| ▲ | Tangurena2 2 hours ago |
| > “In [Fiscal Year] 2025, out of the over 419 million travelers CBP processed at ports of entry, CBP only searched the electronic devices of 55,318 international travelers,” the agency wrote, or 0.0013%. The harassment is targeted at critics & opponents of the current regime. The message is very clear: Be afraid of us. Be very afraid There are 33 days remaining until election day. Vote out all the incumbents. |
|
| ▲ | petcat 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I will be curious to see statistics from past years. I'm wondering if this is a new thing. I'm pretty sure US customs and border patrol have always had this power. I think basically every country exercises this power |
| |
| ▲ | Lendal 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "It has always been this way, this is normal" is the typical first response to tyranny. It puts you on their side, which is fine if that's where you want to be. Just be aware of it. If you think it's wrong, you definitely don't want to be taking the side of "it's normal," because whether or not it's normal is irrelevant when your government is doing immoral and tyrannical behavior in your name. | | |
| ▲ | strictnein an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Weird response to a pretty benign question. Asking whether or not something is new or how frequently it's been done in the past isn't saying it's acceptable nor does it put them on the side of tyranny. In fact, a sign of tyranny would be a significant uptick in the number of these searches, and how else would you be able to see that worrying signal without answering the question they asked? | | |
| ▲ | johnofthesea an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | > Weird response to a pretty benign question. How was this question: > I think basically every country exercises this power | | |
| ▲ | strictnein an hour ago | parent [-] | | You quoted something that wasn't part of the question, which was "I'm wondering if this is a new thing". Their impression was that it wasn't and that other countries do similar things. Stating your understanding of a situation helps guide discussion and helps people answer your inquiries. Doing that should be encouraged, not somehow treated as an endorsement of tyranny. | | |
| |
| ▲ | soco an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | The best moment to fix this was yesterday. The second best time to fix it is now. | | |
| |
| ▲ | mc32 34 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Sure but that means November will have no impact on what CPB does. It’s always happened and will continue to happen just like stock trading with insider information by congress members will continue to happen regardless of November results. The vote came up and it was voted down and I don’t see that changing. I don’t see the spying on citizens changing. The NSA spied on Congress and they did nothing about it. It’s disingenuous to imply that November will have an effect on either of those topics. | | |
| ▲ | gilrain 30 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Actually and very obviously, what's happening now is new and worse. | | |
| ▲ | dmitrygr 24 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | My math teacher used to say that “obviously” means “I don’t know how to prove” and “trivially” means “tenuously at best”. Thanks for the demo of this in action. It’s been a thing since 1789:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception | |
| ▲ | sixothree 19 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Enough alarm bells are ringing to suggest that this is not normal. The persecution of political enemies isn't even a veiled threat, they are spoken outright in public. | | |
| ▲ | mc32 16 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Right like the ~400 subpoenas on Republican lawmakers by Jack S with the tenuous linkage to the Jan riot. You might have reason to subpoena 10 or even 30 lawmakers who may have had some linkage but going after ~400 seems dubious. | | |
| ▲ | 7 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | mschuster91 13 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | An event like the Jan 6th putsch attempt would, in pretty much every democracy that has got some sense of self-preservation, result in at the very least intense public hearings, and outside of the European Union that bans the death penalty under all circumstances, followed by the chief perpetrators getting strung up at the same gallows they brought to hang Mike Pence off of. The fact that barely any consequences came for those instigating the putsch, with only a few of those dumb enough to do stuff like parade around in front of cameras, is completely inexcusable. | | |
| ▲ | mc32 2 minutes ago | parent [-] | | The brought a mock up of a gallows -the same kind other protesters bring to anti-Trump rallies. Should the punish people who went into the Congressional buildings? Yes! Do they need to subpoena ~400 lawmakers and $10 donors to the campaign? I think it’s obvious that that is overreach and intimidation. |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | totallymike an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
| |
| ▲ | gortok an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It has always been this way; but for the hundreds of years before computers that fit in the palm of your hand that have your entire life on them, it was to ensure you weren’t bringing dangerous goods or produce into the country. It was a physical search of physical items. The issue now is that my entire life is literally on my phone. The issue now is that there is a 100-mile ‘border search exception’ in place. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception Now, within 100 miles of the border, should CBP choose to, they can search me without a warrant and search everything in my phone, and even retain it if they’d like. If I want to challenge that, I need tens of thousands of dollars and time. This is the very definition of an unreasonable search; but to change that we have to change the politicians and change the judiciary. It’s up to us, but until we get it changed, we may as well consider the 4th amendment a dead letter, and that means trouble for all of us. | | |
| ▲ | 28 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | moron4hire 38 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Wikipedia's map is wrong. The "border" includes international airports. There is very little of the population that is not within 100 miles of this "border." The map also does not show Hawai'i, which would be one green blob, there is no part of Hawai'i not 100 miles from the border. All of the New England states are similarly small enough to be completely covered, even by the erroneous picture of the physical border. You basically get a few, mostly uninhabited spots out in the West that aren't covered. |
| |
| ▲ | franga2000 33 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I've been hearing about the US searching phones for many years, but not a single time for any other (non-dictatorship) country. The advice for travelling to the US in my circles is "wipe your device, install some believable bullshit, restore from backup when you're through". Not for any other "normal" country. | | | |
| ▲ | alistairSH 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Only new-ish because cell phones are now not only ubiquitous but also contains troves of typically private information. Historically, individuals didn't have their entire lives, financial details, personal details, etc on their bodies when traveling. The border exception to the 4th was used primarily for enforcing customs/trade regulations. That carve out is now used to harass citizens. | |
| ▲ | anal_reactor 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The core issue is that on one hand, police needs power to protect the citizens, but at the same time the power might corrupt them. | | |
| ▲ | echelon 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is why state powers need judicial oversight. There are some instances where powers need to be exercised in a hurry, but there should always be proper reporting and a paper trail, with stiff reprimanded for misuse or abuse of the system. Accidents can happen, but they should be infrequent and should follow protocol. It would be great if citizens had more direct involvement in these cases too. I don't see why egregious abuses shouldn't be tried by jury. Police and intelligence agency employees should be held to a higher standard than civilians (like military personnel are subject to UCMJ), and breeches of protocols should lead to harsher punishments imposed upon them. It would be fine to pay them more if it required more training and accountability. | | |
| ▲ | someonebaggy an hour ago | parent [-] | | In most of Europe, police carry guns. But they are afraid to fire those guns, because there will be a disciplinary process and they are likely to lose their job or go to jail if they can't show there was no other alternative. But if there is a situation where it is necessary to fire the gun, it will be. | | |
| ▲ | mc32 20 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Also in Europe more cops have K-9s and aren’t afraid to sick them on suspects. | |
| ▲ | echelon 43 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | In the US, anyone can own a gun. Police have to perform a different risk calculus than in Europe. Police officers are 30x more likely to be murdered in the US South than in, say, Germany. | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | pstuart an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > police needs power to protect the citizens Those terms need to be clearly defined. SCOTUS has declared that the police actually have no duty to protect and to serve the people. And with an overwhelming amount of evidence, the police operate with effectively no accountability and repeated demonstrate that they abuse their powers freely. So yes, laws without teeth are pointless but the state's monopoly on violence should only be granted when it can be demonstrated to not be abused. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | totallymike an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [dead] |
|
| ▲ | ct0 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | order-matters an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | they said vote out ALL incumbents | | |
| ▲ | iinnPP an hour ago | parent [-] | | I also have a bridge to sell you. | | |
| ▲ | order-matters an hour ago | parent [-] | | so then what, we just dont vote? no one said it would fix everything/anything, but signals of change need to be sent | | |
| ▲ | iinnPP an hour ago | parent [-] | | If everyone avoided the ballot box? I imagine that coming to pass would indicate that the change has indeed already happened. You can't vote out of this, you can only organize across groups and control your way out. I'm happy to hear the alternative where you manage to vote incumbents out without the cooperation needed to actually fix the problem. | | |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | RHSeeger 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If you think the current administration hasn't pushed this so far beyond, and so much faster, what any previous administration has done - since maybe the red scare - I don't have a bridge to sell you. Because honestly, you shouldn't be anywhere near anything involving public welfare. | | |
| ▲ | raincole 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > The number of warrantless device searches at the border and the significant invasion of privacy they represent is only increasing. In Fiscal Year 2022, CBP conducted an all-time high of 45,499 device searches. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/05/federal-judge-makes-hi... But sure it's the current administration what pushed this so far beyond. Beyond 40k phones into 50k phones! | | |
| ▲ | adhadion an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | I really doubt the previous administration was trying to deprive people of their liberty based on their political beliefs. The current administration very clearly is. I can't speak to any changes in the phone search policy, but your right to freedom of expression is gone at the federal level. https://www.propublica.org/article/caught-in-crackdown-ice-c... | | |
| ▲ | user_7832 an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Both things are simultaneously possible:
* This admin is actively hostile in a specific way (eg towards immigrants)
* All govts have been hostile for a (very) hot minute (see: patriot act, snowden stuff that happened across different presidents). And a bonus:
* This is not a new thing, a is related to why people occasionally talk about "the swamp"/the "deep state"/"3 letter agencies". NSA has self interest to stay alive regardless of admin. And this aspect (of "some parts of the govt aren't really affected by the elected reps) isn't a new thing at all either - see: Yes (Prime) Minister. | |
| ▲ | brandon272 30 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37267299 (2023) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5192749 (2013) There have been discussions on HN about this topic across administrations. That is not to say that there aren’t differences in degree, but the government has long maintained that it has special rights to conduct searches at the border that would not be permitted elsewhere. | |
| ▲ | coldtea an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >I really doubt the previous administration was trying to deprive people of their liberty based on their political beliefs Well, not for pro-themselves ones at least. | |
| ▲ | Stingertough an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | etiennebausson 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Given that travel hadn't recovered from covid in 2022, that 45k to 55k increase mean even less. Has the % of people searched actually decreased? I don't trust the current U.S. gov (or any U.S. gov, really), but the figure isn't actually increasing in a significant way. The US. remain as unwelcoming to visitors as they have been since 2001. Nothing to see in this report. | | |
| ▲ | strictnein an hour ago | parent [-] | | > The US. remain as unwelcoming to visitors as they have been since 2001 Strangely the stats don't back your assertion. Wouldn't being "unwelcoming since 2001" result in a decrease in travel? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_the_United_States#V... | | |
| ▲ | y1n0 an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | I’d look for a change in slope. A permanent change that adversely affected tourism would decrease the slope, but maybe not so much as to make it negative. | | | |
| ▲ | jgwil2 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is meaningless without a denominator. How much has international tourism increased in those years? What percentage of international tourists visited the US before and after 2001? | | |
| ▲ | strictnein an hour ago | parent [-] | | So it wasn't so bad that the number of people visiting the US decreased, but it was bad enough that it didn't increase as quickly as other places? Anyways, let's compare to more "welcoming" places. This shows the slope of the data, so it's pretty easy to compare the changes between countries. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/international-tourist-tri... If you have data that shows otherwise, feel free to share it. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | y-curious an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | There is no recovering from this stat drop to the person you’re responding to. Well done. 45k pre trump is surprisingly high |
| |
| ▲ | someonebaggy 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Every administration pushes it beyond what the previous administration did. | | |
| ▲ | grim_io 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The "everyone does it" defense is how the worst of the worst get away with it. | | |
| ▲ | coldtea an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | And the "this one is different" defense is how the slightly less bad get away with it and continue to push the envelopse towards worse. | |
| ▲ | iinnPP an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You are correct, but everyone does it can ALSO be used to prevent anyone from getting away with it. | |
| ▲ | LtWorf 39 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | But it makes it clear that voting won't fix this. | | |
| ▲ | grim_io 21 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Are you implying that not voting will somehow lead to a better solution? Voting increasingly less corrupt options(as good as we can judge) is the way. What else can you do? |
|
| |
| ▲ | infinitezest an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is just adding noise. Even if true, it's still very, very bad. Why even bother saying this? | | |
| |
| ▲ | mapotofu 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Many of us have been warning that the systems built by presidents before Trump, would be abused by a president like Trump, and here we are. I think the critics of the system are the ones with public welfare in mind and ask you to take a deep breath. | | | |
| ▲ | hsuduebc2 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Well they did but I would be willing to bet that their successors will not remove laws allowing this. They may relieve it little bit but why would they remove such potentially valuable tool? Government always want to have as much control as it can possibly acquire. | |
| ▲ | KellyCriterion 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Well, at least did no Government before Trump demolish the US reputation in such a short time of 1.5y, so Im happy to hear about your bridge :-) |
| |
| ▲ | lenerdenator an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | "The previous administration is only doing what the last administration did!" seems to be the rallying cry of the Trump administrations. If Obama and Biden really did suck that much, and if Trump's the savior that they claim, he should be doing less of it, not more. Of course, that's blatantly ignoring the whole premise of Trump - a wannabe dictator implementing totalitarianism for the far-right in exchange for an opportunity to use the presidency for his personal gain in direct violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution - but that would be the improvement, not just the targeting of people you don't like with the same tactics. |
|
|
| ▲ | JensenTorp 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Unfortunately you have made it about politics, so half the people won't listen to you, and half will agree without understanding the problem of the situation. |
| |
| ▲ | phoghed an hour ago | parent [-] | | Brother on what planet is the customs and border agency of your government doing a warrantless search of your devices not political? |
|