[tyrion]

Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis /img/forum/go_quote.gif If it help catching some of those into child ****, then I see no reason for them to search people's computers. Its for a good cause, and they are probably fully entitled by law to do so.

If I understood you correctly, this "for a good cause" you refer to could be used to justify all kinds of activity by law enforcement that violate our constitution. A line has to be drawn somewhere. Otherwise, we lose our right to be free from "...unreasonable searches and seizures..."

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyrion /img/forum/go_quote.gif If I understood you correctly, this "for a good cause" you refer to could be used to justify all kinds of activity by law enforcement that violate our constitution. A line has to be drawn somewhere. Otherwise, we lose our right to be free from "...unreasonable searches and seizures..."

Of course a line have to be drawn somewhere, to protect most of our privacy.
But in this case the OP travelled from a country where its well known that western people travel just to abuse those minor girls/boys. Not to imply that he are one of those though. But the customs could never know until they have checked his computer...

Of course he could have denied. But then they would probably have confiscated his computer.

 

[tyrion]

Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis /img/forum/go_quote.gif Of course a line have to be drawn somewhere, to protect most of our privacy. But in this case the OP travelled from a country where its well known that western people travel just to abuse those minor girls/boys. Not to imply that he are one of those though. But the customs could never know until they have checked his computer... Of course he could have denied. But then they would probably have confiscated his computer.

I understand what you are saying. Actually, if I understand this correctly, it doesn't matter where the traveler is coming from. The search of the computer would most likely be considered a routine search at the border and therefore reasonable. In that cirmcumstance, refusal would likely result in a non routine search as there now would be a reasonable suspicion of illegal activity. I am guessing that confiscation would likely be part of that non routine search.

 

[nabwong]

The word **** is banned on head-fi?

Edit: WOW! Just WOW!

 

[JSTpt1022]

Wow. I am apparently very much more anti-authority than just about all of you. I would have thought more people would come down harder on this. Think about this. Many of us use our computers as more than just another device or appliance, or even a tool or means to an end. Computers are becoming extensions of ourselves, slowly taking over more of the functions involved in our day to day lives. As many above have mentioned, our diaries, photo albums and most personal thoughts, ideas and documents are all contained in these machines. As this continues into the future, and computers become inextricable from our very minds, what will be the difference between an "information crime", the computer crimes of today, and a thought crime?

 

[infinitesymphony]

I predict that someone will eventually get thrown into jail for having their own baby pictures on the computer. It's happened before, it'll happen again.

 

[kramer5150]

to the OP.... as a parent of 2 small children I have ZERO tolerance for child exploitation (is that OK to use?

). I'm glad measures are taken to discourage this kind of activity.

On the other hand, I have nakid pictures of my kids in the bathtub on my PC. Many pictures of my baby girl topless at the swimming pool (she was 18 months at the time). I don't think theres anything wrong with that... but where do they draw the line?

 

[feh1325]

so before you go to the airport, change your desktop to

**** OFF, TSA
or a picture of a nude man

both would be better

no, a plane crash would be best

 

[UNESCO]

similar thing happened to a father's pictures of his daughter on his cell phone - pictures of her in the tub, naked around the house, etc... customs confiscated the phone and wanted to charge him with creating and distributing child pornography.

Never heard the end of that case; although I believe it was dropped as it generated quite the outrage.

Is there any legal precedent for searches like this by customs? I'm too lazy to go to lexis-nexis

 

[DanG]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nabwong /img/forum/go_quote.gif The word **** is banned on head-fi? Edit: WOW! Just WOW!

There's nothing nefarious behind the censorship of the word "p*rn." It just helps keep Head-Fi usable by people with stringent content filters at work.

 

[Carl]

If it was me, I'd laugh if the opened my copy of huge7.jpg as part of their search. Unless I was in a rush, of course.

American customs are pretty notorious for being overzealous, but this hardly rates as far as seriousness goes. I'd imagine they'd catch quite a few people with such material on their computers, such is the sad state of the world.

 

[Aman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by micaela /img/forum/go_quote.gif I guess you have been fortunate to never have been a victim of abuse - or to have known someone who was to be aware of the physical damage and threat that it actually poses. Your statement here is grossly naive in regards to this problem.

Oh, then perhaps you'd like to explain how some JPGs of child pornography is at all endangering a passenger's safety?

This is, as somebody else replied, a MASSIVE breach of privacy. The government has absolutely no right to impede on an object like this and look for a specific type of file. Metal detectors are understandable; very potentially dangerous weapons are made of metal, and the search is broad enough to pick up a belt buckle as likely as a gun. But a TSA agent making you enter your own PRIVATE PASSWORD into your laptop and then giving the agent full control over your machine? Yikes...

How many ill effects must we face in the United States before we realize our government is deliberately removing our freedoms from us, often for no gain whatsoever?! Ben Franklin once said, to paraphrase, that those who would give up a little freedom for a little security, deserve neither freedom nor security.

 

[tyrion]

The right to search like this at a border or functional equivalent doesn't necessarily have to do with airport security as these searches take place at border crossings that are not airports. It's done to prevent illegal activity or bringing into the country that is illegal to possess. They also take place as you are entering the country, not before boarding the plane to fly within the US. Border security and airport security overlap but also are two completely different issues.

I am not advocating whether these types of searches are good or bad, just trying to explain why they are permitted.

 

[RYCeT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kramer5150 /img/forum/go_quote.gif to the OP.... as a parent of 2 small children I have ZERO tolerance for child exploitation (is that OK to use? ). I'm glad measures are taken to discourage this kind of activity. On the other hand, I have nakid pictures of my kids in the bathtub on my PC. Many pictures of my baby girl topless at the swimming pool (she was 18 months at the time). I don't think theres anything wrong with that... but where do they draw the line?

Well, for the record, I have 2 yo son. As I have stated, I have no tolerance for child exploitation either. My view has been expressed, I hate a stranger browsing through my files. Obviously, I also have lots of pic of my son and some of them are naked. It definitely a big inconvenience if they suspect me a pedophile just because I have a naked pic of my son. Another thing, asian women looks a lot more younger than they actually are. I know a 28 yo friend of mine who can be mistaken as Junior High student.
Where should they draw the line and how to protect myself for this kind of incident?
Do we have to stop taking children's pic just to satisfy customs?

 

[Kirosia]

How bout if you just back up any suggestive material to DVD/external HDD before going on a trip?