I don't think what he did was that bad. It's not against the law to carry your gun in your luggage, as long as it's
not carry on, and it's in hard-sided container that's lock. The same thing with gun parts.
BTW, personally I believe the CBP did have both reasonable suspicion, and probable cause in this case, and I'm not sure what the Turkish National's
lawyer, was trying to do, but I'll enjoy the ruling just the same, because now the CBP will need at least reasonable suspicion if they decide to do
intrusive
forensic searches on our cell phones.
[Edited on 5-13-2018 by JoeJustJoe] |
This is the underlying problem with an anarchist.....not do they (you) object to all things law enforcement, they object to and use as an example, the
very people who SHOULD get searched.
Had you not brought the Turkish man's predicament into the game, as the basis of your interpretation of the "unwarranted" search, you might get the
support of more people.
No one WANTS to be searched, not guilty and guilty. It is that some people DO need to be searched completely and the Turk was a classic example of
that need.
To bring firearms on an international flight to the US...any passenger must declare to the airline, in advance of them bring any arms or parts on
board, either carryon or checked. This even applies to flights within the USA........hunters, off duty LEO and or others MUST declare their firearms
to the airline.
For crying out loud.......you can't even carry a battery in your carry on much less parts to a gun......and triple down on that when the person is
from that part of the world known to be a cesspool of terrorist activities.
By any reasonable measure, the Turk put himself right smack dab in the middle of a criminal and civil bind.
During the detention of the Turk......low and behold, it's discovered he has attempted to smuggle arms parts TWICE before.
I am stunned the man is not pounding rocks.
For anyone to even suggest that the Turk got a raw deal when agents cracked his phone is beyond any rational comprehension.
[Edited on 5-13-2018 by DaliDali]
|
|
|
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by wilderone | "If you ask me your statement sounds a little sexually repressive. Who cares if someone crosses the border for sex ...."
Sex trafficking. Maybe you'd sing a different tune if YOU were kidnapped, drugged, raped and made a sex slave. And if you read the Published
Decision, you would know that "routine" in its legal sense applied to border searches (vs. nonroutine) has firm footing in the law. So
non-acceptance, or failure to understand, or failure to adapt, only leaves you with a weak and unsubstantiated position should the time come to defend
yourself. |
Wilderone wrote:" Maybe you'd sing a different tune if YOU were kidnapped, drugged, raped and made a sex slave."
Aren't you getting a little bit dramatic?
The way the stories go, the Mexican pimps/padrotes, use invisible chains, not real chains, and they get the girls to fall in love with them, and then
the so-called abusive is suppose to start. That's if you believe all these stories that all girls are sex traffic victims.
But this is cell phone/border search thread, so I'll try to stay on topic.
When you Wilderone say, " And if you read the Published Decision, you would know that "routine" in its legal sense applied to border searches (vs.
nonroutine) has firm footing in the law."
I think you are confusing the issue when taking about " warrantless searches" of your luggage or car's truck that have been law for a long time with
the CBP at the border. Yeah, when I'm at the airport, or driving back into the US I know the routine and open my car's truck, or open my luggage if
asked.
However with new computers, and especially the latest smart phones, that are fairly new, especially with all the information smart phones can carry.
What the CBP and ICE have being doing is applying the same laws of warrantless searches to your smart phones with manual and forensic, the same way
the CBP checks your luggage at the border.
But now because of these court cases successfully fought by the ACLU and others, the appeals courts are telling the CBP and ICE, not so fast, because
of the intrusive nature of cell phone searches. That now with forensic searches, you're going to need at least reasonable suspicion to do that
forensic search, and hopefully down the line, the courts will say the same thing about manual cell phone searches.
BTW, the way the court cases are going, it's a very good bet, the ACLU will win on the manual cell phone searches too, and will soon require at least
reasonable suspicion on the part of the CBP and ICE, before you turn over your cell phone for a search.
Reasonable suspicion is a lower threshold than probable cause, so I don't understand the mentally around here to let the CBP, ICE, and police do
whatever they want?
[Edited on 5-13-2018 by JoeJustJoe]
|
|
|
norte
Super Nomad
Posts: 1163
Registered: 10-8-2008
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by David K | True that Alm!
Oh, and JoeJstJoe ... the officers that I have come across at the border have never seemed to care about what I look like on the outside, so I don't
know why you mention race/ ethnic profiling as a problem. I have been questioned by all kinds of American officials at the border who were Asian,
Latino, Black, and all kinds of women, as well as the occasional white guy! |
Occasional white guy? Your prejudice is showing. All kinds of women? How many kinds are there?
|
|
|
DaliDali
Super Nomad
Posts: 1132
Registered: 4-21-2010
Location: BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
It is YOU anarchist Joe who is pulling the dramatic thing here.
If one were to put faith in your assertions, CBP, as a matter of routine, hacks phones and other devices willy nilly and on a whim.
This is simply not the case, but anarchists like you eat it up and go on to revel in denting the authority of law enforcement, not only at the border
and other ports of entry, but in their everyday activities......terrorism related or not.
Unlike you, the CBP officers are trained to spot furtiveness and outward signs of deception.
It is these signs of deception that trigger further inquiry.
You know....the truth. Such a concept yes?
|
|
|
norte
Super Nomad
Posts: 1163
Registered: 10-8-2008
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by David K | | Quote: Originally posted by norte | | Quote: Originally posted by David K | True that Alm!
Oh, and JoeJstJoe ... the officers that I have come across at the border have never seemed to care about what I look like on the outside, so I don't
know why you mention race/ ethnic profiling as a problem. I have been questioned by all kinds of American officials at the border who were Asian,
Latino, Black, and all kinds of women, as well as the occasional white guy! |
Occasional white guy? Your prejudice is showing. All kinds of women? How many kinds are there?
|
You quoted my reply. If you read what I was replying to then you would see the racism I was countering. There are all kinds of men and all kinds of
women and none should be judged on skin color. |
The reason I quoted you was so you could see your own prejudice. Guess it went over your head.
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 64852
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
But why do you not see the racism I was responding to? It's one thing to call people racists, like you do. But, it is quite another to live with
respect for all people, like you don't.
|
|
|
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by David K | True that Alm!
Oh, and JoeJstJoe ... the officers that I have come across at the border have never seemed to care about what I look like on the outside, so I don't
know why you mention race/ ethnic profiling as a problem. I have been questioned by all kinds of American officials at the border who were Asian,
Latino, Black, and all kinds of women, as well as the occasional white guy! |
I seem to get mostly the Filipino agents at the border, and for some reason besides being mostly Catholic, Filipinos tend to be ultra conservative,
and is probably one of the reasons in the Philippines they voted for that crazy guy, Rodrigo Duterte, who practices extrajudicial killings of their
citizens suspected of being involved in drugs.
I mention race and ethnicity because the CBP and ICE are some of the few federal agencies that can still use racial profiling at the border and
within 100 miles of the border, although they claim to use other factors, but nobody actually believes them, especially when they refuse to say what
factors they use for screening at the border.
Sadly, this was allowed during the Obama administration in 2014, and this is yet another reason why we need to hold the CBP and ICE accountable at the
border.
Racial Profiling
The Justice policy, however, contains a footnote appearing to exempt DHS with respect to “interdiction activities in the vicinity of the border.
https://holdcbpaccountable.org/racial-profiling/
|
|
|
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by DaliDali |
It is YOU anarchist Joe who is pulling the dramatic thing here.
If one were to put faith in your assertions, CBP, as a matter of routine, hacks phones and other devices willy nilly and on a whim.
This is simply not the case, but anarchists like you eat it up and go on to revel in denting the authority of law enforcement, not only at the border
and other ports of entry, but in their everyday activities......terrorism related or not.
Unlike you, the CBP officers are trained to spot furtiveness and outward signs of deception.
It is these signs of deception that trigger further inquiry.
You know....the truth. Such a concept yes?
|
So you think I'm an anarchist? Well, you are welcome to your opinion, and I rather be an anarchist, than a closed border Trumpster, like you. It's
just too bad that wall doesn't look like it will ever be built.
DD, does that gentleman look like a terrorist to you?
Well, him and 10 other Americans who mostly also happen to be Muslim, had their electronic devices searched and taken from them without a warrant,
and really no reason at all, except perhaps their religion.
This family man and 10 other Americans with the help from the ACLU are suing Homeland Security see ALASAAD V. NEILSEN.
The American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the ACLU of Massachusetts have filed a lawsuit against the Department of
Homeland Security on behalf of 11 travelers whose smartphones and laptops were searched without warrants at the U.S. border.
The American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the ACLU of Massachusetts have filed a lawsuit against the Department of
Homeland Security on behalf of 11 travelers whose smartphones and laptops were searched without warrants at the U.S. border.
The plaintiffs in the case are 10 U.S. citizens and one lawful permanent resident who hail from seven states and come from a variety of backgrounds.
The lawsuit challenges the government’s fast-growing practice of searching travelers’ electronic devices without a warrant. It seeks to establish
that the government must have a warrant based on probable cause to suspect a violation of immigration or customs laws before conducting such searches.
The plaintiffs include a military veteran, journalists, students, an artist, a NASA engineer, and a business owner. Several are Muslims
https://www.aclu.org/cases/alasaad-v-neilsen-challenge-warra...
[Edited on 5-13-2018 by JoeJustJoe]
|
|
|
wilderone
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3824
Registered: 2-9-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
"But back to the Turkish National, I don't think what he did was that bad. It's not against the law to carry your gun in your luggage...."
That's not what he was arrested for.
"I'm not sure what the Turkish National's lawyer, was trying to do...."
Really? And you said you read the Decision? He was trying to suppress the evidence (the resulting data from the forensic search which lead to his
conviction) based on his allegation that the search did not constitute a border search.
OMG I'm done here.
|
|
|
DaliDali
Super Nomad
Posts: 1132
Registered: 4-21-2010
Location: BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by JoeJustJoe |
I seem to get mostly the Filipino agents at the border, and for some reason besides being mostly Catholic, Filipinos tend to be ultra conservative,
and is probably one of the reasons in the Philippines they voted for that crazy guy, Rodrigo Duterte, who practices extrajudicial killings of their
citizens suspected of being involved in drugs.
I mention race and ethnicity because the CBP and ICE are some of the few federal agencies that can still use racial profiling at the border and
within 100 miles of the border, although they claim to use other factors, but nobody actually believes them, especially when they refuse to say what
factors they use for screening at the border.
Sadly, this was allowed during the Obama administration in 2014, and this is yet another reason why we need to hold the CBP and ICE accountable at the
border.
Racial Profiling
The Justice policy, however, contains a footnote appearing to exempt DHS with respect to “interdiction activities in the vicinity of the border.
https://holdcbpaccountable.org/racial-profiling/ |
Well well....lookie here.......the anarchist Joe is revealing his true colors.
Not only are you an anarchist, you're a flaming racist yourself.
Filipinos. brown skin, Catholic...Trump voters.......
Brown skinned Arabs ok.....brown skinned Filipinos not so much
If you're offended by brown skinned Catholics.......what the hell are you doing crossing the border into Mexico.......the country that is chock full
of the exact people you're now crying about at the gate. The truth be known, you're just a hater of all things Trump and will do anything in your
power to weaken him.
That is not IMO.......the very fact you brought politics and religion into the fray proves it.
I KNOW you're an anarchist Joe........based on years of reading your drivel of everything anti LE. And you know it.
|
|
|
TMW
Select Nomad
Posts: 10659
Registered: 9-1-2003
Location: Bakersfield, CA
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by JoeJustJoe |
I mention race and ethnicity because the CBP and ICE are some of the few federal agencies that can still use racial profiling at the border and
within 100 miles of the border, although they claim to use other factors, but nobody actually believes them, especially when they refuse to say what
factors they use for screening at the border.
Sadly, this was allowed during the Obama administration in 2014, and this is yet another reason why we need to hold the CBP and ICE accountable at the
border.
https://holdcbpaccountable.org/racial-profiling/ |
What's wrong with racial profiling? Wouldn't you find it odd for a Black man to be at a KKK rally or a Chinese at a Texas BBQ cookoff or a White
Klansman at a NAACP convention.
|
|
|
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by wilderone | "But back to the Turkish National, I don't think what he did was that bad. It's not against the law to carry your gun in your luggage...."
That's not what he was arrested for.
"I'm not sure what the Turkish National's lawyer, was trying to do...."
Really? And you said you read the Decision? He was trying to suppress the evidence (the resulting data from the forensic search which lead to his
conviction) based on his allegation that the search did not constitute a border search.
OMG I'm done here.
|
Well, I'm done with you too, since you obviously don't know the difference between a warrantless search of your luggage and a personal cell phone that
has a trove of personal information on, and therefore should be treated differently, and privacy rights should not be ignored even at the border.
The courts have now ruled warrantless forensic searches as unconstitutional, and hopefully the way these court cases are going, it's only a matter of
time manual searches require at lease reasonable suspicion before you have to turn over your phone to the CBP thugs.
You also seem to have missed Perry Mason shows.
The objective of an attorney is to win their case for their client. Sadly, the Turkish National was still convicted. What I was wondering about is
even if the attorney was successful of suppressing the evidence of the forensic case, the CBP still had probably cause that a crime has been
committed. There was little chance this guy was going to walk no matter what his lawyer did.
However, that's OK, because what happens from time to time, the appeals court notices some unfairness or unconstitutional aspect of a case, and later
that court case sets a precedent as to what happened in this case with the Turkish National. Now for now on or until this case goes to the Supreme
court, if the CBP wants to do a forensic search of a cell phone, they better at least have reasonable suspicion do to the intrusive search.
Now DD might jump up and down and say, but but the Turkish National, was as guilty as sin, and the CBP was only doing their job.
My answer to that is, while what about those 11 Americans in the up coming ALASAAD V. NEILSEN case? Those 11 Americans were not guilty of anything,
except perhaps praying to Allah.
|
|
|
DaliDali
Super Nomad
Posts: 1132
Registered: 4-21-2010
Location: BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
You're flailing into the wind Anarchist Joe......
The anarchist is now outed into hating brown skinned Catholics and anyone who might have voted against Hillary.
But hey........a brown skinned Arab no problem.
Looks like Eli the Investigator has you pegged down about right.
Don't ask.......were done
.
|
|
|
motoged
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6481
Registered: 7-31-2006
Location: Kamloops, BC
Member Is Offline
Mood: Gettin' Better
|
|
 Now THAT is a frightening frame of reference 
Don't believe everything you think....
|
|
|
grizzlyfsh95
Nomad
Posts: 226
Registered: 1-8-2010
Location: East Cape
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666 | | Quote: Originally posted by David K | True that Alm!
Oh, and JoeJstJoe ... the officers that I have come across at the border have never seemed to care about what I look like on the outside, so I don't
know why you mention race/ ethnic profiling as a problem. I have been questioned by all kinds of American officials at the border who were Asian,
Latino, Black, and all kinds of women, as well as the occasional white guy! |
Well, you are white,... you are unable to see bias, perhaps reflecting your own bias, eh? |
You must understand DK, that if you do not march in lock step with the SJW,s, you are a racist.
The harder I work, the luckier I get
|
|
|
del mar
Banned
Posts: 1057
Registered: 7-23-2016
Location: the cantina of course
Member Is Offline
Mood: lil' fuzzy
|
|
St. Johns Wort?
|
|
|
joerover
Banned
Posts: 676
Registered: 2-3-2011
Location: earth
Member Is Offline
Mood: sleepy
|
|
This could mean anything, any reason. They think jjj is a suspicious character, and he is, so follow the electronic trail he posts behind.
Do you think those fat ladies are texting constantly to overwhelm the system? Ten agents can not search 500 million texts.
the fat lady is breeding
which means
The fat ladys are breeding
|
|
|
joerover
Banned
Posts: 676
Registered: 2-3-2011
Location: earth
Member Is Offline
Mood: sleepy
|
|
Those thugs are lazy. They need to get up and do some more searches.
joe want privacy for drug smugglers and arms smugglers.
What they are not guns unless you transport the whole gun all in one bag?
Heroin continues to poor across the border. We pay guys to stop it, but joe wants them to allow privacy to the criminals.
the fat lady is breeding
which means
The fat ladys are breeding
|
|
|
JoeJustJoe
Banned
Posts: 21045
Registered: 9-9-2010
Location: Occupied Aztlan
Member Is Offline
Mood: Mad as hell
|
|
It speaks volumes that DaliDali, believes Trump, and now he believes E, who looks like he went MIA.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
|
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
