Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login
Australian children's author Mem Fox detained by US border control: 'I sobbed..' (theguardian.com)
22 points by withoutfriction on Feb 26, 2017 | hide | past | web | favorite | 16 comments



What possible reason could they come up with to do this? Do we have the same problem in Border Control that we do in our Police, bullies just bullying because they can?


Yes, it was going on before Trump, but now they feel empowered with free reign to mess with whomever they want.

US citizens: don't cower to the bullies. No reason not to be polite, but in the face of aggression, remember you have the right to enter the US at all times by showing your passport. It's not their business what you were doing overseas, don't incriminate yourself and give them reasons to accuse you of lying to them (a crime). Do not answer questions if taken for further screening. Do understand they may seize your phone and laptop if you don't unlock for them.


Too late to edit so will reply again with an interesting NYT comment today:

>Cynthia New Hampshire 4 hours ago This behavior is actually the behavior that should be of serious concerns to Americans. I spent six years in the military, and I learned a lot about human nature during that time, and it boils down to this: there are some people who are suited for positions of authority and some people who are absolutely not. Those who are not are often drawn, for psychological reasons to complicated to describe here, to work in positions where they can exert their personal brand of control and authority with impunity. What prevents many of these folks, those in ICE, corrections, law enforcement, etc., from behaving in outright unacceptable manners is the fact that there is a mystique, or more accurately, a facade of controlled professionalism around them that serves to regulate their behaviors. That facade is eroding--rapidly--and what we're seeing is what happens when a society doesn't psychologically screen and train applicants fully. The culture of law enforcement is not a productive or healthy one as it exists today, and the deregulation (clinically) we see here will become more frequent and increasingly ugly. As the need for more ICE and law enforcement agents increases, the quality of those applicants will degrade. I fear that what we'll end up with is a Stanford Prison Experiment sort of free-for-all that we can't call off after six days.

I agree with this. My assessment of the situation has been that while there may not have been direct command from John Kelly et al to start being more aggressive, this can flow culturally through an organization without direct instruction very easily. Look at Uber's culture set from the top down.


Yes, we do. Border Patrol is even less accountable.

They've decided they have authority over 2/3 of the population on some absurd argument that anything within a hundred miles of a border and/or the ocean is under their jurisdiction. https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone

They can shoot and kill a kid in another country and not be sued or extradited: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/immigration/2017/02/21/cross-...


I'll have to follow that case.


This is the US. Its a miserable place to etch out a living for the lower middle class, to top that off they hand out to EVERYBODY in positions of power nothing but "Hammers" in their toolkits. This leads to every single problem looking like a nail to them.

The US is eating itself alive, nothing short of a Bernie Sanders style revolution is going to slow this process down.


> nothing short of a Bernie Sanders style revolution is going to slow this process down

Or, to provide a counter point, a Libertarian revolution.

And I don't mean Trump's bastard version of Libertarianism that just means removing regulations from companies.

I mean the kind that lets people or all color, religion, sex, orientation, and place or origin live their life free and keep the money they earn.

Under a Libertarian system border agents that overstep and infringe on the liberties of people (citizens or not) would be taken to task. And if we treat the environment as the commons, it would certainly be better for the environment than under Trump as well. [1]

The poor would be helped in this scenario because instead of being thrown in jail for drug abuse it would be treated as a public health issue. And predatory government welfare programs (ones designed to keep you on them forever rather than help you get on your feet) would be gone. Under Sanders those would increase.

Now the "Libertarian Utopia" has it's drawbacks. I'm not going to pretend it is all roses. But I think it would be better for everyone than a Bernie Sander's style revolution and definitely better than Trump.

[1] Example: Trump removed regulation from coal companies wanting to pollute the water. But a principled Libertarian could argue that such pollution infringes on the liberties of those who have to drink from or have wells that get fed from that water. Likewise, if a company wants to build a pipeline through your land and you say no, it's not happening sorry, find somewhere else to put your pipeline.


There are some previous discussions:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13729770 (15 comments)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13730736 (4 comments)


Its only a matter of time before this craziness begins to have negative effects on economy of the united states.



Is that really all the fault of Trump? Not being from the US, my impression was that traveling to the US has been an ordeal for quite a while now (maybe since 9/11)? There were also famous cases of people dying, wasn't there a taser incident and one (mentally disabled?) person being choked to death? There was even a Tom Hanks movie about a guy stuck at an airport indefinitely. All before Trump.


The Tom Hanks movie was set in Paris, and based on an actual case there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mehran_Karimi_Nasseri


My reading is that the movie was set at JFK in New York, based on real life events which took place at Charles de Gaulle in Paris.


The movie was set at JFK, but it could not have happened there in real life because US airports do not have international transit areas with restaurants or shops. The area before passport control usually contains bathrooms and little else.


didn't know, thanks - haven't actually watched it.

(edit, sine HN doesn't let me reply: why would it be important to have watched it? According to Wikipedia, it is set at JFK. Watching it would not have added a new impression about that.)


Then why did you cite it as evidence of something?




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: