A deportation at the UK border • Hacker News Board

Re: A deportation at the UK border

#191

Post by eitally » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 6:08 PM UTC

lucozade wrote: post #132

eitally wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the agents don't actually want to know why people are traveling. Knowing that forces them to actually do something that isn't routine, which is annoying and a time sink. It's better to withhold information unless explicitly requested, to simplify and streamline the flow for both you as passenger and they as agents.

> It's better to withhold information unless explicitly requested But that's not the question. The question is whether or not it's better to lie about why you're travelling. Now, for some percentage of the time it probably is better in practice. But it's a trade with a fairly large downside. Border agents have lots of reasons to carry out checks so you'll need to be very sure that everything else is completely fine a…

I agree 100%. In this case she should have dotted i's and crossed t's and known inside & out exactly what the rule are governing the actions she was planning. As a longtime corporate employee, even I knew that specifying anything besides "business meetings" throws flags... but this isn't common knowledge for most people, nor are the minutiae governing specific reasons for travel to specific places. For example, if you've never traveled to a country that requires a visa but which only sells visas upon landing at their port of entry, that can be disconcerting. Will they take credit cards? What about my native currency? Do I need special paperwork? Will they stamp my passport or issue a new sheet? Can they just send me home?

Re: A deportation at the UK border

#192

Post by schoen » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 6:09 PM UTC

mynameisvlad wrote: post #185

nickporter wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When going back to the United States from Canada, I was sent to secondary screening because I said I had a TN Visa, when the correct thing to say was TN Status.

I got chewed out because I said I'm "activating" a H1-B, when I should have said that I was being inspected for approval of an H1-B (or some shit like that).

That sounds like it could be emblematic of a power struggle between the State Department (which issues visas) and the Department of Homeland Security (which decides whether people are "admissible" on the basis of their inspection, which includes examining someone's visa status). DHS apparently really likes to emphasize that they, not State, ultimately decide whether someone will get into the country or not, regardless of visa status.

https://www.google.com/#q=visa+%22permission+to+approach%22

Re: A deportation at the UK border

#193

Post by Camillo » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 6:11 PM UTC

Manishearth wrote: post #179

ali-maki wrote: post #131

Keep in mind, this was a white American detained for some arbitrary visa restrictions which is a rarity. Middle Eastern individuals are very frequently put in the 'corral of shame' for reasons unbeknownst to them. I can't recall how many times I've been randomly searched, or have had officers keep an eye on me. I've also occasionally put through interrogations by irate border patrol over the mundane minutiae of my tr…

A lot of times the corral of shame contains old helpless people too, who seem to have been deliberately put there for the pleasure of the corral ranchers. I and my family were traveling back home to Boston. Coincidentally, the Indian grandparents of close friends of ours were on the same flight to visit said friends. Like most old Indian ladies, the grandma was wearing traditional clothes (nothing fancy). They didn't…

"Old helpless people" are actually a risky category at border crossings. Elderly parents are brought in on a tourist visa, then they stay illegally and end up costing the country money for social services. Of course border controls would try to prevent that.

Re: A deportation at the UK border

#194

Post by pjlegato » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 6:12 PM UTC

It's unfortunate what happened to this woman, and probably to many others, but there's no evidence given at all that the "people who look like us" angle was ever a factor in what happened. That is FUD that serves solely to to provoke an irrational emotional response in the reader, not rationally supported in any way.

There's no evidence presented in this article to support the author's many claims that the UK immigration system discriminates on a racial "people who look like us" basis. ("It seems to me..." does not count as evidence.)

Yes, the immigration bureaucracy is badly broken. Yes, the laws are in many cases stupid and ought to be changed. No, latent racism, sexism, or classism are not in any way factors -- at least based on the events described in this article. The very basis of the article -- a middle class professional white woman from the US was deported because she broke the rules, despite her "looks like us" appearance -- is evidence to the contrary.

The one time in the article when she meets someone who might possibly be a racist (which is not even clear), the possible-racist even says that "the rules" always prevent her from ever acting on any of her possibly-racist impulses. Doesn't that mean the system is actually working pretty well in terms of preventing racist factors from entering into its operation?

That whole "people who look like us" theme is fearmongering, pandering to those who both love to speculate wildly about others' motives without evidence, and who are also consumed by liberal guilt. (The only thing missing is a "glance of solidarity" somewhere.)

She is understandably angry that she was deported, and feels like publicly shaming the system that deported her, so she picks a favorite pet issue (hidden racism) that has cachet in society and projects it onto that system, without any supporting evidence at all.

Now, if there is actual evidence of racism in some system, that's another matter entirely. But "it seems to me.." is not, in itself, evidence, it's just unfounded guessing and speculation designed to rile people up into a fit of righteous indignation, on an emotional rather than rational basis.

Re: A deportation at the UK border

#195

Post by School-Cotton » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 6:13 PM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #58

intoverflow2 wrote: post #43

Pretty much the same sort of experience you'd get travelling any international borders.

Except inside the Schengen Area. Every time I travel I realize how lucky I am to have this freedom (and wary of political movements trying to kill it).

It doesn't make sense to compare going from France to Germany with going from France to the US. A better comparison would be France to Germany vs. California to Arizona.

Both European states and US states are sovereign political entities with their own laws and territory, but with an agreement for freedom of movement. (the US constitution in one case; the Schengen agreement in the other).

Re: A deportation at the UK border

#196

Post by eitally » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 6:13 PM UTC

leovonl wrote: post #166

Funny, my experience as South American is the exact opposite: expensive USA VISA (USD 160!) for attending a conference, US border asking about everything, checking my story and even knowledge about programming (!), etc - UK border just asking the purpose of my travel, stamping the passport and saying "welcome to UK". And I didn't even need a VISA. One thing for sure is: you have to know the visa requirements and you…

If it makes you feel better, when Bush put that policy in place the Brazilian government was quick to institute a reciprocal fee, and the Brazilian immigration agents can be a royal pain for foreigners to deal with (I had a colleague get rejected at border entry once for a stupid, stupid reason).

Re: A deportation at the UK border

#197

Post by bald » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 6:13 PM UTC

That's a very detailed account of what happens for EU citiziens at the US border.

Re: A deportation at the UK border

#198

Post by majewsky » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 6:13 PM UTC

exolymph wrote: post #135

kintamanimatt wrote: post #100

This is a horrible experience that she went through, but one quote stuck out: > The room’s only other occupants were men. I do not feel comfortable in rooms full of men I do not know with the door closed. Why? This doesn't make sense. What does she think is going to happen? Are most men really presumed to be rapists or something?

It's a Bayesian thing: relatively low risk that a given man will assault you multiplied by the extreme personal suffering of being assaulted = high alert in situations where it would be easy for a man to assault you. She's already vulnerable and exhausted. I would feel uneasy too.

To add insult to injury, these men were already selected as suspicious by the immigration officers. The psychological effect is quite easily imagined, regardless of the usefulness of their definition of "suspicious".

Re: A deportation at the UK border

#199

Post by Manishearth » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 6:14 PM UTC

Camillo wrote: post #193

Manishearth wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of times the corral of shame contains old helpless people too, who seem to have been deliberately put there for the pleasure of the corral ranchers. I and my family were traveling back home to Boston. Coincidentally, the Indian grandparents of close friends of ours were on the same flight to visit said friends. Like most old Indian ladies, the grandma was wearing traditional clothes (nothing fancy). They didn't…

"Old helpless people" are actually a risky category at border crossings. Elderly parents are brought in on a tourist visa, then they stay illegally and end up costing the country money for social services. Of course border controls would try to prevent that.

Right, except the questions asked weren't relevant to that (i don't remember what they were; this was years ago -- I remember my mom saying that they were confrontational and more focused on figuring out if the old people were terrorists)

Re: A deportation at the UK border

#200

Post by Barrin92 » Fri, Jun 10, 2016, 6:16 PM UTC

jcoffland wrote: post #165

fredley wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not justifying what goes on there, but I happen to know someone who works in the immigration detention centre at one of the major UK airports. This article is right: you do not want to end up there. He is a guard at the centre, and must deal with the business of (sometimes forcefully) removing people from the UK who have been denied entry. He has dealt with people from almost every country in the world in this re…

"You cannot expect people to maintain racial or cultural blindness in such a situation." If not in this situation then when? We must place expectations on people in positions of power over others to treat all people fairly regardless of race. People should be judged by their actions. Those in positions of power who violate the trust we put in them should be punished.

exactly. If you're representing law enforcement treating everybody the same and fairly is like 80% of what your job ought to be about.

To argue like the police or guards are somehow allowed to throw a tantrum is just incredible. If they can't do their job in stressful situations they're not qualified, period.