Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 286 posts

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#71

Post by orf »

hnaccy wrote: post #51
orf wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A thousand times this. I'm not saying the UK is some shining beacon of how to run a country but I do think overall our governmental systems are pretty sensible . I think being sensible might be a stereotypical English trait, but it's true. For example you have to comply with the spirit of a law, not the exact text. Also our QC's are pretty level headed and the same goes for our police force. Nobody is overly nitpicky…

Didn't British police ignore the rape of a thousand children in one city alone?

Rotherham, which you are likely referring to, was a complete failure of the system at every level and utterly unacceptable.

It sparked 5+ inquiries, including a parliamentary one, numerous reforms and national outrage. I hope we learn from those mistakes.

I never said England was perfect, and I'm not sure why this invalidates any of the points I've made.

I could pick a few things that have happened in America that have not triggered universal outrage and a senate hearing. Like weekly school shootings.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#72

Post by refurb »

orf wrote: post #42
refurb wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like arresting people when they say something the gov't doesn't like? [1] I'll take a pass, thank you. [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/arrests-for-offensive-...

Couple of thousand fines in a city of 8,700,000 seems sensible to me. Not everyone values free speech quite as highly as the USA. It's important, sure, but it's not live or die. There are limits and spreading vile hate speech is one of them. I also like the complete focus on the free speech aspect, completely ignoring the "we actually deal with racists here" aspect. How narrow minded.

Couple of thousand fines in a city of 8,700,000 seems sensible to me.

As someone who values free speech, even one fine is abhorrent.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#73

Post by orf »

refurb wrote: post #72
orf wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couple of thousand fines in a city of 8,700,000 seems sensible to me. Not everyone values free speech quite as highly as the USA. It's important, sure, but it's not live or die. There are limits and spreading vile hate speech is one of them. I also like the complete focus on the free speech aspect, completely ignoring the "we actually deal with racists here" aspect. How narrow minded.

Couple of thousand fines in a city of 8,700,000 seems sensible to me. As someone who values free speech, even one fine is abhorrent.

Do you speak for all people who value free speech?

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#74

Post by ajholyoake »

hnaccy wrote: post #51
orf wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A thousand times this. I'm not saying the UK is some shining beacon of how to run a country but I do think overall our governmental systems are pretty sensible . I think being sensible might be a stereotypical English trait, but it's true. For example you have to comply with the spirit of a law, not the exact text. Also our QC's are pretty level headed and the same goes for our police force. Nobody is overly nitpicky…

Didn't British police ignore the rape of a thousand children in one city alone?

I think you've just given evidence for the point made in the parent.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#75

Post by arcticbull »

orf wrote: post #71
hnaccy wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't British police ignore the rape of a thousand children in one city alone?

Rotherham, which you are likely referring to, was a complete failure of the system at every level and utterly unacceptable. It sparked 5+ inquiries, including a parliamentary one, numerous reforms and national outrage. I hope we learn from those mistakes. I never said England was perfect, and I'm not sure why this invalidates any of the points I've made. I could pick a few things that have happened in America that ha…

Exactly this, you can go back and forth all day (like the judge in 2009 who went to prison for sending thousands of kids to detention facilities in exchange for $2.6M in kickbacks [1]), but it's not related in any way.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/us/13judge.html

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#76

Post by userbinator »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #30
JackCh wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a common saying: "There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order." Emphasis on Please use in that order. I can't believe this needs to be emphasized, but killing people should be a last resort. I'm glad these "2nd Amendment advocates" aren't as trigger happy as you seem to suggest they be. I don't think it's hyperbolic to say that shooting peo…

Well said. I guess the problem is that not enough people know that civil forfeiture is a thing yet. I'm just blown away that such a thing could ever be written into law. I think it's a pretty clear-as-day violation of our Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure.

I guess the problem is that not enough people know that civil forfeiture is a thing yet.

...or that not enough people have experienced it yet, and probably never will. There's a lot of "it won't happen to me" thinking around this, and to be honest, how many people do take large amounts of cash with them while traveling? The fact that this item is newsworthy is enough to show that it happens rarely.

I'm almost willing to bet that if the number of people affected goes high enough, there will be armed revolts; but the government is smart enough to not do that, instead preferring to strip liberties in tiny bits at a time.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#77

Post by orf »

seibelj wrote: post #68
orf wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couple of thousand fines in a city of 8,700,000 seems sensible to me. Not everyone values free speech quite as highly as the USA. It's important, sure, but it's not live or die. There are limits and spreading vile hate speech is one of them. I also like the complete focus on the free speech aspect, completely ignoring the "we actually deal with racists here" aspect. How narrow minded.

“Vile hate speech” can cut both ways unfortunately. Both of us agree that racism is a bad thing. But the American South during Jim Crow declared progressive speech as “hate speech” and tried to ban it.[0] So it’s better to not empower the government to decide what is hate and what isn’t, or you may elect a government that decides what you say is hate speech. [0] “As we have seen, during the days of slavery and later…

> So it’s better to not empower the government to decide what is hate and what isn’t

The government cannot just arbitrarily expand hate speech to include something which is patently not hate speech. The courts would not uphold it, neither would the judiciary or the public at large.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#78

Post by wetpaws »

iforgotpassword wrote: post #56
refurb wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like arresting people when they say something the gov't doesn't like? [1] I'll take a pass, thank you. [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/arrests-for-offensive-...

I can't wrap my head around how you can see it as positive that these kind of actions would go unpunished, in the name of "freedom". If I were harassed and bullied I'd not feel very free, but rather anxious, threatened, depressed. I'm quite happy my government takes measures to assure a certain level of personal safety, both physical and psychological.

I would prefer being harrased and bullied rather than having to live in a country that has a legal power to punish me for what I say.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#79

Post by ardit33 »

martin1975 wrote: post #9

I come from a country that borders Albania... Albania has a 60% muslim population, and given our current administration and mood toward islam, it is highly doubtful they were after his money but rather after something that went off on their 'threat to national security' radar. Could be a mistaken identity too, it's not unheard of .. many names on those watch lists sound similar or are not the same person at all. I'm…

Albania is mostly an atheist country, and only 43% of people identify as religious, (and it includes muslim, catholic and orthodox). It is part of NATO and it is in the process of getting into EU, and it is a staunch ally of USA, and probably the most EU/USA loving country in the region. (there are plenty of sentiment polls that have measured this).

I sympathize with the Kazasis. Albania went through a major shock after the fall of communism in 91, and it had another financial collapse in 97-98, where people lost of of their money on companies/financial institutions that promised lots of returns (pyramid schemes).

People of Mr. Kazasi's generation went through a lot, and have a deep distrust of both financial and governmental institutions for good reasons. Also, he was put into a catch 22 situation, where he couldn't declare the money until he went to New Ark (the port of exist), and had to deal with a corrupt system that doesn't care.

The back to back financial collapses of the 90's are the main reason that the older generations like him, prefer to deal with cash, while younger generations, (the one that become adults after 2000), embrace the modern style of consumerism (banks, ATMs, credit cards, etc). About 58k, is exactly what a house/apt costs around non-prime areas, so this story checks out.

I hope they win, and more stories like this get covered by the press.

Re: A 64-year-old put his life savings in his carry-on, and U.S. Customs took it

#80

Post by tracker1 »

user982 wrote: post #57
tracker1 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to sue the government body that took your funds. Get a good lawyer and pray, basically.

The government body will refuse to return the money voluntarily if you sue.[0] [0]: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180508/10330739804/cbp-s...

And what percent of the time did they EVER return all of it voluntarily?
Post reply on HN