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

561–570 of 617 posts

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

#561

Post by DannyB2 »

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.

> Best thing is to just not have anything to do with the US of A.

The US is about 4% of the world population. The rest of the world about 96%.

(Google for "US population" and "world population", use mathematical process known as division.)

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

#562

Post by umvi »

wonderwonder wrote: post #559
umvi wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My uncle told me a story about when he was deployed to Afghanistan there was a designated area by the mess hall you were supposed to use to ensure your sidearm chamber was clear. Every once in a while, there was an accidental discharge and an officer would be seen over there sheepishly holstering their sidearm. My uncle pointed out that it wasn't required that you had to pull the trigger, just that you had to ensure…

So soldiers trained by the US military would sometimes make mistakes with their weapon resulting in a discharge they were not expecting? Seems like perhaps its not so simple a tool after all...

That's like saying a knife isn't a simple tool since chefs sometimes cut themselves despite being trained to use them.

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

#563

Post by JasonFruit »

themaninthedark wrote: post #493
angry_octet wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's 'CP'? Is that supposed to be PC (Probable Cause)? I still don't get it.

They probably mean CP - child porn

Who talks about child pornography enough to need an abbreviation?

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

#564

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

shkkmo wrote: post #502
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Death penalty exists, but it is rare. As an American, this attitude drives me nuts. "We don't kill that many people, and heck most of them are even guilty!" Regarding "loaded guns exist, but they are not common." Again, this is the same attitude of "Even though we have a mass shooting every week, all in all it's not that much." Even if my chances of getting murdered in public are lower than, say, a car accident, th…

Mass shootings are an incredibly small source of gun deaths. ~2/3rd are suicide and ~1/3rd are murder. While the US does have pretty high gun related homicide rates, it is largely because proportionally more of our homicides involve guns. Our overall homicide rate is a fair bit higher than most european countries but nowhere near the top world-wide (about #90.) However, much of this is concentrated into particular lo…

> While the US does have pretty high gun related homicide rates, it is largely because proportionally more of our homicides involve guns. Our overall homicide rate is a fair bit higher than most european countries but nowhere near the top world-wide (about #90.)

While not exactly wrong I would definitely argue that "a fair bit higher" is a gross mischaracterization. The US has an intentional homicide rate of 5.3 per 100,000, which is many times higher than UK (1.2), France (1.3), Germany (1.0), Spain (0.7), Italy (0.67) or any of the Nordic countries.

> Concerns about gun policy (and the death penalty) by potential visitors to the US are thus ideologically, not practically based.

Depends how you frame it. Yes, your chances of getting killed in a random shooting are lower than a lot of other more mundane things. At the same time, your chances of getting killed in a random shooting in the US are many, many times higher than getting killed in a random shooting in one of the European countries previously mentioned.

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

#565

Post by wonderwonder »

SimbaOnSteroids wrote: post #556
wonderwonder wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"There’s no meaningful risk of getting shot and the US is one of the safest places in the world" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention... The United States is Ranked 94th in the world by intentional homicide rate. "The odds of dying in a car vs getting shot are relevant." Why? I did not mention cars at all in my post so not sure how you bringing up cars renders my response illogical. Is your ar…

15,000/325,000,000 ~= 1/25,000. Just for scope because 15,000 sounds big but not that huge for a country this large. Yes its way too high, but its not like Americans are Yosemite Sam all the time.

The only countries in the world with a higher rate are:

Honduras, Eswatini, Jamaica, Guatemala, El Salvador, Venezuela, Brazil, Colombia, Panama, Philippines, South Africa, Costa Rica, Mexico, Paraguay, Uruguay

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

#566

Post by naasking »

murph-almighty wrote: post #494
bregma wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is…

While I agree with your point, I need to point out that the Declaration of Independence generally isn't used in case law.

It seems like it would provide quite a bit of relevant background to originalist interpretations of the constitution, and those are fairly common.

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

#567

Post by umvi »

black_puppydog wrote: post #555
umvi wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you store and carry your weapon safely? How do you transport it? Who has access to it and the ammunition? It is a simple tool that kills tens of thousands of people a year Unintentionally? I highly doubt that. I would guess the majority of the tens of thousands of deaths were the result of the gun owner intentionally pulling the trigger, not because they were bumbling around transporting it incorrectly, stor…

You do realize that 500 gun deaths alone would make headlines in most other countries?

500 accidents in a country with gun rights and a population of over 300M is nothing. You have like a 1 in a million chance of dying by a gun accident. Even lower if you don't own or use guns. It's a non-problem.

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

#568

Post by wan23 »

Pyxl101 wrote: post #345
wan23 wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regulations are the means by which you make something be regulated. The relationship between these words hasn't changed. https://www.etymonline.com/word/regulate

The phrase "well-regulated" is an idiom that means something like "working as expected, calibrated correctly, normal, regular". You can't interpret an idiom literally based solely on the words that it's made from - idioms have their own independent meaning. The following source gives examples from the Oxford English Dictionary of how the idiom was used from 1709 through 1894, demonstrating how the idiom 'well-regulat…

> Parsing the 2nd Amendment, the US Supreme Court wrote that "the adjective “well-regulated” implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training":

The military calls rules that impose proper discipline and training "regulations". Such as Army Regulation 670-1, which states “While in uniform, personnel will not place their hands in their pockets, except momentarily to place or retrieve objects.”

The word "regulation" is perfectly compatible with the "well-regulated" idiom.

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

#569

Post by jopsen »

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.

There are 16 countries rated higher on the "human freedom index": https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/human-freedom-i...

I assume you won't travel to Sweden, they have the same score as the US :)

Don't get me wrong, I also frustrated the US doesn't so better -- not because the US is that bad, but because it would be so easy for the US to do better.

And for some reason I emphasize with the Americans :) (I live in Denmark, but I'm not scared of traveling to neither Sweden or the US -- but I've never been to a non-democratic country, no plans to either).

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

#570

Post by jopsen »

throaway4644998 wrote: post #402
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.

He is far from being the only one to have this feeling. I once intended to even base my business there, but at this point I do not want to have anything to do with this country. This is not lazy thinking, this is exactly the opposite. This is finally catching up with reality and moving beyond hollywood movies and the American dream propaganda.

I wish the US would do better too. But the US is not that bad. It's ranked 17 on the human freedom index, along side Sweden.

Just saying, where do you live?

(I'm not American, and I wish they did better, but it's not that bad)

Post reply on HN