6 ms·
Canadian man says U.S. border officers made him give DNA sample
- whynotmaybe 7mo ago[flagged]
- cf100clunk 7mo agoA border agent sensing that someone attempting to enter is a ''liability'' can and should simply turn the person around and forbid them entry. That's how it has always been done. This collection of DNA from a non-citizen for the FBI's use is an outrageous and awful new event.
- throwawayk7h 7mo ago> “At no time did they question the intent of my visit," he said. "They never challenged that whatsoever.” I wonder how they knew. Social media?
- tredre3 7mo agoA few sentences later: > Larson says once he told U.S. Customs and Border Protection why he wanted to enter the country, he was sent for a secondary inspection.
- mindslight 7mo ago1. A protest is not "disruption". 2. The "elected" government is explicitly prohibited from policing speech, and mostly strongly political speech. 3. That restriction is framed in terms of natural rights that apply to all human beings, not merely citizens. Sorry, there is no "however you feel about" both-sidesism to be had in this situation. The time for discussing and debating differing political viewpoints is after we've ousted the fascists and restored our Constitutionally-limited government bound by the rule of law. I'm a libertarian, so I think many of the policies and narratives pushed by Democrats leave much to be desired. In fact I was both-sidesing up until 2020 or so (5d-chess and all). But at this point, I'm no longer going to be suckered by any of the fascists' dishonest appeals to things that I care about. In fact, I am going to criticize them even more because they are burning the credibility of appeals to individual liberty.
- pixl97 7mo agoLuckily these fascists control the SCOTUS so they can politely say "Mindslight, you're wrong because we can ignore previous case law whenever we want". Well, luckily for them, not for the rest of us.
- mindslight 7mo agoSure? That is obviously one of the things that needs to be remediated as part of reclaiming our country. My original comment was talking about what ought rather than what is, in case that wasn't clear.
- JumpCrisscross 7mo ago> these fascists control the SCOTUS What’s learned helplessness when it isn’t learned but willed? SCOTUS has rejected “these fascists” multiple times. Electoral consequences to this administration are mounting. It’s wild to continue to ply lines of lazy nihilism when the evidence points so clearly the other way.
- lovich 7mo agoBecause while there have been a few noticeable rejections, such as the tariff ruling, its been a majority of heads he wins, tails his opponent loses, with this court.
- kelseyfrog 7mo ago> OK, what did he expect by explicitly stating that he wanted to bring disruption to a country? Exactly right! Order above all else, even rights. If you break the rules, you no longer deserve rights. Rights are based on your adherence to the state, not on natural or universal law.
- anon7000 7mo agoLol. Great comment. I think people missed the sarcasm.
- cf100clunk 7mo agoWas it sarcasm? I wondered if it was satire.
- kelseyfrog 7mo agoIt's a reflection of The Doctrine of Fascism[1] (Benito Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile 1932). I find it important to read original works and point out when those threads resurface. Rights as a product of the state is a core belief as described by facists themselves opposed to the universal natural rights of the liberal project. You can see how rights tied to the state naturally produce an in group and out group, and an obsession of law and order, two common features of such regimes. The original passage reads "Fascism sees in the world not only those superficial, material aspects in which man appears as an individual, standing by himself, self-centered, subject to natural law, which instinctively urges him toward a life of selfish momentary pleasure; it sees not only the individual but the nation and the country; individuals and generations bound together by a moral law, with common traditions and a mission..." 1. https://dn721808.ca.archive.org/0/items/mussolini-archive/The%20Doctrine%20of%20Fascism%20Benito%20Mussolini.pdf https://dn721808.ca.archive.org/0/items/mussolini-archive/Th...
- pavel_lishin 7mo agoPoe's law strikes again.
- deleted 7mo ago
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- sowbug 7mo ago> ...if you explicitly state that you want to take part in a demonstration against the elected government. Cambridge Dictionary's definition of a free country: a country where the government does not control what people say or do for political reasons and where people can express their opinions without punishment.
- jepj57 7mo agoThey were talking about citizens there, not random people from other countries.
- array_key_first 7mo agoNowhere in the definition of a free country does it state that you have to be a citizen. Even in the US constitution that is not the case. Unalienable rights extend to everyone under the constitutions jurisdiction, which includes people who are not citizens. Even aliens get due process in the US. Or should, anyway, if we didn't have anti-American leadership.
- jepj57 7mo agoWhen defining a Constitution for a country, to whom would you direct the constitutional precepts? Surely it would only be for people that were to be governed by the constitutional government. China, for example, would not cover American citizens in their Constitution.
- array_key_first 7mo agoThe US constitution explicitly covers people who are not US citizens. It's not up for interpretation, you're just wrong.
- cf100clunk 7mo agoThe original Substack piece: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47548420 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47548420
- JumpCrisscross 7mo ago“Larson mentioned names of officers who talked with him” This will be more valuable than his presence at a “No Kings” rally. I hope he gets those names to the ACLU, FIRE and other organizations would can make a list and wait for a change in power.
- junofan 7mo ago[flagged]
- JumpCrisscross 7mo ago> Why would anybody in power want random people at the border turning up to protest the government? Why would anyone in power want anyone opposing them? We restrict power because power's wants are unlimited. > We have been using biometric identification to identify repeat detainees for decades He was never charged with anything.
- dzonga 7mo agothere's a famous user on here who got subjected to the same thing - while a US citizen
- fakedang 7mo ago> On Oct. 18, 2025, Kincardine, Ont., native Kevin Larson was heading to a No Kings Rally in Port Huron, Mich., when he was pulled over for a “random check” at the U.S. border crossing. Seems very stupid for a foreign national to go around participating in political rallies of another country. Sure, you can support No Kings like I do, or anyone else, but explicitly going out of your way and crossing the border to take part in a rally as a foreign agent is just asking for trouble. And it would land you in trouble almost immediately in any country in the world.
- semiquaver 7mo agoWhy is it stupid? Freedom of assembly is not limited to US citizens. Your phrase “foreign agent” seems to attempt to cast aspersions on this person just for exercising his rights.
- rationalist 7mo agoBecause traditionally countries do not like when citizens from other countries interfere with their affairs, just like when Canada did not like U.S. citizens being involved with the truckers protest a few years ago.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- knodi 7mo agoHe’s not breaking the law.
- rdevilla 7mo ago[flagged]