The Cops Can Pretty Much Always Search Your Smartphone in Canada

[alfred russel]

Something that has been bugging me, maybe a lawyer can answer.

I was coming back to the US. I go up to immigration.

Immigration guy: "What was the purpose of your visit?"
Me: "Tourism"
Immigration guy: "How long were you gone?"
Me: "one week"
Immigration guy: "What are some of the things you saw while you were over there?"
Me: "I hung out in the capital for a few days, then I rented a car and drove around the north of the country, then I went into the desert."
Immigration guy: "I've been checking people in on this flight for 2 years, and that is literally the vaguest answer anyone has ever given me. I suggest you get more specific with me or I'll refer you to some guys that will have you get a LOT more specific."

So from here I gave more details and went on my way. But what an asshole. I was just trying to give quick answers because I didn't want to hold up the line, usually they just pass me through with vague answers, and I don't see how it possibly matters whether I tell them about my trip to a museum.

But my question is this: what if I just said, "go fuck yourself, I'm an american with an american passport, I'm not telling you about my vacation." Am I really under an obligation to answer their questions to get back into the country?

[HVC]

You could try, but I hope you aren't alergic to latex gloves.

[grumbler]

Something that has been bugging me, maybe a lawyer can answer.

I was coming back to the US. I go up to immigration.

Immigration guy: "What was the purpose of your visit?"
Me: "Tourism"
Immigration guy: "How long were you gone?"
Me: "one week"
Immigration guy: "What are some of the things you saw while you were over there?"
Me: "I hung out in the capital for a few days, then I rented a car and drove around the north of the country, then I went into the desert."
Immigration guy: "I've been checking people in on this flight for 2 years, and that is literally the vaguest answer anyone has ever given me. I suggest you get more specific with me or I'll refer you to some guys that will have you get a LOT more specific."

So from here I gave more details and went on my way. But what an asshole. I was just trying to give quick answers because I didn't want to hold up the line, usually they just pass me through with vague answers, and I don't see how it possibly matters whether I tell them about my trip to a museum.

But my question is this: what if I just said, "go fuck yourself, I'm an american with an american passport, I'm not telling you about my vacation." Am I really under an obligation to answer their questions to get back into the country?

Should have responded "I've been flying drugs into the US on this flight for 2 years, and yours was the vaguest fucking question an Immigration officer has ever asked.  If you want specific answers, ask specific questions!"

[Barrister]

Border searches are not the issue, the article plainly says that  the cops in Canada can search anyone's phone within Canada for virtually any reason.

And in doing so the article is wrong.

[Ed Anger]

I like Mounties

[alfred russel]

Should have responded "I've been flying drugs into the US on this flight for 2 years, and yours was the vaguest fucking question an Immigration officer has ever asked.  If you want specific answers, ask specific questions!"

What would totally punk them is if I said that, and then on my smartphone had loaded a bunch of fetish porn featuring gay latex butt exams.

They would have one guy doing a cavity search, while another is searching the smartphone..."Oh My God! Its a trap! He tricked us! STOP THE EXAM! ITS WHAT HE WANTS!"

[Barrister]

Here's the latest case law straight from the Supremes in the last 12 months on police powers to search your cellphone.

Canadian police may have more expansive rights than American police, but it most certainly is not "for any reason", and is constrained in a number of different ways.

http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2014/2014scc77/2014scc77.html

Personally, I think it's one of those cases that superficially is a ruling in favour of the Crown, but when you drill down into the specifics is actually a major win for the defence bar.

[Admiral Yi]

What would totally punk them is if I said that, and then on my smartphone had loaded a bunch of fetish porn featuring gay latex butt exams.

They would have one guy doing a cavity search, while another is searching the smartphone..."Oh My God! Its a trap! He tricked us! STOP THE EXAM! ITS WHAT HE WANTS!"

Your most cunning grift ever Dorsey.

[Barrister]

But my question is this: what if I just said, "go fuck yourself, I'm an american with an american passport, I'm not telling you about my vacation." Am I really under an obligation to answer their questions to get back into the country?

You, as an American citizen, have the right to enter the country.

The stuff you're bringing with you is an entirely different matter.

So you could strip down naked, say "go fuck yourself" and they would, eventually be forced to let you into the country.

[Tonitrus]

So you think customs laws should be nothing more than a suggestion.

I'll take your strawman bait...

No, they should be enforced properly. 

That being said, I think returning citizens should be given the benefit of the doubt unless there is probable cause/reasonable suspicion (the same rules as on-the-street police officers) to go beyond that.  There is no conflict with that ideal and existing customs laws. 

And AR's anecdote shows what is wrong with most customs agents, and heck, most law enforcement agents of all stripes...they should be competent, polite, and professional, not rude and cynical and making threats.

[Barrister]

So you think customs laws should be nothing more than a suggestion.

I'll take your strawman bait...

No, they should be enforced properly. 

That being said, I think returning citizens should be given the benefit of the doubt unless there is probable cause/reasonable suspicion (the same rules as on-the-street police officers) to go beyond that.  There is no conflict with that ideal and existing customs laws. 

And AR's anecdote shows what is wrong with most customs agents, and heck, most law enforcement agents of all stripes...they should be competent, polite, and professional, not rude and cynical and making threats.

The officer was competent, polite and professional.  AR's answer was indeed vague bullshit.  And the officer is right, AR can either go into specifics with him, or into specifics at a secondary screening.

Saying "we can do this the easy way, or the hard way" is not a threat - it's clearly laying out two possible courses of action, and the pros and cons of each.

[Admiral Yi]

I'll take your strawman bait...

No, they should be enforced properly. 

That being said, I think returning citizens should be given the benefit of the doubt unless there is probable cause/reasonable suspicion (the same rules as on-the-street police officers) to go beyond that.  There is no conflict with that ideal and existing customs laws. 

What could possibly constitute reasonable cause apart from an informant's tip?

[Admiral Yi]

The officer was competent, polite and professional.  AR's answer was indeed vague bullshit.  And the officer is right, AR can either go into specifics with him, or into specifics at a secondary screening.

Saying "we can do this the easy way, or the hard way" is not a threat - it's clearly laying out two possible courses of action, and the pros and cons of each.

Totally disagree.  All he had to do was ask Dorsey to be more specific.

[alfred russel]

The officer was competent, polite and professional.  AR's answer was indeed vague bullshit.  And the officer is right, AR can either go into specifics with him, or into specifics at a secondary screening.

Saying "we can do this the easy way, or the hard way" is not a threat - it's clearly laying out two possible courses of action, and the pros and cons of each.

I'll toss you a bone and disagree with Tonitrus that most immigration people are rude. I think most are polite.

But I really don't think my answer was vague bullshit. They always ask the same questions, I always answer in similar ways, sometimes they just say "welcome home" and sometimes they ask a follow up or two. I'm not sure how he wanted me to answer. I really doubt he wanted a day by day description of what I was doing, so should I just have picked a couple days and told him about those?

I also highly doubt he was being truthful in telling me that in two years that was the most vague answer he has heard.

[DGuller]

The officer was competent, polite and professional.  AR's answer was indeed vague bullshit.  And the officer is right, AR can either go into specifics with him, or into specifics at a secondary screening.

Saying "we can do this the easy way, or the hard way" is not a threat - it's clearly laying out two possible courses of action, and the pros and cons of each.

He was polite?  Man, your job is really getting to you, you no longer understand how humans perceive things.