4 ms·

The burden of proof is on you. If something is common and frequent, it really shouldn't be this hard to find evidence. > Yeah, showing that the CBP (a) has th

The burden of proof is on you. If something is common and frequent, it really shouldn't be this hard to find evidence. > Yeah, showing that the CBP (a) has the power to do something, and (b) has used that power... is FUD. All you've shown is that the CBP has the power. You've yet to provide any evidence of someone being arrested solely for involuntarily entering the US.

adekok 10y ago
> If something is common and frequent, Did I say it was "common and frequent"? No. Why do you feel the need to lie in order to "disprove" my position? Get off your high horse.
- miles 10y ago
  Did I say it was "common and frequent"? No. In fairness, you said: There are well known stories about planes making unscheduled landings in the US (emergency, storm, delays, etc). Cue CBP opening the front doors, walking down the aisle, and pulling one guy off the plane. I'd also be interested in hearing about these well-known stories if you or someone else wouldn't mind sharing a link or two.
  - adekok 10y ago
    I've looked, and can't find anything. That doesn't necessarily disprove what I've said, it just makes it unsupported. I still stand by my claims that the CPB has the legal power to do this. And that it is very likely they either have used that power in the past, or that they will in the future. I also find it disappointing that previous comments denied such claims as "FUD", and others outright lied about my position. The psychology of this is simple: Let's say you have an alcoholic "Uncle Bob" who shows up at every family gathering, gets drunk, gropes people, and passes out after throwing up in public. If you decide that you don't want him at your house next Christmas... it's your fault. You are the bad guy. The entire family will gang up on you, and punish you for bringing the abuse to light.
- dang 10y ago
  You've gone way out of line in this thread with incivility and personal attacks. Since your account doesn't have a history of this I'm not banning you, but it is a bannable offense, so please don't do it again. Instead, please (re-)read the site guidelines and post civilly and substantively, or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - adekok 10y ago
    At the risk of being banned... The lesson is that lying about what I said is OK, but getting frustrated and pointing that out is being "incivil".
    - dang 10y ago
      People misinterpret each other on the internet often. It's practically the default case. When this happens, it's important not to escalate, because that leads to more escalation, the needle goes into the red, and communication ceases. A phrase like "lying about what I said" is an escalation. To escalate less, you could speak in terms of misunderstanding and clarification. Similarly, to escalate more, you could say something like "you're a liar". After all, they said something false, which by definition is a lie, and someone who lies is a liar, so you'd simply be stating a fact, yes? And a liar is a bad thing to be, right? So you could add "you're a bad person" too. This is how we get stuck in opposition and flamewars. On HN, each of us is responsible for not letting that happen, regardless of how mistaken the other person is or how badly they violated the rules themselves. Acting from the feeling of "they started it" or "they did worse" won't work. Everybody always feels like the other person started it and did worse.

adekok 10y ago

> If something is common and frequent, Did I say it was "common and frequent"? No. Why do you feel the need to lie in order to "disprove" my position? Get off your high horse.

miles 10y ago
Did I say it was "common and frequent"? No. In fairness, you said: There are well known stories about planes making unscheduled landings in the US (emergency, storm, delays, etc). Cue CBP opening the front doors, walking down the aisle, and pulling one guy off the plane. I'd also be interested in hearing about these well-known stories if you or someone else wouldn't mind sharing a link or two.
- adekok 10y ago
  I've looked, and can't find anything. That doesn't necessarily disprove what I've said, it just makes it unsupported. I still stand by my claims that the CPB has the legal power to do this. And that it is very likely they either have used that power in the past, or that they will in the future. I also find it disappointing that previous comments denied such claims as "FUD", and others outright lied about my position. The psychology of this is simple: Let's say you have an alcoholic "Uncle Bob" who shows up at every family gathering, gets drunk, gropes people, and passes out after throwing up in public. If you decide that you don't want him at your house next Christmas... it's your fault. You are the bad guy. The entire family will gang up on you, and punish you for bringing the abuse to light.
dang 10y ago
You've gone way out of line in this thread with incivility and personal attacks. Since your account doesn't have a history of this I'm not banning you, but it is a bannable offense, so please don't do it again. Instead, please (re-)read the site guidelines and post civilly and substantively, or not at all. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- adekok 10y ago
  At the risk of being banned... The lesson is that lying about what I said is OK, but getting frustrated and pointing that out is being "incivil".
  - dang 10y ago
    People misinterpret each other on the internet often. It's practically the default case. When this happens, it's important not to escalate, because that leads to more escalation, the needle goes into the red, and communication ceases. A phrase like "lying about what I said" is an escalation. To escalate less, you could speak in terms of misunderstanding and clarification. Similarly, to escalate more, you could say something like "you're a liar". After all, they said something false, which by definition is a lie, and someone who lies is a liar, so you'd simply be stating a fact, yes? And a liar is a bad thing to be, right? So you could add "you're a bad person" too. This is how we get stuck in opposition and flamewars. On HN, each of us is responsible for not letting that happen, regardless of how mistaken the other person is or how badly they violated the rules themselves. Acting from the feeling of "they started it" or "they did worse" won't work. Everybody always feels like the other person started it and did worse.