The Cops Can Pretty Much Always Search Your Smartphone in Canada

[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.

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.

Completely disagree.  His initial answers were about what I would expect the average person would give in response to do what they did on a touristy vacation.

Giving the "in two years those were the most vaguest answers" line shows obvious disrespect and suspicion.  Suspicion is fine, that's part of the job, but showing it off is unprofessional if the person being questioned is not a suspect in a crime.

It may not be a direct "threat", but it is an attempt at unsubtle coercion, again pretty damned unprofessional to a non-suspect.

[Tonitrus]

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.

I'll give you that one.

For my personal experience:

Canada = 1 out of 3
U.S. = also 1 out of 3
Japan = ? out of 1 (practically invisible).
   

[Tonitrus]

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?

The same standards that police officers apply at traffic stops or stopping someone on the street.

That being said, applying higher standards to non-U.S. citizens entering the country is fine, though some decency and common sense should still apply.  But U.S. citizens should be treated as if with anywhere else in the U.S.; returning from outside the country should not, by itself, be immediate grounds for a higher suspicion of criminal activity.

[Martinus]

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.

The article is suspect.

Are you suggesting that an article from a site that is Slate's partner is in any way not meeting the highest standards of journalist credibility?

[Martinus]

I like how this thread quickly turned into "Barrister Boy is a Formalistic Asshole Out of Touch With Reality: Case Study no. 3648". 

[katmai]

I like Mounties

Faggit

[Tonitrus]

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

I like how this thread quickly turned into "Barrister Boy is a Formalistic Asshole Out of Touch With Reality: Case Study no. 3648". 

No need to make things personal. 

[Admiral Yi]

The same standards that police officers apply at traffic stops or stopping someone on the street.

Someone on the street is only going to get searched if they're seen committing a crime, Bloomberg's stop and frisk being a notable exception.  Unless someone tries to sell a kilo of smack to the person behind them in the ICE line, what you're proposing does in fact turn customs laws into a suggestion.

[sbr]

The same standards that police officers apply at traffic stops or stopping someone on the street.

Someone on the street is only going to get searched if they're seen committing a crime, Bloomberg's stop and frisk being a notable exception.  Unless someone tries to sell a kilo of smack to the person behind them in the ICE line, what you're proposing does in fact turn customs laws into a suggestion.

Should we assume every citizen re-entering the country is smuggling smack?

[Admiral Yi]

Should we assume every citizen re-entering the country is smuggling smack?

That would be a patently false assumption.

[sbr]

I agree.

[CountDeMoney]

The same standards that police officers apply at traffic stops or stopping someone on the street.

Someone on the street is only going to get searched if they're seen committing a crime, Bloomberg's stop and frisk being a notable exception.

Stop and Frisk is not a search, and plenty of agencies do it.

[crazy canuck]

If you're a citizen of the country that you're entering, there is no good reason you shouldn't.

It depends on whether the government of the country is willing to grant that expectation to its citizens.  Remember that most countries are like Canada, where rights are given by the government, not like the US, where rights are human and the government only has the power to infringe on them that the people give it.  Those are two completely different starting points.

The US of A.  Where corporations and now rights are human.

[Barrister]

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.

I dunno.  I always think back to a police interview I remember watching.  Crack had been found in the back seat of the car, and police were interviewing the occupants about it.

First officer starts much as you guys suggest - very polite and non-assertive.  And this lady spent a good hour rambling about nothing at all.

Then a second officer comes in.  He was very professional, but very direct.  He didn't put up with bullshit and said so.  Lady admitted everything (or at least enough for a conviction) within 10 minutes.

Law enforcement officers should always be respectful, but they are not their for a social visit.  Their questions should be answered directly, and they will often need to be quite blunt in their responses.

[crazy canuck]

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?

The same standards that police officers apply at traffic stops or stopping someone on the street.

That being said, applying higher standards to non-U.S. citizens entering the country is fine, though some decency and common sense should still apply.  But U.S. citizens should be treated as if with anywhere else in the U.S.; returning from outside the country should not, by itself, be immediate grounds for a higher suspicion of criminal activity.

Do you think non Americans are more apt to smuggle things into the country than Americans?