QUOTE=acidzebra;230908]Directly from the official release:
"Officers may detain documents and electronic devices, or copies thereof, for
a reasonable period of time to perform a thorough border search. The search may take place on-site or at an off-site location."
Note that it says "
detain electronic devices OR copies thereof". In other words, we reserve the right to send your electronics to the NSA or wherever for further analysis. And all over the document it goes on about "reasonable" but it doesn't come out and give any limits for "reasonable".[/QUOTE]
No "in other words" .... that is your own take on it. It is NOT what the policy says. So, I shall just ignore that part of your argument, which has no basis in fact.
Note also that the word used is "detained" ... not "confiscated." I see nothing that indicates "off site" shall be the NSA. A reasonable period of time is something that has been defined by the courts of the United States in hundreds of thousands of state and federal cases. You read those, and then get back to me.
QUOTE=acidzebra;230908]
Somewhere in there it also says that if they do take your stuff for further examination, "responses [from assisting agencies] should be received within fifteen (1 5) days", but also "CBP may permit extensions in increments of seven (7) days." - with no upper limit mentioned.[/QUOTE]
And if they do "take your stuff" for "further examination" you can bet your boots it will be because they found something highly suspect. I do not imagine for one moment that this sort of stuff is going to happen while someone tries to figure out if your copy of "Great Expectations" is from Project Gutenberg or not.
QUOTE=acidzebra;230908]And I keep telling you, that is not the point - refer to the earlier linked article about "I have nothing to hide and other misunderstanding about privacy" -
I will link to it again as you should really read it. I can't believe an attorney (don't know if you are, someone in the thread mentioned it) does not see this. They have no right to access that data. You can pooh-pooh it and call me paranoid all you like, but I have no control over copies of that data. If they tell me it is destroyed, can I be reasonably sure? Why? Because they tell me so? From the same guys that proposed the Total Information Awareness program (which was quickly renamed "Terrorist Information Awareness" in 2003 after a media outrage)? The same guys from that little
NSA/AT&T outing?[/QUOTE]
And, I keep telling you ... if you are not quoting primary source material or case law, then I really don't give a rat's ass what they have to say. Some idiot's article is not the law. Everything you read in an article on the internet is not necessarily the truth. So, since I have no reason to believe that what it says is (1) the law or (2) true ... why exactly should I waste my time reading it?? Is it a first hand explanation of policy by Customs?? No?? Then, please ... only waste as much of my time as you absolutely have to.
QUOTE=acidzebra;230908]From here in the Netherlands, "land of the free" is starting to sound increasingly like a sad joke, and to see people actually supporting and defending these lame "anti-terrorist" measures is a shock to me.[/QUOTE]
Oh, and the Netherlands isn't a land of the free?? That's so sad to know. I, myself, have never used that term with respect to the United States. It makes us sound like some sort of paradise. This is not paradise. It is a country, a country that is entitled (just like yours) to protect it's borders. A country whose Customs and Immigration Departments have decided to have a policy of searching digital information. Now, before you start going on and on about "land of the free" and "rights of the citizens" and yada yada ... keep in mind that travellers from other countries are not entitled to the rights of a citizen ... and your personal opinion of the United States matters not one iota to me. You are entitled to it ... I am entitled not to care about it.
However, since you are not a citizen, you don't have standing to complain about the search policy in the first place. I'm sure someone will let you know as soon as they decide to extend US Constitutional rights to everyone on the planet. As far as any citizens who have complained ... it would appear that they were engaging in illegal acts, which makes the complaint a little hollow, don't you think??
Sorry .... sillly me, of course you don't think ... you read some person's article and let them do the thinking for you. Why let the law get in the way, right?