The roadside rest area

[cinxxx]

Super Bowl contest winner denied entry to U.S.
A Vancouver Island man who won an all-expenses-paid trip to the Super Bowl in New Orleans has been refused entry into the U.S. because of a marijuana possession conviction dating back to 1981.

Victoria resident Myles Wilkinson won the trip in a fantasy football league contest, competing against nearly four million other players for the chance to attend the National Football League championship, featuring the Baltimore Ravens and the San Francisco 49ers.

But when he got to Pearson International Airport in Toronto on Thursday, U.S. customs agents learned of a marijuana possession conviction in Vancouver in 1981 and told him he was not allowed to enter the country.

"I had two grams of cannabis. I paid a $50 fine," Wilkinson told CBC news.

Wilkinson said he was 19 when he was busted.

"I can't believe that this is happening, for something that happened 32 years ago."

[...]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/britis...-us-entry.html

[pobre diablo]

They have US customs in Canadian airports?

[italystf]

That's just insane. Being treated like an Al Qaeda member just for a little juvenile trasgression. not that I want to defend drug usage, but it's plain ridiculous and reflects the hypocrisy and backwardness that exist in American laws much more than in Europe.

[Suburbanist]

Originally Posted by italystf

That's just insane. Being treated like an Al Qaeda member just for a little juvenile trasgression. not that I want to defend drug usage, but it's plain ridiculous and reflects the hypocrisy and backwardness that exist in American laws much more than in Europe.

He should have applied to a visa if he had any criminal conviction.

Australia also keep people out on visa waiver travle if they have such troubles. Only continental Europe is lazy on that aspect, letting even things like assault or theft go forgiven for visa free travel purposes.

Originally Posted by pobre diablo

They have US customs in Canadian airports?

In some airports. It's called pre-clearance, so flights from certain Canadian airports can be offered to many US destinations that don't have international facilities.

There are such facilities also in Aruba, Ireland and a couple other Caribbean islands

There is something like that in Europe: British customs facilities in Calais (ferries), Bruxelles and Paris (train Eurostar)

[Penn's Woods]

Originally Posted by italystf

That's just insane. Being treated like an Al Qaeda member just for a little juvenile trasgression. not that I want to defend drug usage, but it's plain ridiculous and reflects the hypocrisy and backwardness that exist in American laws much more than in Europe.

Seems it was Canada that convicted the guy for possession. So the backwardness and hypocrisy are, um, not exclusively ours here. Is it a case of ALL criminal convictions outside the U.S. disqualifying you for entry? It would be ironic if Europeans could be excluded from the U.S. because they'd been convicted there for, say, wearing an Islamic head scarf on the street or violating one of Europe's many limits on free speech. ;-) Things they'd have an absolute right to do here.

And Google keeps feeding me automated ads when I'm on SSC lately which include "Entering Canada on a DUI?" (DUI = driving under the influence) I haven't paid attention to these ads - it's not an issue for me - but I take it foreigners with DUI's on their record might have trouble entering Canada.

EDIT: In fact, the notion of the U.S. keeping people out for actions that would be protected here by the First Amendment presents an interesting Constitutional issue. Wonder if it's ever come up....

EDIT 2: An American trying to enter Canada with a conviction for possession of marijuana would have had the same problem: http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca...on.aspx?view=d, 2d section.

[Rebasepoiss]

Originally Posted by Penn's Woods

violating one of Europe's many limits on free speech.

Which are these exactly?

BTW, coming from a person who gets all upset when somebody criticizes the US, you do generalise quite a bit - Europe isn't a single country.

[Verso]

He must be talking about Belarus.

[Penn's Woods]

Originally Posted by Rebasepoiss

Which are these exactly?

BTW, coming from a person who gets all upset when somebody criticizes the US, you do generalise quite a bit - Europe isn't a single country.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/24/op...ojan.html?_r=0

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...-laws/1613057/

http://www.voanews.com/content/analy...w/1512559.html

http://www.npr.org/2013/01/22/169998...st-hate-speech

A non-American (it seems) point of view saying we have too much free speech here: http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn....fling-to-many/

And I learned last week lèse-majesté is still a crime in the Netherlands. What century is this?

I am aware Europe isn't a single country. I didn't say it was. But these phenomena do exist "in Europe" and are in fact fairly widespread.

And I do not get "all upset," or even simply upset, at legitimate, factual criticism, just at ignorant criticism and blatantly xenophobic stereotypes. (Just because I believe - unlike many European governments - in your right to express blatantly xenophobic opinions doesn't mean I have to agree with them.)

I responded calmly, politely and factually to italystf's point. If you and anyone else want to make something of it, enjoy yourselves; you'll be doing it without me. No matter how many "likes" you tally for it.

[Rebasepoiss]

Maybe it's a cultural thing but hate speeches aren't considered as part of free speech, at least not in Estonia. For example, organising a protest agains muslims/jews/whoever isn't what the free speech principle is supposed to protect.

[italystf]

Originally Posted by Penn's Woods

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/24/op...ojan.html?_r=0

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...-laws/1613057/

http://www.voanews.com/content/analy...w/1512559.html

http://www.npr.org/2013/01/22/169998...st-hate-speech

A non-American (it seems) point of view saying we have too much free speech here: http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn....fling-to-many/

And I learned last week lèse-majesté is still a crime in the Netherlands. What century is this?

I am aware Europe isn't a single country. I didn't say it was. But these phenomena do exist "in Europe" and are in fact fairly widespread.

And I do not get "all upset," or even simply upset, at legitimate, factual criticism, just at ignorant criticism and blatantly xenophobic stereotypes. (Just because I believe - unlike many European governments - in your right to express blatantly xenophobic opinions doesn't mean I have to agree with them.)

I responded calmly, politely and factually to italystf's point. If you and anyone else want to make something of it, enjoy yourselves; you'll be doing it without me. No matter how many "likes" you tally for it.

In Italy is forbidden to insult the flag, the constitution, to pronunce hate speech against certain ethnic groups, religions or homosexuals, to apologize fascism and nazism (but, strangely, not communism or other regimes), to display nazi-fascist symbols, to defamate or insult people, to educate other to break the law.
Lack of free speech is not democracy, but also tolerating hate speech isn't.
I think every European country, as well other democracies such the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia,... have such laws.

[keber]

Originally Posted by Penn's Woods

And I learned last week lèse-majesté is still a crime in the Netherlands. What century is this?

Can I burn US dollar note in USA? How not? It is just one dollar. What century is this?

[Verso]

Originally Posted by Penn's Woods

I responded calmly, politely and factually to italystf's point.

You responded like an attention whore, as usually.

[Road_UK]

Originally Posted by italystf

In Italy is forbidden to insult the flag, the constitution, to pronunce hate speech against certain ethnic groups, religions or homosexuals, to apologize fascism and nazism (but, strangely, not communism or other regimes), to display nazi-fascist symbols, to defamate or insult people, to educate other to break the law.
Lack of free speech is not democracy, but also tolerating hate speech isn't.
I think every European country, as well other democracies such the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia,... have such laws.

Why not let the suckers that spew hate speech out in the open, so we can see who they are and what they're up to? Or do you want them to hide their grudges in their basements so that they will take us by surprise?

In my opinion free speech ends with violence. Stop this thing where we are afraid to offend other people, because one opinion might be offensive to the other one anyway. And if you cannot handle that, than you're exactly the same as any Nazi, terrorist, communist and dictator roaming this planet.

[italystf]

Originally Posted by Road_UK

Why not let the suckers that spew hate speech out in the open, so we can see who they are and what they're up to? Or do you want them to hide their grudges in their basements so that they will take us by surprise?

In my opinion free speech ends with violence. Stop this thing where we are afraid to offend other people, because one opinion might be offensive to the other one anyway. And if you cannot handle that, than you're exactly the same as any Nazi, terrorist, communist and dictator roaming this planet.

If our democracy states that everybody is equal in front of the law and has the same rights and duties regardeless his social status, race, gender, sexual preference, political or religious view this must be enforced.
If someone make a discrimination, for example refusing to hire someone because she's a woman, or he's black, muslim, atheist, etc... he commits a violation.
Same with defamation: if you say that a rival honest professionist is a thief to drive customers away from him, you should be punished since your freedom to say whatever you want ends where starts the freedom of the other to be respected.

[Road_UK]

That is not free speech.

[italystf]

Originally Posted by Road_UK

That is not free speech.

The problem is: where to draw a line between free speech and defamation. Hate speech is often associated with disrespect towards the discriminated categories and here is the problem.

[Verso]

Originally Posted by Road_UK

In my opinion free speech ends with violence.

Violence is an action, not speech, to begin with. My opinion is somewhere between that of you and italystf. Calling for violence shouldn't be tolerated IMO, but insulting others should, even if it's not a nice thing to do (I'm talking about real life, of course, not this forum).

[italystf]

Originally Posted by Verso

Violence is an action, not speech, to begin with. My opinion is somewhere between that of you and italystf. Calling for violence shouldn't be tolerated IMO, but insulting others should, even if it's not a nice thing to do (I'm talking about real life, of course, not this forum).

Depend what kind of insult. If you scream "stupid" to someone who crossed the road in front of you or spilled some drink on your clothes or to a footballer who miss a goal is normal, I don't say that you should be punished for that.
But if you regularily humiliate a collegue because you want persuade him to fire himself or you advocate that categories such ethnic minorities or LGBT are inferiors to the "majority" this is unacceptable. I don't say you should be jailed for hate speech, but maybe fined in proportion of the social harm causated by your speech.

[Verso]

I disagree. If you don't like what you hear, you should just ignore it. I don't feel inferior just because someone told me so (and if I do, I should get more self-confidence or stop being strange, if I am).

[Road_UK]

Originally Posted by Verso

I disagree. If you don't like what you hear, you should just ignore it. I don't feel inferior just because someone told me so (and if I do, I should get more self-confidence or stop being strange, if I am).

There is this Dutch celebrity who said it just right: You see and hear stuff on the tv that you don't like. Things that you disagree with, or you might even get offended. But you create a defensive shield for yourself and you move on. That's what you do in a free society.

Tell that to these assholes in the Middle East who get all upset and weary about a few cartoons in a Danish newspaper... They are offended and respond with violence and anger...

Wouldn't it be much better to either ignore ignorance, or start a debate with words rather than guns?