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

Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

aclu.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 617 posts

Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

#461

Post by wonderwonder »

bluGill wrote: post #434
mlang23 wrote: post #399

Best thing is to just not have anything to do with the US of A. Death penalty, loaded guns everywhere, a general attitude of being the masters of the world which leads to things like suspicionless searches. No, thanks. I think the best would be if more people would actually stop dealing with the USA. Its becoming a trend. I once turned down an invitation to a conference in Hawai, and guess what, I was not alone.

Death penalty exists, but it is rare. Loaded guns exist, but they are not common. Most of them are in the hands of well trained people who are harmless unless (in the unlikely event) that deadly force is the only way they can get out of the situations. The US has its problems, but you have been listening to propaganda by anti US forces (you might want to figure out who they are and what their agenda is!) if you think…

Most of the points in this post are not accurate. There are more guns in civilian hands here than there are people.

"The Small Arms Survey stated that U.S. civilians alone account for 393 million (about 46 percent) of the worldwide total of civilian held firearms" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_ownership

"Most of them are in the hands of well trained people who are harmless" I am not sure what you base this on, you don't need any training at all to buy a gun, just ~24 - 48 hour waiting period and if you have a concealed carry permit, you can generally walk out with the gun after paying. Depending on the state, training to carry a concealed weapon can take from 2 - 8 hours. Some states don't even require training if you want to open carry your weapon.

In 2010 there were ~20,000 suicides involving a gun. In 2016, there were 11,004 gun homicides. The US leads the world in mass shootings, especially in schools. Accidental gun injuries are most common in homes where guns are kept for self-defense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta...

Getting shot by the police is a leading cause of death in young male people of color.

"you might want to figure out who they are and what their agenda is"

Indeed.

Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

#462

Post by bluGill »

wonderwonder wrote: post #461
bluGill wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Death penalty exists, but it is rare. Loaded guns exist, but they are not common. Most of them are in the hands of well trained people who are harmless unless (in the unlikely event) that deadly force is the only way they can get out of the situations. The US has its problems, but you have been listening to propaganda by anti US forces (you might want to figure out who they are and what their agenda is!) if you think…

Most of the points in this post are not accurate. There are more guns in civilian hands here than there are people. "The Small Arms Survey stated that U.S. civilians alone account for 393 million (about 46 percent) of the worldwide total of civilian held firearms" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_ownership "Most of them are in the hands of well trained people who are harmless" I am not sure what you base this on,…

You can buy a gun easily enough. However the people who actually do that tend to be enthusiasts who are well trained. To have a loaded gun on your person you need to be well trained in most states.

Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

#463

Post by wonderwonder »

bluGill wrote: post #462
wonderwonder wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the points in this post are not accurate. There are more guns in civilian hands here than there are people. "The Small Arms Survey stated that U.S. civilians alone account for 393 million (about 46 percent) of the worldwide total of civilian held firearms" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_ownership "Most of them are in the hands of well trained people who are harmless" I am not sure what you base this on,…

You can buy a gun easily enough. However the people who actually do that tend to be enthusiasts who are well trained. To have a loaded gun on your person you need to be well trained in most states.

Again what do you base this on? I got a concealed carry permit after a 2 hour training class. During this class I had to fire a total of 6 rounds at a target ~15 feet away. I was not given any training on how to use the weapon, only a primer on the laws about when I can shoot someone. At no time did I have to demonstrate that I could safely bring my weapon from concealment to ready without shooting myself in the leg or a bystander. I can guarantee that of the 20 other people in my class, most of them did not meet any definition of "well trained".

"However the people who actually do that tend to be enthusiasts who are well trained" - based on what? You can buy a gun even if you have never fired one before.

Thirty percent of U.S. adults say they personally own a gun, while a larger percentage, 43%, report living in a gun household. - "https://news.gallup.com/poll/264932/percentage-americans-own...

Is your argument that 43% of US households consist of well trained enthusiasts and the this is a small number?

Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

#464

Post by BurnGpuBurn »

throwaway6734 wrote: post #435
sbarre wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not about the US citizenry but about the state. If you can't actually see how the American state (not population or country) has devolved into something to be concerned about over the last 20 years, perhaps you're not looking hard enough. Domestic politics and policies are cruel and divisive, international policies have regressed dramatically (i.e. they've pulled out of major international treaties around arm…

> If you can't actually see how the American state (not population or country) has devolved into something to be concerned about over the last 20 years I find this timeframe strange. Although the US has had major policy mishaps in the last 20 years (Iraq war, NSA surveillance, etc), imo policy is still better than at any other time in America's history. What timeframe do you think had "better" policy?

The fact that you refer to the murdering of a couple of million Iraqis as a 'policy mishap' just underscores the other guys point.

Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

#465

Post by saiya-jin »

bluGill wrote: post #434
mlang23 wrote: post #399

Best thing is to just not have anything to do with the US of A. Death penalty, loaded guns everywhere, a general attitude of being the masters of the world which leads to things like suspicionless searches. No, thanks. I think the best would be if more people would actually stop dealing with the USA. Its becoming a trend. I once turned down an invitation to a conference in Hawai, and guess what, I was not alone.

Death penalty exists, but it is rare. Loaded guns exist, but they are not common. Most of them are in the hands of well trained people who are harmless unless (in the unlikely event) that deadly force is the only way they can get out of the situations. The US has its problems, but you have been listening to propaganda by anti US forces (you might want to figure out who they are and what their agenda is!) if you think…

I would say those concerns are not really big ones, at least not for me. The big ones are treatment of foreigners on state level in US - it is extremely xenophobic. You are literally a lesser human being and have some basic human rights revoked when not holding US passport, morality and sanity be damned.

Imagine this kind of treatment for you if you travel for leisure or business. Would you ever, and I mean ever, want to have anything to do with such a place? People vote with their feet/money.

Anti-US forces really don't have to try hard with propaganda. Heck, they don't have to do anything. US is doing all this by itself, and thanks to internet those cases are not buried as easily as in the past.

Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

#466

Post by hannasanarion »

dalore wrote: post #391
hannasanarion wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in such a case, you can sue for harassment. The police can't routinely violate your rights just for the heck of it, they need to show a good-faith belief that what they're doing is legal and could produce evidence useful in court.

From the article: > But the problem with that argument, the appeals court ruled, is that courts have long held that police cannot be on the hook for property damage caused in the process of trying to make an arrest.

Police can be held responsible if the arrest itself was illegal, an attempt to harass instead of execute the law in good faith.

Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

#467

Post by hannasanarion »

jupp0r wrote: post #355
hannasanarion wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from all the arguments brought up so far, there's that word "unreasonable" which the courts have historically interpreted with an "expectation of privacy" standard. You have a high expectation of privacy when you're in your house, somewhat less when you're in a car, and much less when you're entering an airport or crossing a border. In the old days, it was routine for customs officers to search ships coming in…

You rightfully argue that lowering protection boundaries was necessary to uphold the law. The same logic can be applied in reverse though - there is no practical need to smuggle data into the country on a physical device nowadays, so why search devices?

I'm sure that was part of the ACLU's winning argument.

Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

#468

Post by hannasanarion »

ineedasername wrote: post #455
lallysingh wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The incomparability is the point.

Are you sure? The GP post seemed to be using the comparison to explain why these types of searches are in fact in line with historic border & import practices because those historic practices could include a search of cargo, luggage, etc. It certainly appeared that post was attempting a direct comparison.

No, I was explaining that it is not an open and shut case on a bare reading of the 4th,and I was explaining CBP's theory of law for the case.

Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

#469

Post by C1sc0cat »

Ensorceled wrote: post #427
ramblerman wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a european who is not always very fond of the US, this is ridiculous, and lazy thinking. The amount of generalization and black and white simplifications to come up with such a thing is impressive though.

And yet, in this very thread there are discussions, presumably by Americans, about whether human rights “afforded” to people only apply to citizens or all humans. They are literally arguing if “people” only means US citizens.

Really I am pretty sure that they do apart from oddities like restriction son roles like the president

Re: Court: Suspicionless Searches of Travelers’ Phones and Laptops Unconstitutional

#470

Post by bregma »

bluGill wrote: post #462
wonderwonder wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the points in this post are not accurate. There are more guns in civilian hands here than there are people. "The Small Arms Survey stated that U.S. civilians alone account for 393 million (about 46 percent) of the worldwide total of civilian held firearms" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_ownership "Most of them are in the hands of well trained people who are harmless" I am not sure what you base this on,…

You can buy a gun easily enough. However the people who actually do that tend to be enthusiasts who are well trained. To have a loaded gun on your person you need to be well trained in most states.

> You can buy a gun easily enough.

All you need is to know some guy.

> To have a loaded gun on your person you need to be well trained in most states.

All you really need is to grab a loaded gun and conceal it about your person. No paperwork required.

Post reply on HN