
Jogger accidentally crosses U.S. border from B.C., gets detained for 2 weeks - cpncrunch
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/jogger-accidentally-crosses-u-s-border-from-b-c-gets-detained-for-2-weeks-by-authorities-1.4717060
======
mindcrime
We really need to figure out how to get to a stateless, borderless society,
and end this kind of absurdity. There is NO justification, none, zero, zilch,
nada, for somebody being detained for two weeks for crossing an imaginary line
while running on a beach. It's not just absurd, it's beyond absurd.

~~~
colemannugent
> _...crossing an imaginary line..._

But it's not an imaginary line, it's a line that two democratic countries
agreed to create to separate them. She inadvertently crossed _one of the most
important lines that exists_ , a line that demarcates two sovereign countries
that hold wildly different world views. Until such a stateless utopia
manifests itself we still need these lines.

I agree on the two week detention being absurd. It should have taken less than
a few hours to sort things out.

~~~
mindcrime
_But it 's not an imaginary line, it's a line that two democratic countries
agreed to create to separate them._

Sorry, but I can't help but read that as "it's not an imaginary line, it's an
imaginary line".

 _She inadvertently crossed one of the most important lines that exists, a
line that demarcates two sovereign countries_

A case can be made that "sovereign countries" are imaginary constructs that
should be abolished, along with their imaginary lines of demarcation.

I mean, I understand where you're coming from, but what I'm saying is that
elevating that line to some concrete status is rooted in a worldview which has
no objective reality. We _can_ abolish borders, we just need to come together
and muster up the will to do it. Which means, in part, finding solutions to
all the problems the statists will use as arguments for preserving their
lines.

~~~
colemannugent
> _A case can be made that "sovereign countries" are imaginary constructs that
> should be abolished_

An exceedingly weak case can be made. It makes for a fun thought experiment
but it falls apart really quickly.

Say someone did manage to abolish all the states, why would that not just be
the conqueror establishing a new global state? How would you enforce the rule
_no states allowed_? Who would enforce it? If there was no global state to
enforce the rule, what stops someone like me from organizing a state and
easily conquering the stateless?

> _...elevating that line to some concrete status is rooted in a worldview
> which has no objective reality_

I'm curious what worldview you think is rooted in objective reality? To me a
world where everyone just gets along and lives in cooperative communes is
lacking a foundation in reality.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of the state. I do however view it as a
necessary evil. Remember, ultimately the state is still just people. Any gripe
you have with the state is just a gripe against people with power. Saying that
nobody should hold power is a cop out.

The hard part of organizing the human race is trying to determine who should
organize us. To that end it seems like a democratic state is more desirable
than a hopelessly disorganized commune.

------
curtis
I can't help but feel like there's some missing information here. One piece of
information that's missing from the headline but not the article is that the
jogger was not a Canadian citizen, which may have complicated things, but
doesn't seem like it should have complicated things so much that she needed to
be detained for two weeks.

One possibility is that the jogger not only wasn't a Canadian citizen, but may
not have been a fluent english-speaker either.

This still seems screwed up though.

------
luckydata
Sounds like the kind of stunts Iran pulls on tourists from time to time when
they try to make a political statement.

------
sandworm101
>>Roman, a citizen of France who had travelled to Canada to visit her mother
in B.C. and work on her English, didn't have any government-issued ID or
travel permits on her.

Ok. Free legal advice: If you a citizen of country A visiting relatives in
country B, don't go anywhere near country C without your passport. US
authorities acted very reasonably here. Two weeks is not a long time
considering she needed confirmation from multiple countries.

~~~
gojomo
Two weeks is _not_ reasonable for someone who presumably could've walked over
& back, at an official crossing, with instantaneous review of her
passport/eligibility.

Sure, an improper entry adds some complication. But if her story checks out –
passport available for review, low signage at the crossing, in jogging wear,
video shows no suspicious packages, well-established
addresses/education/career – then perhaps 24-48 hours would be reasonable.

I'm not uniquely blaming US border authorities here – if Canada wouldn't take
her back within 24 hours, as someone with proper documents who had just
previously been there legally, they share the blame in creating an
unreasonable system.

~~~
5555624
Except she "didn't have any government-issued ID or travel permits on her."
Her passport was not available for review.

They let her contact her mother, who brought her passport. All that was left
was for Canada to say she was in Canada legally.

So, Canada does deserve part of the blame. The article says her mother rushed
to the detention center with her passport and was told to submit it to
Immigration Canada. I have no idea why it took two weeks for officials on both
sides to determine she could go back to Canada; but, it sounds like there was
some sort of delay on the Canadian side. Of course, neither side will comment
on the case.

~~~
gojomo
The passport was available as soon as the relative reached the detention
center – strongly implied to be the same day as the arrest. That's when I'd
consider the 'reasonableness' clock to have started.

The Google Map attached to the story, with photos and annotated positions of
the beach and nearest border sign, are highly suggestive her explanation was
credible, and should have been self-evidently so to agents on the ground.

As w citizen of a country with visa-free travel to the US, the only question
of Canada that seems reasonable would be something like: "Let us know if this
person is a fugitive; if we don't hear from you in 12 hours, we'll set them
free in the U.S." Then she could walk back to Canada at an official crossing
with her passport, and Canada could object to that re-entry if necessary.

------
pissedOff2018
This looks more like a case of entrapment. There was no indication that there
is a line not to be crossed and this is a large public beach.

It makes me angry to see a guest of our country (yes Canada) treated this way
by our neighbor. You people have to get your shit together and stop treating
your friends like criminals.

------
Hnrobert42
How is this hacker news?

