Two disturbing stories....both eroding civil rights. :MERGED

This is a discussion on Two disturbing stories....both eroding civil rights. :MERGED within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; The first one has to do with US Agents seizing traveler's electronic devices & copying & searching thru the data. Clarity Sought on Electronics Searches ...

Page 1 of 9 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 127

Thread: Two disturbing stories....both eroding civil rights. :MERGED

  1. #1
    VIP Member
    Array goawayfarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Fork Union, Virginia
    Posts
    2,694

    Two disturbing stories....both eroding civil rights. :MERGED

    The first one has to do with US Agents seizing traveler's electronic devices & copying & searching thru the data.

    Clarity Sought on Electronics Searches
    .....tech engineer returning from a business trip to London objected when a federal agent asked him to type his password into his laptop computer. "This laptop doesn't belong to me," he remembers protesting. "It belongs to my company." Eventually, he agreed to log on and stood by as the officer copied the Web sites he had visited....
    The second one is about DNA samples being taken during 'routine traffic stops'.

    Police Swabbing Mouths During Traffic Stops In Serial Killer Hunt - Orlando News Story - WKMG Orlando

    .....Agents are using the DNA kits to collect as much DNA as possible during traffic stops and special operations.....
    Why do these stories really bother me? I personally haven't been subjected to either one, but the very idea that these are occurring is very VERY disturbing.

    Are we to the point where we have to prove ourselves innocent of any wrong doing while we go thru our daily lives, instead of the government proving our guilt?
    Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est.-Seneca

    "If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. If I have a gun, what do I have to be paranoid about?" -Clint Smith

    "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." -Jeff Cooper

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Distinguished Member Array morintp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    1,233
    It's scary. Not what the terrorist did/could do to us, but what we're doing to ourselves.

  4. #3
    Senior Member Array walvord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    St. Charles County Missouri
    Posts
    991
    Quote Originally Posted by goawayfarm View Post
    Are we to the point where we have to prove ourselves innocent of any wrong doing while we go thru our daily lives, instead of the government proving our guilt?
    It would appear that we are very close to that place in time.
    The most exhilarating thing in life is getting shot at with no results.
    - Winston Churchill
    Endowment Life Member - NRA
    Life Member - GOA
    Member - Oath Keepers, SAF, CCRKBA
    U.S. Army (72G) 1975-1980

  5. #4
    Member Array DocRhino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    27
    The quote I found today for my sig says it all.....
    When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion. - C. P. Snow

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array matiki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    N.W.
    Posts
    2,917
    I can't say I'm surprised. There have been Freudian slips aplomb from both sides of the aisle.

    'Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.'

    George W. Bush
    5 August 2004
    "Wise people learn when they can; fools learn when they must." - The Duke of Wellington

  7. #6
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797

    Exclamation

    "If Tyranny and Oppression Come to this Land, it Will be in the Guise of Fighting a Foreign Enemy" - James Madison
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

    Sig P229 DAK - .40 S&W
    Ruger SP101 - .357 Mag

  8. #7
    Distinguished Member Array Chooie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,870

    Fourth amendment? What fourth amendment?

    Wow... this is insanity.

    Electronic searches prompt protests - Washington Post - MSNBC.com

    Electronic searches prompt protests
    Seizure of laptops, cameras and cellphones raising legal questions
    By Ellen Nakashima
    The Washington Post
    updated 3:59 a.m. ET, Thurs., Feb. 7, 2008

    Nabila Mango, a therapist and a U.S. citizen who has lived in the country since 1965, had just flown in from Jordan last December when, she said, she was detained at customs and her cellphone was taken from her purse. Her daughter, waiting outside San Francisco International Airport, tried repeatedly to call her during the hour and a half she was questioned. But after her phone was returned, Mango saw that records of her daughter's calls had been erased.

    A few months earlier in the same airport, a tech engineer returning from a business trip to London objected when a federal agent asked him to type his password into his laptop computer. "This laptop doesn't belong to me," he remembers protesting. "It belongs to my company." Eventually, he agreed to log on and stood by as the officer copied the Web sites he had visited, said the engineer, a U.S. citizen who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of calling attention to himself.

    Maria Udy, a marketing executive with a global travel management firm in Bethesda, said her company laptop was seized by a federal agent as she was flying from Dulles International Airport to London in December 2006. Udy, a British citizen, said the agent told her he had "a security concern" with her. "I was basically given the option of handing over my laptop or not getting on that flight," she said.

    The seizure of electronics at U.S. borders has prompted protests from travelers who say they now weigh the risk of traveling with sensitive or personal information on their laptops, cameras or cellphones. In some cases, companies have altered their policies to require employees to safeguard corporate secrets by clearing laptop hard drives before international travel.

    Right to search?
    Today, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Asian Law Caucus, two civil liberties groups in San Francisco, are filing a lawsuit to force the government to disclose its policies on border searches, including which rules govern the seizing and copying of the contents of electronic devices. They also want to know the boundaries for asking travelers about their political views, religious practices and other activities potentially protected by the First Amendment. The question of whether border agents have a right to search electronic devices at all without suspicion of a crime is already under review in the federal courts.

    The lawsuit was inspired by some two dozen cases, 15 of which involved searches of cellphones, laptops, MP3 players and other electronics. Almost all involved travelers of Muslim, Middle Eastern or South Asian background, many of whom, including Mango and the tech engineer, said they are concerned they were singled out because of racial or religious profiling.

    A U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokeswoman, Lynn Hollinger, said officers do not engage in racial profiling "in any way, shape or form." She said that "it is not CBP's intent to subject travelers to unwarranted scrutiny" and that a laptop may be seized if it contains information possibly tied to terrorism, narcotics smuggling, child pornography or other criminal activity.

    The reason for a search is not always made clear. The Association of Corporate Travel Executives, which represents 2,500 business executives in the United States and abroad, said it has tracked complaints from several members, including Udy, whose laptops have been seized and their contents copied before usually being returned days later, said Susan Gurley, executive director of ACTE. Gurley said none of the travelers in the ACTE suit raised concerns about racial or ethnic profiling. And Gurley said none of the travelers were charged with a crime.

    Copied log-on, password
    "I was assured that my laptop would be given back to me in 10 or 15 days," said Udy, who continues to fly into and out of the United States. She said the federal agent copied her log-on and password, and asked her to show him a recent document and how she gains access to Microsoft Word. She was asked to pull up her e-mail but could not because of lack of Internet access. With ACTE's help, she pressed for relief. More than a year later, Udy has received neither her laptop nor an explanation.

    ACTE last year filed a Freedom of Information Act request to press the government for information on what happens to data seized from laptops and other electronic devices. "Is it destroyed right then and there if the person is in fact just a regular business traveler?" Gurley asked. "People are quite concerned. They don't want proprietary business information floating, not knowing where it has landed or where it is going. It increases the anxiety level."

    Udy has changed all her work passwords and no longer banks online. Her company, Radius, has tightened its data policies so that traveling employees must access company information remotely via an encrypted channel, and their laptops must contain no company information.

    At least two major global corporations, one American and one Dutch, have told their executives not to carry confidential business material on laptops on overseas trips, Gurley said. In Canada, one law firm has instructed its lawyers to travel to the United States with "blank laptops" whose hard drives contain no data. "We just access our information through the Internet," said Lou Brzezinski, a partner at Blaney McMurtry, a major Toronto law firm. That approach also holds risks, but "those are hacking risks as opposed to search risks," he said.

    The U.S. government has argued in a pending court case that its authority to protect the country's border extends to looking at information stored in electronic devices such as a laptop without any suspicion of a crime. In border searches, it regards a laptop the same as a suitcase.

    "It should not matter . . . whether documents and pictures are kept in 'hard copy' form in an executive's briefcase or stored digitally in a computer. The authority of customs officials to search the former should extend equally to searches of the latter," the government argued in the child pornography case being heard by a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco.

    As more and more people travel with laptops, BlackBerrys and cellphones, the government's laptop-equals-suitcase position is raising red flags.

    "It's one thing to say it's reasonable for government agents to open your luggage," said David D. Cole, a law professor at Georgetown University. "It's another thing to say it's reasonable for them to read your mind and everything you have thought over the last year. What a laptop records is as personal as a diary but much more extensive. It records every Web site you have searched. Every e-mail you have sent. It's as if you're crossing the border with your home in your suitcase."

    If the government's position on searches of electronic files is upheld, new risks will confront anyone who crosses the border with a laptop or other device, warned Mark Rasch, a technology security expert with FTI Consulting and a former federal prosecutor. "Your kid can be arrested because they can't prove the songs they downloaded to their iPod were legally downloaded," he said. "Lawyers run the risk of exposing sensitive information about their client. Trade secrets can be exposed to customs agents with no limit on what they can do with it. Journalists can expose sources, all because they have the audacity to cross an invisible line."

    Hollinger said customs officers "are trained to protect confidential information."

    'Content of people's thoughts'
    Shirin Sinnar, a staff attorney with the Asian Law Caucus, said that by scrutinizing the Web sites people search and the phone numbers they've stored on their cellphones, "the government is going well beyond its traditional role of looking for contraband and really is looking into the content of people's thoughts and ideas and their lawful political activities."

    If conducted inside the country, such searches would require a warrant and probable cause, legal experts said.

    Customs sometimes singles out passengers for extensive questioning and searches based on "information from various systems and specific techniques for selecting passengers," including the Interagency Border Inspection System, according to a Customs statement. "CBP officers may, unfortunately, inconvenience law-abiding citizens in order to detect those involved in illicit activities," the statement said. But the factors agents use to single out passengers are not transparent, and travelers generally have little access to the data to see whether there are errors.

    Although Customs said it does not profile by race or ethnicity, an officers' training guide states that "it is permissible and indeed advisable to consider an individual's connections to countries that are associated with significant terrorist activity."

    "What's the difference between that and targeting people because they are Arab or Muslim?" Cole said, noting that the countries the government focuses on are generally predominantly Arab or Muslim.

    It is the lack of clarity about the rules that has confounded travelers and raised concerns from groups such as the Asian Law Caucus, which said that as a result, their lawyers cannot fully advise people how they may exercise their rights during a border search. The lawsuit says a Freedom of Information Act request was filed with Customs last fall but that no information has been received.

    Kamran Habib, a software engineer with Cisco Systems, has had his laptop and cellphone searched three times in the past year. Once, in San Francisco, an officer "went through every number and text message on my cellphone and took out my SIM card in the back," said Habib, a permanent U.S. resident. "So now, every time I travel, I basically clean out my phone. It's better for me to keep my colleagues and friends safe than to get them on the list as well."

    Udy's company, Radius, organizes business trips for 100,000 travelers a day, from companies around the world. She says her firm supports strong security measures. "Where we get angry is when we don't know what they're for."

    Staff researcher Richard Drezen contributed to this report.
    © 2008 The Washington Post Company

    URL: Electronic searches prompt protests - Washington Post - MSNBC.com

  9. #8
    Distinguished Member Array Chooie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,870
    Damn, found it soon as you posted. :P

  10. #9
    Senior Member Array sui-juris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    521
    Thats the Govt for you, search and harass people who come in and out of the country legally and yet the southern border is so wide open and who knows how many truly dangerous people have come in down there..

  11. #10
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Yawn!

    Another example of left wing reporting that distorts the facts and minimizes the dangers. It is interesting that so many are concerned with our porous southern border yet they scream bloody murder when a non citizen is scrutinized by security authorities.

    Yes, we should interrogate non citizens, either coming or going from our country. Yes, we should do as we have always done: search the contents of belongings of incoming people, citizens or not. Yes, we should perform behavioral profiling and ascertain the motives of anyone that are determined suspicious. It is a policy that has saved many lives in Israel.

    Personally, I am required to report any foreign travel to the government. No hardship, no problem. People coming or going from enemy countries and regions should be held to even higher standards.

    Exactly what is it you are trying to hide?

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    Yawn!

    Another example of left wing reporting that distorts the facts and minimizes the dangers. It is interesting that so many are concerned with our porous southern border yet they scream bloody murder when a non citizen is scrutinized by security authorities.

    Yes, we should interrogate non citizens, either coming or going from our country. Yes, we should do as we have always done: search the contents of belongings of incoming people, citizens or not. Yes, we should perform behavioral profiling and ascertain the motives of anyone that are determined suspicious. It is a policy that has saved many lives in Israel.

    Personally, I am required to report any foreign travel to the government. No hardship, no problem. People coming or going from enemy countries and regions should be held to even higher standards.

    Exactly what is it you are trying to hide?
    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

    People should not be treated as suspects unless there is good reason to.

    Our leaders have told us that "they hate us because of our freedom". Should we then respond by giving up that very freedom?
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

    Sig P229 DAK - .40 S&W
    Ruger SP101 - .357 Mag

  13. #12
    Member Array jackdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dover,tn
    Posts
    222
    Well this gets a major Bravo sierra from me and a call top my lawyer
    Jack dog

  14. #13
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by CEW58 View Post
    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

    People should not be treated as suspects unless there is good reason to.
    I assume you would support disbanding Customs. I assume you do not fill out the immigration forms declaring purchases and your travel whereabouts, either. Or you refuse the searches that Customs has done for decades. The fear mongering and stirring of discontent is typical prior to a Presidential election. As if this is anything new or different. It is not. It is completely legal and, I for one, am glad we have this level of protection.

    Importantly, the Fourth Amendment applies to ONLY US citizens. And then there is that pesky word 'unreasonable.' I submit is is entirely reasonable to search a suspicous person that has just traveled from an enemy region.

  15. #14
    Senior Member Array CEW58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    797
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    I assume you would support disbanding Customs. I assume you do not fill out the immigration forms declaring purchases and your travel whereabouts, either. Or you refuse the searches that Customs has done for decades. The fear mongering and stirring of discontent is typical prior to a Presidential election. As if this is anything new or different. It is not. It is completely legal and, I for one, am glad we have this level of protection.

    Importantly, the Fourth Amendment applies to ONLY US citizens. And then there is that pesky word 'unreasonable.' I submit is is entirely reasonable to search a suspicous person that has just traveled from an enemy region.
    "A few months earlier in the same airport, a tech engineer returning from a business trip to London objected when a federal agent asked him to type his password into his laptop computer. "This laptop doesn't belong to me," he remembers protesting. "It belongs to my company." Eventually, he agreed to log on and stood by as the officer copied the Web sites he had visited, said the engineer, a U.S. citizen who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of calling attention to himself."

    Customs inspections were designed to prevent dangerous or prohibited items from entering the county. In this case the person involved was a U.S. Citizen. What where they looking for on his laptop? "Dangerous" software perhaps? The last time I checked, software isn't explosive or incendiary. Software doesn't introduce unwanted organisms into the country like prohibited plants or food can. Visited websites don't pose any of these threats either. So what dangers were they loooking for?
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. ~ Albert Einstein

    Sig P229 DAK - .40 S&W
    Ruger SP101 - .357 Mag

  16. #15
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by CEW58 View Post
    "A few months earlier in the same airport, a tech engineer returning from a business trip to London objected when a federal agent asked him to type his password into his laptop computer. "This laptop doesn't belong to me," he remembers protesting. "It belongs to my company." Eventually, he agreed to log on and stood by as the officer copied the Web sites he had visited, said the engineer, a U.S. citizen who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of calling attention to himself."

    Customs inspections were designed to prevent dangerous or prohibited items from entering the county. In this case the person involved was a U.S. Citizen. What where they looking for on his laptop? "Dangerous" software perhaps? The last time I checked, software isn't explosive or incendiary. Software doesn't introduce unwanted organisms into the country like prohibited plants or food can. Visited websites don't pose any of these threats either. So what dangers were they loooking for?
    Do you think that people returning from foreign travel should be immune to the searches that are commonplace and the law? All because you assume there is no potential threat?

    I find it interesting that he tried to initially evade the search. Why? Could it be that he was suspected of dealing with foreign agents? If he was reported to have had contact with enemies, divulging American secrets, would that change your mind? Or is that OK too? Don't you wonder why he was interrogated?

Page 1 of 9 12345 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. ACLU defends gun owner's civil rights in FL
    By paramedic70002 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: July 20th, 2010, 01:47 PM
  2. Gun Rights Are Civil Rights...
    By ExSoldier in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: July 11th, 2010, 12:58 AM
  3. Public Accommodation/Civil Rights/2d A.
    By randytulsa2 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 27th, 2008, 05:11 PM
  4. Nra Civil Rights Coalition Sues San Francisco
    By mrreynolds in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: July 7th, 2008, 03:57 PM
  5. George Clooney on Civil Rights
    By Steelhorse in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: May 22nd, 2006, 08:10 PM

Search tags for this page

distubing civil rights stories
,

reasonable suspicion ied battery

Click on a term to search for related topics.