Having just been given the third degree by both U.S. and Canadian border patrol last weekend, I can attest that it can be a really infuriating process. To be blunt, they can (and generally are) huge assholes, really getting in your face and making you feel like a criminal even when you have nothing to hide. I presume the goal of this is to psych out the people who actually are up to no good, but the end result is that you end up feeling pissed off and unwelcome.
That said, I definitely agree that there is another side to this story. For one thing, everything that happens at a border crossing is videotaped from about 14 different camera angles, so there's no way they're going charge him with assault unless he actually took a swing. The fact that the situation even got to that point--multiple guards, pepper spray, verbal commands--means he did something pretty egregious. The crossing guards are dicks but they are professional dicks, at least in my experience. Do as you're told and you'll eventually get through. Ignore repeated commands and project the same surliness back at them and you're just asking for trouble.
> project the same surliness back at them and you're just asking for trouble.
That's commonsense, but its truth still pisses me off. There is zero reason border guards deserve deference, and projecting surliness to people behaving surly is my natural right.
There is zero reason border guards deserve deference
No? Such universal, stratospheric levels of assholedom don't arise organically--border guards behave the way they do because they are trained to. Probably because the alternative, cheerfully waving everyone through, is unacceptable from a national security standpoint.
I know you can justify pretty much anything these days by waving the security flag, but I think in this instance it's fair. They deserve deference because somebody has got to secure our borders in this day and age, and like it or not, this is probably the best way to go about doing it. I'm willing to live with my feelings getting hurt if it means people aren't able to drive bombs over the border.
I think you are 100% wrong. Do we really want to live in a society where being hurried or annoyed at the border guard will result in searches, detention, or worse?
Pretty soon simply giving the guard an annoyed look can land you behind bars for a few hours. This is the opposite of the rule of law, it is giving way too much power to the whim of the guy with a gun.
No, but it isn't as simple as that nowadays. My only point is that, when there are people out there who are trying to blow you up, dealing with a certain amount of bullshit from law enforcement is an acceptable tradeoff for putting a stop to that. It's not optimal, but neither is dying in a terrorist attack. Neither extreme--fascism or doing nothing--appeals to me as much as the middle ground. YMMV.
If enough people think like you do, the terrorists won.
They are not out to blow you up. They want to destroy your way of life - your freedoms and the notion that government serves the people. The want the opposite.
And they are winning. Blowing people up is not the objective: it's the tool.
If enough people think like you do, the terrorists won
Al Qaeda spent $20,000 or so on September 11. The US spent $1 trillion and counting. They "won" the minute we opened our checkbook; turning the country into a police state was just dancing in the end zone.
> My only point is that, when there are people out there who are trying to blow you up,
The smart ones make the bombs inside the country. When has anyone ever tried to drive a bomb across the border? Hell, this is the same thing as airport security. They could just drive the bomb into the mess of cars at the border before being inspected and it would have the same effect. It would be even a more spectacular effect if done on a bridge (i.e. Ambassador (Detroit-Windor); Peace Bridge (Buffalo,NY); Rainbow Bridge (Niagara Falls)) because then it would strike fear into people about not being caught in the blast but being on the bridge that is collapsing (Hollywood milks this one all the time).
The vast majority of the US/Canadian border is unguarded and there are hundreds of roads the guy could have alternately taken.
Any sophisticated attacker would realize this and simply go a few miles out of the way to one of those logging roads.
I hardly think that your example offers evidence that border security enhances national security, only that it did in one isolated instance (with a very stupid terrorist).
Odds are if the terrorist failed to realize he could cross the border without being screened, he would have made some other mistake that would have foiled whatever his planned attack was.
Acting like a child and expecting the adults in the room to protect you only encourages those who believe you shouldn't live freely (whether it is your local politician or a religious radical).
> They deserve deference because somebody has got to secure our borders in this day and age, and like it or not, this is probably the best way to go about doing it. I'm willing to live with my feelings getting hurt if it means people aren't able to drive bombs over the border.
Have you ever been to EU? Or somewhere else? How it is, that these guys are able to act professionally, non-emotionally and secure the borders without acting like assholes?
This is not either-or situation, border guards can do their job without intimidation and beating people.
(The US border is in fact the worst one I ever went through. Makes you think.)
15 minutes by rowing boat anywhere in lake Huron near the Sault border.
But this guy was trying to leave.
On top of that there is a much easier way to get a bomb in to the US, buy it in bits and pieces in the US, assemble it there. No point in taking it across the border.
Well put - to put it simply - Don't act like you have any rights whatsoever when crossing a border - the instant you think you don't have to answer every question, be prepared for an instant search, or otherwise, be completely docile - well, that's the start of a fairly ugly downhill journey, as Mr. Peter Watts has just discovered.
As a frequent border crosser though, I'll note that I have _never_ witnessed, nor been exposed, to anything other than thoroughly professional (if sometimes highly antagonistic and hostile) behavior on the part of Immigration. These guys _really_ know what they are doing - and the "psych out" is intentional - nothing personal.
Though, I'll admit, traveling back to Canada for a visit (I work in Silicon Valley) and explaining what I (a Canadian Citizen) will be doing there, and why, and where - does get a little old after 10+ years of doing so. At least I know what to expect.
That argument's hardly better than the "he helps cats therefore he's innocent" quip at the bottom of the link. Quit thinking of there being two sides: there's no "other story", there's just "insufficient information". All we know is that he got pepper sprayed and charged, and that he needs money. Donate to his defense fund and leave the speculation to science fiction writers.
(I'll let someone else comment on "if you don't obey, you're asking for it".)
Swiss border guards at airports are worst - esp if your European (like me). I nearly got arrested for standing the wrong side of the yellow line a few months ago :) The best border guards I've met are the ones as Newark Airport, NY; friendly and smiley.
I actually find US/Canadian Border guards not too bad (by comparison) - as you say they are at least professional and perfectly helpful if you are courteous.
I agree with what you end with: he has to have done something pretty stubborn and rude to get that treatment.
Agreed, I've been in and out of many countries in my time, including multiple times through Canadian customs and through the US border. I've been greeted by surliness before, but usually less than I get in a coffee shop or supermarket checkout from people who are being paid to be nice.
My first time into Canada had me dragged through the entire process. Questioned, threatened, bag searched, more threatening, etc. In the end the other officers were telling the one dealing with me to lay off, I overheard one say, "He's got nothing, you've got to let him go through." The man who searched my baggage was downright courteous, he even complimented me on my packing skills.
The first thing in the article that made me question WTF was when he got out of the car. In my experience with police, you never get out of the car until you're directly told to. Whether he was told to or not, I didn't get from the article. If he wasn't told to, that would have at least got him slammed to the ground and handcuffed.
This wasn't his first time crossing the border, so this seems a little erroneous. He should have known how to behave at a border crossing, what he did to let this occur is beyond me. I've been greeted at customs by four cops with MP5's (gotta love the Spanish hospitality), and I doubt a single one had less-than-lethal rounds in them. I acted courteous even though I was speaking a foreign language, the immigration officer was a bit abrupt but I let it slide. The captain, or whatever he was, of the squad asked how good was the book I was reading (a Terry Pratchett novel I believe it was) and wished me a good vacation. There was a lot more stress there than at any other land or airport border crossing I've done.
That said, I definitely agree that there is another side to this story. For one thing, everything that happens at a border crossing is videotaped from about 14 different camera angles, so there's no way they're going charge him with assault unless he actually took a swing. The fact that the situation even got to that point--multiple guards, pepper spray, verbal commands--means he did something pretty egregious. The crossing guards are dicks but they are professional dicks, at least in my experience. Do as you're told and you'll eventually get through. Ignore repeated commands and project the same surliness back at them and you're just asking for trouble.