A lot of people travel for business; so it's logical to think that in this day of technological dependency, these people would bring with them laptop computers, kindles, FlyFusion pens, MP3 players, cell phones, and other little techy goodies to help them do their jobs while they are traveling.
After all, that is supposedly what they're being invented and manufactured for, isn't it? Convenience and ease of use?
Well, imagine, if you will, stepping off a plane from a foreign country and while going through customs the hard drive on your laptop computer was "inspected"?
A couple of years ago, Michael T. Arnold landed at the Los Angeles International Airport after a 20-hour flight from the Philippines. He had his laptop with him, and a customs officer took a look at what was on his hard drive. Clicking on folders called “Kodak pictures” and “Kodak memories,” the officer found child pornography.
The search was not unusual: the government contends that it is perfectly free to inspect every laptop that enters the country, whether or not there is anything suspicious about the computer or its owner. Rummaging through a computer’s hard drive, the government says, is no different than looking through a suitcase
Okay, so Mr. Arnold went out of the country, came back, and the officials took and looked through the hard drive on his laptop; then, upon finding pictures of child pornography, was arrested.
And this isn't the first time this has happened.
The arguments regarding this is that a laptop computer is akin to a suitcase; it's a storage device and therefore searching through a laptop computer is no different than searching through a person's suitcase.
However, laptop computers tend to be much more personal, and therefore many people contend that to search through a person's laptop computer is more than merely an extreme case of violation, but that it's akin to searching parts of the human body - there had better be good cause.
What do you think?
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I think it's toeing the line as a breach on the fourth amendment to search suitcases, much less laptops.
--Mike
Check out the Topic of the Week
http://www.progressiveu.org/weeklytopic
My thoughts exactly! :)
I mean, technically speaking, they aren't supposed to go through your suitcase unless they have reasonable cause (like something comes up on the little X-Ray thingy or you're just acting like a complete psycho and said you had a bomb)... But I don't think they ever even follow that.
And there's really no way to get "reasonable cause" from a laptop... it's not like file contents show up on an X-Ray. I think it's reasonable to ask the owner to turn it on just to prove it's a real laptop and not a bomb engineered to look like a laptop (like they do with cameras)... but beyond that it's a complete invasion of privacy.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"when you have nothing else to say, "Fwonk" is always the perfect thing."
"yeah well, fwonk"
--Devon
Fanaile Essence
It is a hard balance.
On one hand, child porn. I don't think that a person should have it, for any reason. Ever.
I am glad that such things are illegal as it victmizes a child in a way that he or she might never recover from.
On the other hand.... it isn't a public thing, the contents of a hard drive.
Sometimes it is hard to draw a line of freedom when such a line protects scum like those who view or peddle child porn.
but, that is what happens sometimes.
Of course, child pornography could just as easily be 17 years old as it could be 4...
--Mike
Check out the Topic of the Week
http://www.progressiveu.org/weeklytopic
1st Degree Murder is 1st Degree murder, whether you shoot them 10 times or once.
Heh, especially if you're a Philadelphia police officer.
But in all seriousness, that's the same perversion of the law that I hate Chris Hansen for. The point of the law is to protect young people from being coerced due to their naivete inherent in their age into posing nude (or whatever), not to prevent a nude picture of a 17 year old popping up on the internet. One of the main reasons I'm an anarchist is because law necessarily become about the 'what' rather than the 'why'.
Independent of law, people can reason the 'why'; however with laws, a judge or jury can only rule based on a 'what'.
--Mike
Check out the Topic of the Week
http://www.progressiveu.org/weeklytopic
As an attorney I can assure you that one is not within one's rights when a person is at a border crossing.
Entrance into a county & re-entrance upon visiting a foreign land is a constitution free zone.
This has historically been the case and is well established. No "unreasonable search & seizure" rules apply. They can, as a matter of coarse, search your bags- or, your laptop if they see fit.