5 ms·
I think lying about your activities can get you into some actual trouble - so this could be risky advice if they follow up on who you were visting.
by mrtron 16y ago
I think lying about your activities can get you into some actual trouble - so this could be risky advice if they follow up on who you were visting.
- mattmanser 16y agoIn fact he specifically mentions that in the follow up point. What is extremely worrying is the comment that 'they have a checkbox for that'. What the hell are they doing recording the reasons for movement of law abiding citizens?
- mrtron 16y agoHe mentions anecdotal evidence that they haven't followed up with him on that issue. Doesn't mean lying to them isn't problematic.
- cperciva 16y agoWhat the hell are they doing recording the reasons for movement of law abiding citizens? They don't know that you're law-abiding, for one thing. Law enforcement agencies routinely record information which is volunteered to them.
- daychilde 16y ago>They don't know that you're law-abiding, for one thing Guilty until proven innocent, eh?
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- jodrellblank 16y agoNo, he hasn't been arrested or accused of anything.
- cperciva 16y agoPolice investigate lots of innocent people. If they only investigated people who were already known to be guilty, they would never get anywhere.
- Devilboy 16y agoPolice are supposed to investigate crimes. Not arbitrary people.
- cperciva 16y agoThey're investigating lots of crimes. Drug smuggling, for example -- they know it's happening, but they don't know who is doing it; and anyone entering the country could have useful information about it or be a potential suspect.
- Devilboy 16y agoSo would you be OK with the police randomly picking members of the public to investigate - just in case those people are doing something illegal somewhere?
- mattmaroon 16y agoThe fallacy here is the assumption that they know who is law abiding and who isn't.
- noonespecial 16y agoSo far, there's pretty much always a friend and/or family where I've gone. I suppose if I go to do business exclusively with enemies, I might revise my answer. Also, his comments in the follow up about refusing to answer to avoid the possibility of that answer being used later against you (no matter what you say) do have legal merit, but I don't feel that they are entirely practical. I think it more likely that they will attempt to concoct charges against you for refusing to answer their questions (drawing both attention to yourself and their ire) than answering the question in the most innocuous way possible. I hate saying it more each time I do, but the best practical defense against law enforcement run amok is always to draw as little attention to yourself as possible.
- kelnos 16y agoI hate saying it more each time I do, but the best practical defense against law enforcement run amok is always to draw as little attention to yourself as possible. I believe there's a Martin Niemöller quote that'd be quite apropos here...