As an aside, if you've ever been arrested, you can't (legally) enter the US under visa waiver and have to go through the rigmarole of disclosing and applying for a visa even to go on vacation there. Had to drop someone from my wedding party because of this :-(
I'ma UK citizen, and I've filled in the VWP (Visa Waiver Program) green slips travelling to the US.
The question on the form used to be "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?" but after 9/11 the question was changed to "Have you ever been arrested?".
Whether you were convicted is irrelevant, and the only exception is for traffic offences.
Important: Some travelers may not be eligible to enter the United States visa free
under the VWP. These include people who have been arrested, even if the
arrest did not result in a criminal conviction, those with criminal records,
(the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act does not apply to U.S. visa law), certain
serious communicable illnesses, those who have been refused admission into,
or have been deported from, the United States, or have previously overstayed on
the VWP. Such travelers must apply for special restricted visas. If they attempt
to travel without a visa, they may be refused entry into the United States.
So if you actually were convicted, then you're pretty much screwed. But an arrest without conviction creates a very high artificial barrier (months of delay and financial cost) to entry and a very powerful tool for the authorities.
I now choose not to participate in any form of public protest or demonstration for fear that actions by others that might result in disorder could lead me to be arrested and harm my work and private life in the future.
Here is a man denied entry to the US for taking a drug in a different country, that was legal at the time, as part of psychological research.Dr Feldmar concluded in another article of that time (which I can't find to quote) that his real crime was in not having the imagination to understand the world in which he now lived.
If a man can be judged, without a jury, and penalised for actions in the past that were legal at the time in a different country altogether, then this world is not the one I thought it was and I realise that the only protection I can offer myself it to acknowledge what this world actually is.
Awesome comment - useful info! I noted that change too.
I now choose not to participate in any form of public protest or demonstration for fear that actions by others that might result in disorder could lead me to be arrested and harm my work and private life in the future.
I'm the same, except it's because I've come to realize protest has no effectiveness against anything that the powers that be really want to push through. Life certainly became less stressful for me once I realized my political opinions or actions would have zero impact or relevance on a national level - so now I get on with more interesting stuff that does make a difference directly to me and my family :-)
I don't think any of the airport security circus works any more. People just answer the questions to get past the bureaucracy.
It's like other things in life though - when I call up ADSL support, they start with "Are you using windows". If you answer 'no', they say they don't support anything else. So I answer yes so that I'll at least get through to the next stage of bureaucracy.
The EU and the US have a lot of data sharing, mostly in one direction (EU to US). Indeed, you now have to register with the US (through the ESTA scheme) in advance so they have the opportunity to run background checks on you if they so wish.
I suspect you could get away with lying still right now as the system's so new, but I bet it won't be long before they'll be able to pull up British police records (if any) at the US immigration counter - or at least verify if you were ever arrested or not.
Sure, there's a lot of BS that goes on, you're supposed to provide an address you're staying at in the US as well.
Last time I flew (UK-US), I didn't know the address (I know how to drive there, can't remember the address though), so the kind check-in assistant just put "hilton, san fransisco" or something.
Another time I got pulled over for a hand luggage check. I had packed my laptop bag to bursting with various gadgets cables toys food etc etc etc. The guy opened it up, took one look inside and his face fell. You could see he was thinking "I'll be damned if I'm going to unpack all that and pack it back up". So he didn't, and just waved me along.
Perhaps I'm just lucky, but I don't think they really check too much. Which is actually slightly worrying.
You could see he was thinking "I'll be damned if I'm going to unpack all that and pack it back up". So he didn't, and just waved me along.
You are lucky :-) If you do get your hand luggage checked like that, they aren't the ones packing it back up; you are. I discovered this the hard way when rushing to make a 2 hour transfer at Atlanta and I only barely made it..
I'm not surprised, it makes their jobs so much easier. Of course I'm against the idea of a global DNA database, but imagine how much easier solving crimes would be if any and all DNA spotted at a scene could instantly point you to a specific individual who instantly becomes a person of interest?
Which begs the question: is this a simple question of cops making things easier for themselves, or are there orders from above taking part? I don't know the British legal system but something like the equivalent of a cunning ADA or something?
The end of the any type freedom we had left. One government to rule the world. One government elected by the bankers and corporations and global slavery for the rest of us.
I'm always surprised by the downvotes on hackernews to anyone that suggests a conspiracy of any kind. Usually, "technical" people are all about pure anonymity, pure truth, full disclosure....but it seems like there are certain topics where this no longer applies.
Feel free to downvote, but I'd be even more interested in assertions that all is well, there have been no noteworthy changes in the world from a compliance or enforcement of existing rules perspective.
It's not so much the simple suggestion of a conspiracy as it is the sheer over-the-topness of it all. Police overstepping their bounds in the UK equals "the end of any type freedom" and "global slavery"? Oh, please.
If you have a silly canned response that is equally (not very) on any comment thread that relates to information, privacy or rights in any way you get downvoted. It's usually just trolling. Even when it isn't, it's annoying because its' a combination of grandiose claims & stupid, simplistic or non-existent support.
I think we welcome loopy conspiracy theorists, but not dumb ones.
Did you read what he wrote, or are you just being a contrarian?
One government to rule the world. One government elected by the bankers and corporations and global slavery for the rest of us.
Absolute drivel. Where to start? There isn't only one government in this world. And most 1st world governments are republics of one form or another (elected officials representing a slice of the population). Bankers have a vote, but certainly not the only vote. Etc, etc.
He's either trolling or stupid. Either way it's not worth arguing, hence the downvotes.
I don't believe in New World Order theories, but you have to admit that those people who are funding president candidates are not doing it for free or out of democratic/liberal believes. They have their voice on the country.
