How to piss off customs agents with impunity

[Shryke]

Holy Shit mormont, I didn't even notice that the first time I read it.

Wow, that just puts the post in a whole new light.

[Kalbear]

So I can assume ordinary people ordinarily go around asking others to justify what they are doing in their country and what their personal belongings are? Because I can imagine that if this were to be a Mexican-looking chap being interrogated by a white guy, rather than a Libertarian-seeming chap being interrogated by what sounds to be a black woman, you and many others in this thread would think the rudeness gradient ran in precisely the opposite direction.

After all, they're just people, not minions of the state.

Honestly? Yes! I've been asked all sorts of times on random travels who I am and why I'm in their country. And if I responded 'none of your business' they'd have looked at me like I was some ignorant paranoid american asshat. It's a very common thing to talk about.

They didn't ask to JUSTIFY anything. They asked what the purpose of their trip was.

Really, this is just idiotic on too many levels.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Gaorthas,

In my experience it's difficult to determine accent from written text unless the author attempts to write in dialect. Even then it's not always clear. That's quite an assumption you're making and one of little relevance to this discussion.

[DanteGabriel]

So I can assume ordinary people ordinarily go around asking others to justify what they are doing in their country and what their personal belongings are? Because I can imagine that if this were to be a Mexican-looking chap being interrogated by a white guy, rather than a Libertarian-seeming chap being interrogated by what sounds to be a black woman, you and many others in this thread would think the rudeness gradient ran in precisely the opposite direction.

After all, they're just people, not minions of the state.

Well ordinary people don't have a job that involves preventing dangerous or illegal items from coming into the country, so there's that. But don't let that stop your dumb-as-dogshit rantery.

Seriously, anyone with a pair of neurons to rub together could have avoided such an epically stupid post.

[Tyrellius]

This thread makes me sad.

Hell, the lady was just trying to do her job, yes the agent who mentioned a cooling off period was a bit of a dick, but that dude sounds like he would have set me off and I am the Fonz of security.

100-1 this prick would be one the first to complain about lax border checks and contraband/illegals getting into the country.

[Old Nan]

There's so much here that's random, unfounded and entirely silly that I hesitate to single one bit out, but what on earth gives you the idea that the woman 'sounds to be black'?

That she's in this line of work in this part of the world gives her a disproportionate chance of being black. That a libertarian white man describes her as a "matron" almost guarantees it, to my ears.

Well ordinary people don't have a job that involves preventing dangerous or illegal items from coming into the country, so there's that.

Well, Kalbear stated that they're "people, not faceless minions of the great monolith," and I certainly agree. Using a "job" as an excuse for behavior stopped being accepted in polite company a few generations back.

[Kalbear]

Okay, Gaorthas -

If you're in a restaurant, do you think it's an invasion of your privacy if the waitstaff asks to take your order?

If you're at a rental car agency, do you think it's an invasion of your privacy if they ask to see proof of insurance?

If you're buying alcohol, is it an invasion of your privacy to see ID? How about to ask questions to determine whether or not you're impaired?

Part of a border crossing guard's job is to ask questions. This is an expectation of their job and an expectation of privacy at those places. This is not unreasonable. You can choose not to answer for whatever reason - you have that right - but they can then choose to verify your reasonable intentions in entering the country in other ways.

[mormont]

That she's in this line of work in this part of the world gives her a disproportionate chance of being black. That a libertarian white man describes her as a "matron" almost guarantees it, to my ears.

I wouldn't know about the 'line of work' point, but he described her as 'having the appearance and manner of a prison matron'. A prison matron, I believe, is a person of authority in a women's prison, the equivalent of a senior warden. I wouldn't have thought that was particularly associated with being black.

And I'll give the original author this: he doesn't once in his blog post give any indication that race is an issue to him. Nor, despite my own comment, do we really know that he's a libertarian. To impute racist motives to the writer to cover up your own lazy racial stereotyping is pretty weak stuff.

[Relic]

Yep. Not a pair of neurons to be found here.

You sound pretty black Dante.

[Old Nan]

To impute racist motives to the writer to cover up your own lazy racial stereotyping is pretty weak stuff.

Not in the least. I freely acknowledge that I'm racist! And while that prevents me from (selectively) seeing racism everywhere the way a leftist can, I would think that people might not dismiss me out of hand when I say that something is a racist code word. You are absolutely right in that his rant is otherwise not colored, if you'll forgive the pun, in that way, but I would bet that the woman in question (not to be confused with women in prison) is black. If I were a betting person.

[mormont]

Not in the least. I freely acknowledge that I'm racist! And while that prevents me from (selectively) seeing racism everywhere the way a leftist can, I would think that people might not dismiss me out of hand when I say that something is a racist code word. You are absolutely right in that his rant is otherwise not colored, if you'll forgive the pun, in that way, but I would bet that the woman in question (not to be confused with women in prison) is black. If I were a betting person.

Oh dear. So, 'prison matron' is a racist code word, purely because you say so. But it's leftists who see racism everywhere. (Selectively, of course.)

There was no trace of race being an issue in this discussion until you stepped in. There still isn't, apart from your floundering attempts to crowbar it in. It's rather sad, actually.

[IheartTesla]

Many of the commenters took issue with my rude tone toward the CBP officers. This criticism is profoundly misguided.

To the authoritarian mind, there are only two responses to a demand: submission or defiance, and anything less than total submission is defiance. A Lutheran grandmother from Savannah with manners from an antebellum finishing school would be hassled if she refused to answer CBP’s questions.

Answering with a tart “None of your business” underscores that I will not be pushed around and – potentially important from a criminal procedure perspective – is an unambiguous statement that I am not waiving any rights. It is a line in the linoleum.

Further, why is politeness a one-way street? Many commenters relayed stories about rude, abusive, mean and intrusive CBP officers. The entire cop ethos is based on intimidation and domination. We should be able to give the officers a little of their own medicine, and, if they’re as tough as they claim, they can take it.

The followup in its entirety can be seen here. Well, maybe he should reason that the CBP officers who were rude are not the exact same people he was interacting with, so giving the officers a taste of their own medicine is a bit ridiculous.

Anyway, I got an answer to my question, the CBP officers have no right to bar a citizen reentry into his/her own country.

[Insert Edit]

Heh. Matronly = fat?

Nah, this is America, there's no fat people.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

IE,

I rode through my undergraduate alma mater a couple of weeks back and was suprised by how many rather heavy undergrads seemed to be walking around.

[Maester Yobjascz]

Scot -- they only "seemed" to be walking? Were they actually rolling? :stunned:

[Angalin]

I have to admit I've been asked some rather personal questions by US border officials

That's because you're a long-haired hippie who might (further) corrupt the youth of America. :P

Am I missing something? How can one judge the rudeness of the statements without having heard the delivery?

"Why were you in China?" asked the passport control officer, a woman with the appearance and disposition of a prison matron.

"None of your business," I said.

Her eyes widened in disbelief.

"Excuse me?" she asked.

"I'm not going to be interrogated as a pre-condition of re-entering my own country," I said.

I agree that the tone of voice would make a bit of difference, but "interrogated" is a loaded word. In any case, if during the incident he spoke using the same tone as he used to write his blog post, I wouldn't describe it as polite.

Sometimes I get a follow-up question ("Was the beer really good in Belgium?" or "how's business in India"?) and after I answer, I always get a "welcome home".

Would the blogger in question have answered any questions about the quality of Chinese beer, I wonder, or would he have felt that might compromise him somehow? ;)

[alguien]

Reading his follow up makes me lean more towards the "this guys is an arrogant douche" direction.

I did think that this comment someone left on the follow up entry was interesting though:

No one questions that you have Fifth Amendment rights at a border if you are detained.

However, federal courts have ruled that questioning at the border does not violate your constitutional right to remain silent and does not trigger a Miranda warning.

Furthermore, since you were simply being asked routine questions for entry, you are not considered to be in custody; therefore, the 5th Amendment does not apply. [Of course, once they denied you entry and detained you, you were in custody, and could continue to refuse to answer questions.]

I find it bizarre that you would choose to vindicate your 5th Amendment right not to incriminate yourself, but expose yourself to the border search exception of the 4th Amendment and let your your body and personal belongings be searched based on your refusal to answer these questions.

So even if you are technically correct that "once a traveler has provided bona fide proof of U.S. citizenship, he or she is entitled to re-enter the country," a travelers belongings are not.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

MY,

I'd provide an equally pithy response, but, I don't want to pick on people rearding their weight.

(To be clear I'm not saying you are my poor skills attempting to utilize written English are well established and well worth picking on). :)

[Errant Bard]

There's one thing striking in all this, in the end : it feels like y'all are living in a police state, where it's legal not to answer personal questions, yet they're asked all the time, and you get hassled if you don't answer, where what you do is recorded, even if it's perfectly legally refusing to answer personal questions, and most of all, where half the citizen argue that it's dumb, arrogant and disrespectful to try to keep your privacy, especially if it's routine for that privacy to be invaded despite the right for the contrary.

Feels kind of scary to me.

[devotee]

There's one thing striking in all this, in the end : it feels like y'all are living in a police state, where it's legal not to answer personal questions, yet they're asked all the time, and you get hassled if you don't answer, where what you do is recorded, even if it's perfectly legally refusing to answer personal questions, and most of all, where half the citizen argue that it's dumb, arrogant and disrespectful to try to keep your privacy, especially if it's routine for that privacy to be invaded despite the right for the contrary.

Feels kind of scary to me.

I think you overestimate the privacy issue involved, and I think the ones who takes a 5th to those routine questions are doing the same.