Large Scale Central

Visiting the USA

General Discussion
#1

I hope Kay and I don’t share this young bloke’s experience when we travel to the US in a month or so:

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2008/05/australian-at-t.html

It’s Monday night here, and I’ve just finished watching a TV documentary on this case. A couple of things came out:

  1. He’s a young bloke, and came across as a bit of a wise guy. Can’t imagine him impressing anyone.

  2. He came into the US at Detroit. An ex-Immigration Service employee interviewed on the TV show suggested US cities that are not major entry points for foreign visitors often deal much more conservatively with travelers from overseas than the big hubs like LAX and JFK.

  3. Apparently a DHS officer has complete and total authority to make a call, in this case deportation back to Australia. There is no appeal, no redress, no comeback. The DHS doesn’t have to charge you with anything; if they don’t like you, it’s your bad luck.

In this case, once it became obvious the kid wasn’t a terrorist (which is what the Detroit DHS officers were originally on about), they claimed he might just disappear into the US as an illegal immigrant. That accusation could apply to almost anyone. Seems to me those Detroit guys were doing whatever it took to avoid admitting they’d screwed up.

I don’t have any particular brief for this young Australian, but I worry about untrammeled police power, anywhere, anytime. Multiple mistakes by the Australian Department of Immigration and Federal Police in the last few years have cost Oz taxpayers a lot of money, but at least folks (Australians and non-Australians alike) who were wronged have been compensated.

It looks like DHS is a law unto itself, and that’s unhealthy. Sure, be careful, but accept that no one gets it right all the time. Processes should be put into place to give all suspects a fair go.

#2

Oh s…t!

Good thing my “travelling to the US on business” days are past.

Scene: 1973, Detroit Tunnel Point of Entry, approx. 11AM

Officer: “What is the purpose of your visit?”
HJ: “Request from the US distributor for assistance to troubleshoot a machine.”
Officer: “Will you be doing any work?”
HJ: “Depends what the problem is.”
Officer: “blah, blah, blah, blah, blah” (for about five minutes)
HJ: “OK that means the machine will be down until the distributor gets someone trained or they get the factory reps in from Switzerland?”
Officer: " You deposit your passport with me. You have until midnight to pick up your passport and exit the US."
HJ: “Thank you. Take good care of the passport, it’s the most valuable passport in the world.”

And I was on my way. Back then it was a five year wait to become a Canadian citizen. :wink: :open_mouth:
Looks like today everyone has to be on their very best behaviour. :lol: Or stay away!

#3

Dave:

There is always another side to these stories. Not saying which is correct, but the immigration authorities in virtually every country have the power to allow or deny entry to anyone.

I suppose they could have detained this guy until they arranged an immigration hearing. I think that usually takes a couple of weeks. Along with that, he would have had to hire a lawyer to plead his case, then still be subject to a judge’s decision on whatever grounds he was denied entry in the first place.

I have traveled in something around 100 foreign countries and have been asked virtually every imaginable question. Many times about how much money I’m carrying, whether I will seek employment, what is the specific purpose of my visit, how long I will stay, etc.

My re-entries into the U.S. are usually the ones that get the most scrutiny, regardless of the fact that I was born here and have had a passport and traveled continuously for well over 40 years. On one contract job, I spent about ~24 hours in Korea every other week for almost six months. Try explaining that to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Officer.

In the post 9/11 era, it is better to make a mistake on the side of safety, than to repeat the errors that lead up to the terrorist mass murders we suffered. If that means turning away one smart a$$ young man, so be it.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

#4

Returning from a visit to Rosarita Beach, just south of Tijuana, BC, Mex., the border guard did not want to talk to me, just my 6 year old son. He asked Jeremiah where we had been, what we had been doing, and what we were bringing back with us.

Having just purchased some terra cotta pottery in RB, my son answered truthfully, “Nothing but the pot in the back.”

The look on the Border Patrol guy’s face was priceless, until he swung his flashlight into the back of the station wagon where all the pottery was. He burst out laughing, waved us on, and said, “You have a nice night, sir.”

I can just imagine the stories he told his buddies on the next coffee break!

#5

http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/commonwealth/publish.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/reports_1997_dima_visa.pdf/$FILE/Revocation_of_Visas_Report.pdf

Israel, China, Korea, Russia, UK, Nepal, India, Pakistan, several in South America, take your pick who is going to deny entry.

#6
Curmudgeon said:
http://www.ombudsman.gov.au/commonwealth/publish.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/reports_1997_dima_visa.pdf/$FILE/Revocation_of_Visas_Report.pdf

Israel, China, Korea, Russia, UK, Nepal, India, Pakistan, several in South America, take your pick who is going to deny entry.


Very interesting! The conclusion:

“I am pleased to say that there is substantial agreement on most points.
Compensation has been paid to Ms A for the cost of the air ticket. Mr B reapplied
to visit Australia but his new application was assessed and rejected.
Steps have been taken to implement the other recommendations.”

seemed reasonable in light of the facts in the brief. Music school? Yeah, right.

I agree with Jerry’s comment that “In the post 9/11 era, it is better to make a mistake on the side of safety, than to repeat the errors that lead up to the terrorist mass murders we suffered.” Actually, that was true before 9/11. It’s too late for questions at 35,000 feet.

However, the link cited in Dave’s post points out a significant difference between the Australian and American responses to cases where decisions by the immigration authorities have been problematic. In the case of Australia, there is hope of redress. Ms A was compensated for her outlay. In the American instance, as far as I can tell, there is little hope of redress from DHS for the young man in question, or anyone else.

I think the Aussie way is better, and I’d dearly love someone to show me that the US behaves similarly where there’s been a screw-up. Deny entry? Absolutely! Pay reasonable compensation? Sure!

Had to chuckle at Steve’s story. Many years ago, I bought Thing #3 a Fender Stratocaster in the US. A middle-aged man going through Aussie customs with one of those gets the attention he deserves.

As we waited while the case was searched, the immigration officer made a comment about the delay and how they had to be careful. I took out my wallet, opened it up to the photo of our four girls, put it on the table in front of him and said something to the effect that if being careful meant stopping even an ounce of whatever getting into Oz, I was prepared to wait all day.

When the guitar came back, he waved me through - no duty. He didn’t have to do that - and believe me, I wasn’t playing for it.

#7

Well, it looks like the authorities down under may play out of the same screwy rule book -

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080826/people_nm/australia_snoop_dc_2

-Brian

#8

Back in November 1982, I went for a ride out in the back country with my brother and a friend. We ended up crossing the border into Tecate to get gas. On the way back, the US agent at the border wanted to me to open the trunk of the car. No problem, except that it was still full of fairly realistic, latex severed heads that I had made for Halloween! He got a kick out of it, and actually bought one from me. Doubt things would turn out so well nowadays.

#9
Ray Dunakin said:
Back in November 1982, I went for a ride out in the back country with my brother and a friend. We ended up crossing the border into Tecate to get gas. On the way back, the US agent at the border wanted to me to open the trunk of the car. No problem, except that it was still full of fairly realistic, latex severed heads that I had made for Halloween! He got a kick out of it, and actually bought one from me. Doubt things would turn out so well nowadays.
Chuckle! I'd liked to have seen the look on his face!
#10

Finally took the time to look at this video. I agree that it is only one side of the story. Judgement calls sometimes create hurt feelings, but I don’t believe that is the purpose or concern of the Customs and Immigration people. I can think of incidents where I wish these same people would have been little more protective of our borders.

#11
Ric Golding said:
Finally took the time to look at this video. I agree that it is only one side of the story. Judgement calls sometimes create hurt feelings, but I don't believe that is the purpose or concern of the Customs and Immigration people. I can think of incidents where I wish these same people would have been little more protective of our borders.
Yep. I took our youngest to the top of the WTC less than a month prior to 9/11. The memory raises goosebumps.

Imagine not picking up on a bloke who wants to learn how to take-off and fly, but not how to land!!! I’m a lot more concerned about that than a couple of over-eager honchos in Detroit! Despite my suspicious nature, I don’t think it’s possible to prove the Detroit DHS guys did anything wrong.

I do think that, in cases where there’s been a clear miscarriage of justice, compensation is fair. There was a piece on TV here last night showing how the US military in Iraq pays compensation to Iraqi civilians who suffer injury, premeditated or accidental, at the hands of US forces. Why not the DHS?

What wouldn’t be fair is to jump on the DHS people for every screw-up they make. If you did that to a baby every time it fell over while learning to walk, it would never care much for walking. What’s wanted is for the DHS guys to learn from this experience and, if they did make a hash of it, to do the job better next time.

#12

Dave:

I agree, and really don’t see that the DHS guys did anything out of line. There is no report available as to why the subject was denied entry, and his video only complains about being held and returned, not the underlying items such as how he would support himself while in the U.S., where he would stay, whether he had a return ticket, and his employment status in Australia among other items.

I have a friend who works for FEMA, which is currently under the DHS. He just told me that there is gong to be a reorganization of DHS, part of which will remove FEMA and some other ‘non-security’ agencies from DHS.

I think DHS is an unfortunate necessity of our times, but the agency was granted far too much power, with far too little in the way of rules, guidelines and oversight. IMHO, this was necessary in response to the murderous attack on our country, but needs to be tempered and controlled. Apparently that part will now get done.

In this morning’s paper, there is an article headlined “Snoop Dogg scrutinized,” reporting that the Australian Department of Immigration and Citizenship is conducting a “character assessment” to determine whether rapper Snoop Dogg will be grated a visa for an upcoming concert tour. This seems like a much more civilized way to handle entry issues, rather than waiting to make the determination after the person’s arrival.

Happy RRing,

Jerry

#13
Jerry Bowers said:
In this morning's paper, there is an article headlined "Snoop Dogg scrutinized," reporting that the Australian Department of Immigration and Citizenship is conducting a "character assessment" to determine whether rapper Snoop Dogg will be grated a visa for an upcoming concert tour. This seems like a much more civilized way to handle entry issues, rather than waiting to make the determination after the person's arrival.
Apparently DIMIA did grant him a visa, but reconsidered after an outcry from some members of the public who object to his lyrics, which they say inspire racial hatred.

Dunno - doesn’t seem like my kind of music, but he probably wouldn’t like mine, either.