4 ms·

Friendly reminder that if you have a DUI in your past, you WILL be refused admittance into Canada.

0xTJ 2y ago
This isn't even remotely relevant to this discussion. Being convicted of a crime is not the same as expressing critical opinions.
- donnachangstein 2y ago
  Every country on planet Earth has their own rules and they all have every right to tell any non-citizen entering to fuck off at their whims. Sorry but that's how it works. The sense of entitlement here is mind-boggling. If I fly to $COUNTRY they have every right to put me on the next plane back for any reason (including pissing off customs in any way) and I have no recourse beyond shouting into the void.
  - anonymousDan 2y ago
    Just to be clear, you're perfectly fine with this?
  - tromp 2y ago
    People are not arguing whether US has the right; but whether they had good reason. As in, a better reason than disliking criticism of the administration or its policies (or name calling).
    - kyleee 2y ago
      The article provides no details to assess whether or not there was good reason, so this is really quite a futile overall conversation.
  - 0xTJ 2y ago
    And everyone has a right to be excessively rude towards customer service employees. That doesn't mean that it's considered acceptable, or that others shouldn't be critical of people who do that.
    - lores 2y ago
      If you wave a giant flag written "Free speech" for two hundred years, make it one of the central tenets of your nation's self-image, and give condescending lessons about it to others, you'd better be upholding it, lest you look like a royal hypocrite.
pearlsontheroad 2y ago
Do you mean having a DUI committed in Canada or anywhere else?
- donnachangstein 2y ago
  Anywhere else. If Canada finds out you have a DUI in your past, and they WILL find out because they are an advanced Western country with the resources and intelligence to do so, they will turn you away at the border. This is a well known fact and such a routine occurrence it has its own page on the Canadian government's website: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/inadmissibility/reasons.html https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/se... To wit: committing a crime, including driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol
  - pearlsontheroad 2y ago
    I find it hard to believe they can track misdemeanor offenses such as DUI
    - donnachangstein 2y ago
      [flagged]
sham1 2y ago
The funny thing is that this is both whataboutism and also irrelevant. While countries can turn foreign people away at their borders for any reason under international law (unless they're in specific protected classes of people, like refugees), this ability is most often reserved for actual crimes, not calling the Commander-in-Chief bad names or whatever. Especially when the government in question advertises itself as being a beacon of free speech and all the rest of it. So at least it's hypocritical. And again, this is whataboutism. Just because Canada does something like this doesn't mean that Canada's pants have to also do it.
xtracto 2y ago
Ok, happy to be deported. The problem in the US right now is the for profit concentration camps where they retain the "arrested" people without a clue of when they'll be able to leave. Read the article of the Canadian lady; but not her case, but the cases of the othrr people detained in the concentration camps.

0xTJ 2y ago

This isn't even remotely relevant to this discussion. Being convicted of a crime is not the same as expressing critical opinions.

donnachangstein 2y ago
Every country on planet Earth has their own rules and they all have every right to tell any non-citizen entering to fuck off at their whims. Sorry but that's how it works. The sense of entitlement here is mind-boggling. If I fly to $COUNTRY they have every right to put me on the next plane back for any reason (including pissing off customs in any way) and I have no recourse beyond shouting into the void.
- anonymousDan 2y ago
  Just to be clear, you're perfectly fine with this?
- tromp 2y ago
  People are not arguing whether US has the right; but whether they had good reason. As in, a better reason than disliking criticism of the administration or its policies (or name calling).
  - kyleee 2y ago
    The article provides no details to assess whether or not there was good reason, so this is really quite a futile overall conversation.
- 0xTJ 2y ago
  And everyone has a right to be excessively rude towards customer service employees. That doesn't mean that it's considered acceptable, or that others shouldn't be critical of people who do that.
  - lores 2y ago
    If you wave a giant flag written "Free speech" for two hundred years, make it one of the central tenets of your nation's self-image, and give condescending lessons about it to others, you'd better be upholding it, lest you look like a royal hypocrite.

pearlsontheroad 2y ago

Do you mean having a DUI committed in Canada or anywhere else?

donnachangstein 2y ago
Anywhere else. If Canada finds out you have a DUI in your past, and they WILL find out because they are an advanced Western country with the resources and intelligence to do so, they will turn you away at the border. This is a well known fact and such a routine occurrence it has its own page on the Canadian government's website: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/inadmissibility/reasons.html https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/se... To wit: committing a crime, including driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol
- pearlsontheroad 2y ago
  I find it hard to believe they can track misdemeanor offenses such as DUI
  - donnachangstein 2y ago
    [flagged]

sham1 2y ago

The funny thing is that this is both whataboutism and also irrelevant. While countries can turn foreign people away at their borders for any reason under international law (unless they're in specific protected classes of people, like refugees), this ability is most often reserved for actual crimes, not calling the Commander-in-Chief bad names or whatever. Especially when the government in question advertises itself as being a beacon of free speech and all the rest of it. So at least it's hypocritical. And again, this is whataboutism. Just because Canada does something like this doesn't mean that Canada's pants have to also do it.

xtracto 2y ago

Ok, happy to be deported. The problem in the US right now is the for profit concentration camps where they retain the "arrested" people without a clue of when they'll be able to leave. Read the article of the Canadian lady; but not her case, but the cases of the othrr people detained in the concentration camps.