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

Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 224 posts

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#191

Post by click170 »

cpncrunch wrote: post #171
Canada wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact of the matter is they don't. What they want to do is go fishing through your papers and they cynically use this catch all excuse when challenged. In Canada it isn't legal to arbitrarily search people even at the border. Reasonable cause is necessary: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-52.6/page-64.html#... There is both plenty of incentive and no consequences for conducting unlawful searches.

>The fact of the matter is they don't Do you have any references for that? From what I can see on programmes like Border Security, they do catch a lot of people this way, and they do always have reasonable grounds for the search. Also, how does that law allow random searches at airports (which are presumably legal)? Is there another law which permits those?

You know those shows are 100% PR right? Do you really think they would be invited back if they showed unedited footage? I would bet money that the agencies involved get the final say on whether an episode airs or not.

I can't stand those shows, I have to change the channel, they literally make me angry. Thinking that there are people out there who actually fall for it makes it worse.

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#192

Post by cpncrunch »

jnbiche wrote: post #182
cpncrunch wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was simply pointing out the reason for the searches. As it stands, the law currently lets them do these searches, and I was explaining the reasoning behind these searches (which should be pretty obvious to anyone who has watched those TV shows). As for why they want to search for pedophiles at airports: the reason is presumably because there is a serious problem of child sex tourism in certain countries (Thailand f…

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Franklin, Benjamin By the way, the real cap'n crunch would be ashamed of the attitude you have expressed, as I'm sure you know.

I think you should perhaps research what that quote actually means. Hint: it means pretty much the opposite of what you think it means.

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#193

Post by loceng »

Someone1234 wrote: post #44
loceng wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to make it commonplace so people become tolerant to it. It doesn't mean there isn't specific targeting done with private data prior to.

Maybe, but since you have no specific basis or proof that that was the case in the above example, we can just move forward assuming it was part of a common pattern of searches conducted by US immigration and customs on a daily basis.

Not really. Both options should be kept on the table, in our minds.

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#194

Post by nosuchthing »

allendoerfer wrote: post #102
bhayden wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not that we tolerate it, it's that our voting populace is largely single issue voters and don't really care about whether the next president wants to remove the Patriot Act. They care about social issues like reproductive rights. Added to mostly binary voting (two party system) means you only have two real choices that are polar opposites on the hot button social issues.

I think in the end it comes down to the way the parties are funded. With state financed parties and regulations to cut costs of campaigns, smaller parties would have better chances to gain traction. The problem is that nobody currently in charge has the slightest interest to do as he would cut of his own monopoly to the financing. Maybe you could start by sneaking in some clever cost-cutting tricks for the campaigns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#195

Post by WildUtah »

allendoerfer wrote: post #125
malexw wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What part of the world are you from? Here in Canada, if you were to say "Canada is in America", it would sound as strange as saying "Spain is in France". To Canadians, America only ever refers to The United States of America.

I know that you use the word that way. Nevertheless it is correct to say, that Canada is in America and I used the fact to address both countries, because as far as I know, on US borders similar things can happen. Unfortunately my genius plan did not take into account that Europe is currently asleep and Americans ( and Canadians !) are down-voting the posts now.

"Europe is currently asleep"

Wrote a comment recently which incidentally and obliquely implied in passing that people are in control of their own body weight, a proposition which I believe within some limited contexts.

It went up to +15 overnight when the Europeans were awake. Then right back down to +5 when the Americans woke up. Got some kind of nasty comments back, too. I'm surprised that it makes so much difference.

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#196

Post by Canada »

click170 wrote: post #191
cpncrunch wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The fact of the matter is they don't Do you have any references for that? From what I can see on programmes like Border Security, they do catch a lot of people this way, and they do always have reasonable grounds for the search. Also, how does that law allow random searches at airports (which are presumably legal)? Is there another law which permits those?

You know those shows are 100% PR right? Do you really think they would be invited back if they showed unedited footage? I would bet money that the agencies involved get the final say on whether an episode airs or not. I can't stand those shows, I have to change the channel, they literally make me angry. Thinking that there are people out there who actually fall for it makes it worse.

> I can't stand those shows, I have to change the channel, they literally make me angry. Thinking that there are people out there who actually fall for it makes it worse.

If HN sold gold stars I'd buy you one.

Sadly, the propaganda is effective and enough people agree with cpncrunch: Being treated without dignity, like a prisoner, is totally worth it if maybe it catches a few evil boogeymen.

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#198

Post by WildUtah »

bigiain wrote: post #177
MichaelGG wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While good overall advice, I understand that those protections do not cover you at the border. As an American entering the US, yes you just need to provide a customs declaration. As a non-US person, it's not clear what rights you have. They certainly don't need to permit you entry.

Sure. It's certainly more complicated at borders (or, in the US "border zone" https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights-governments-100-mile-b... ), especially for us non-US citizens, but the underlying sentiment still holds. The other guy does not have your interests in mind. He knows the rules better than you, and knows which rules you probably don't know and what he will get away with when bending the rules. He's prob…

"For those of us who aren't US citizens, remember it _is_ a privilege to be permitted to visit, a privilege the possibly minimum-wage customs/immigration/border people on the ground have the authority to revoke"

This is a libelous accusation. The US Government doesn't pay its employees minimum wage. Those border police make more than engineers and programmers on average.

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#199

Post by mg1982 »

cpncrunch wrote: post #192
jnbiche wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Franklin, Benjamin By the way, the real cap'n crunch would be ashamed of the attitude you have expressed, as I'm sure you know.

I think you should perhaps research what that quote actually means. Hint: it means pretty much the opposite of what you think it means.

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/07/what-ben-franklin-really-...

Interesting, thanks!

Re: Canadian Charged for Not Unlocking Smartphone at Canadian Border

#200

Post by Canada »

cpncrunch wrote: post #190
Canada wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shows like that are pure PR. Border guards aren't going to break the rules while they're on camera. And even if they did, the shows producers aren't likely to include it. Random searches are not legal in Canada. Border guards take advantage of the fact that nobody wants to look guilty by refusing to be searched. They exploit the public's ignorance of the law and use intimidation.

Actually, it is legal in Canada for border officers to inspect any goods being carried across the border -- not even suspicion of illegal activity is needed. See section 99(1)a of the customs act. I don't think this would allow them to search your phone. However that may be permitted if they have reasonable suspicion.

There's a very important difference between inspecting the goods and searching your person and papers. (These details matter. Note your comment about random searches at airports. Did you mean borders, or airports?) Try reading the entire Act. I did, and found some interesting stuff in there. Then go watch "Border Security".

When a Canadian enters Canada it's acceptable for the government to say, "Show me all of your apples." It can even say, "Give me the bill of sale for those apples." That's inspecting goods.

It's not acceptable for the government to say, "Show me all of your text messages, emails, pictures, and personal journals." That's a warrantless search.

It is illegal, and it should remain illegal regardless of what good deeds a government bureaucrat might be able to do with that information.

If the government wants to conduct a search like that, it needs to accuse you of a specific crime and set out the reasons why it believes getting those items will prove it. Any just government must assign different people who act at arms length from each other to make the request and to decide if the request is justified. (eg. Police, Prosecutor, and Judge) This is necessary in order to prevent any individual human agent acting with the power of the government from abusing that power.

Just governments do not search everyone because some of them might be guilty. Just governments don't say, "Show me your apples. OK, that's fine. Now give me your passwords because you might be a pedophile and I need to make sure I can't find any evidence that you are." Just governments don't say, "Show me your journals, emails, and pictures, then and then we'll see if we can charge you with a crime."

I wouldn't give up living under a just and fair government even if that meant we could catch all of the criminals... which of course we couldn't.

Post reply on HN