4 ms·

Because a terrorist would actually answer yes on such a Form. /s Same goes for the old form that asks if you were part of the nazi party in 1939-1945 even thou

Because a terrorist would actually answer yes on such a Form. /s Same goes for the old form that asks if you were part of the nazi party in 1939-1945 even thought you were born much later. These forms are such bullshit and are only here to give authorities leverage against you at a later date incase you did purger yourself. Then they have it in writing that you lied.

394549 8y ago
> These forms are such bullshit and are only here to give authorities leverage against you at a later date incase you did purger yourself. Then they have it in writing that you lied. They're not bullshit. The forms' design is what gives the government unambiguous grounds to revoke the citizenship of foreign war criminals, once their crimes are discovered. The fact that they lied during their naturalization means it was never actually valid.
- slededit 8y ago
  ESTA is for non-immigrant travel only.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  >The forms' design is what gives the government unambiguous grounds to revoke the citizenship of foreign war criminals, once their crimes are discovered. No, they are what makes the person (even if they never apply for citizenship; the form has nothing to do with citizenship applications) unquestionably a criminal under US law if they've ever done the thing asked about in the question and denied it on the form, because US law doesn't unconditionally exert universal jurisdiction over all instances of the international crimes identified, but it does over lying to the US government.
- sseth 8y ago
  It's true that they may serve their intended purpose. But only by exposing innocent people to needless risk. Isn't there a better way to achieve the intended purpose? For example, could the same not be achieved by passing a law allowing the government to revoke the citizenship of anyone who meets these criteria? edit: Or perhaps a better UI? For example, this is just a checkbox you could accidentally tick. Perhaps it would be made a little harder - raise a warning perhaps? The real problem i think is that visa authorities can design the worst UIs and get away with it since they are an effective monopoly.
coaxial 8y ago
I used to wonder too why would anyone answer yes if that was really their intent. I was told that this was a technicality: you plan on assassinating the president (or whatever the form asks these days) but you answered no. Now you can be charged for lying on your immigration document which gives the government a lot more leverage and opens more avenues to convict you (because lying is bad mmmkay). I don't know how much truth there is to it but it makes more sense than having the question hoping someone with bad intentions will have a lapse of judgement and decide to be truthful on the form.
- OJFord 8y ago
  On the contrary perhaps it can be argued it lessens the crime: there wasn't intent (on entering the country)!

394549 8y ago

> These forms are such bullshit and are only here to give authorities leverage against you at a later date incase you did purger yourself. Then they have it in writing that you lied. They're not bullshit. The forms' design is what gives the government unambiguous grounds to revoke the citizenship of foreign war criminals, once their crimes are discovered. The fact that they lied during their naturalization means it was never actually valid.

slededit 8y ago
ESTA is for non-immigrant travel only.
dragonwriter 8y ago
>The forms' design is what gives the government unambiguous grounds to revoke the citizenship of foreign war criminals, once their crimes are discovered. No, they are what makes the person (even if they never apply for citizenship; the form has nothing to do with citizenship applications) unquestionably a criminal under US law if they've ever done the thing asked about in the question and denied it on the form, because US law doesn't unconditionally exert universal jurisdiction over all instances of the international crimes identified, but it does over lying to the US government.
sseth 8y ago
It's true that they may serve their intended purpose. But only by exposing innocent people to needless risk. Isn't there a better way to achieve the intended purpose? For example, could the same not be achieved by passing a law allowing the government to revoke the citizenship of anyone who meets these criteria? edit: Or perhaps a better UI? For example, this is just a checkbox you could accidentally tick. Perhaps it would be made a little harder - raise a warning perhaps? The real problem i think is that visa authorities can design the worst UIs and get away with it since they are an effective monopoly.

coaxial 8y ago

I used to wonder too why would anyone answer yes if that was really their intent. I was told that this was a technicality: you plan on assassinating the president (or whatever the form asks these days) but you answered no. Now you can be charged for lying on your immigration document which gives the government a lot more leverage and opens more avenues to convict you (because lying is bad mmmkay). I don't know how much truth there is to it but it makes more sense than having the question hoping someone with bad intentions will have a lapse of judgement and decide to be truthful on the form.

OJFord 8y ago
On the contrary perhaps it can be argued it lessens the crime: there wasn't intent (on entering the country)!