Searching laptops with or without reasonable cause is constitutional

[ggirod]

Re: Searching laptops with or without reasonable cause is constitutional

c1ue: Is it possibly you who is persisting to some inexplicable end? Please contemplate this brief summary of a Wikipedia article on child pornography...

Child pornography refers to images or films (also known as child abuse images) and in some cases writings depicting sexually explicit activities involving a child; as such, child pornography is a record of child sexual abuse. Abuse of the child occurs during the sexual acts which are recorded in the production of child pornography, and the effects of the abuse on the child (and continuing into maturity) are compounded by the wide distribution and lasting availability of photographs of the abuse.

Ninety-four of 187 Interpol member states had laws specifically addressing child pornography as of 2008, though this does not include nations that ban all pornography. Of those 94 countries, 58 criminalized possession of child pornography regardless of intent to distribute. Both distribution and possession are now criminal offenses in almost all Western countries. A wide movement is working to globalize the criminalization of child pornography, including major international organizations such as the United Nations and the European Commission.

Legal definitions of child pornography generally include sexual images involving both prepubescent and post-pubescent teenage minors and computer-generated images that appear to involve them. Most possessors of child pornography who are arrested are found to possess images of prepubescent children; possessors of pornographic images of post-pubescent minors are less likely to be prosecuted, even though those images also fall within the statutes.

Child pornography is a multi-billion dollar industry and among the fastest growing criminal segments on the internet.Producers of child pornography try to avoid prosecution by distributing their material across national borders, though this issue is increasingly being addressed with regular arrests of suspects from a number of countries occurring over the last few years. NCMEC claims that around 20 % of all pornography contains children.
Child pornography is viewed and collected by pedophiles for a variety of purposes, ranging from private sexual uses, trading with other pedophiles, preparing children for sexual abuse as part of the process known as "child grooming", or enticement leading to entrapment for sexual exploitation such as production of new child pornography or child prostitution.

I believe the customs service's role includes "Interdicting narcotics and other contraband" and considering that possession of child porn is illegal in the US, most if not all its states, and lots of other places, it does not seem unreasonable in the slightest that they should search for and seize same on laptops, since digital images are most likely the most common form of the contraband materials.

As to reasonableness of the US laws against child porn, we might give thought to other nations, western and not.

Ninety-four of 187 Interpol member states had laws specifically addressing child pornography as of 2008, though this does not include nations that ban all pornography.[14] Of those 94 countries, 58 criminalized possession of child pornography regardless of intent to distribute.[14] Both distribution and possession are now criminal offenses in almost all Western countries.

At this point, if c1ue really believes that child porn is somehow an exception to contraband because it is so innocent, and that somehow the constitution should be invoked to change a centuries' old law that has been accepted all this time there is little I can do to persuade him otherwise. To go further is a waste of everyone's time.

[*T*]

Re: Searching laptops with or without reasonable cause is constitutional

I could be wrong but isn't London the city where you cannot find a spot not on a camera? Where people actually monitor the cameras for all manner of infractions? Where presumably microphones also record anything you might choose to say? Where your public display of affiliation by meeting a friend on a corner is recorded just in case something interesting develops. Where totally innocent acts can be recorded, saved, and later used as evidence against you? Where you do not know what was recorded in any case? Granted, one does not have complete privacy in public spaces anyway, but to be under nanny's watchful eye seems uncomfortable in the extreme to this American. It would make me think twice about living in such a society. It seems, though, that a lot of people are willing to give up their privacy quite lightly.

Those all pervasive cameras seem to me to be much less benign than the centuries-old border search that has always been empowered to look for things like kiddie porn, shoes bearing foot and mouth disease from infected farms, drugs, anthrax, radioactive isotopes suitable for dirty bombs, cash in excess of legal limits, huge treasury notes in denominations they were never issued in, and lots of stuff nobody has thought of yet?

.. and the police want to order surveillance UAVs for the olympics. Yeah, I don't like the UK much either in this regard. But at least I don't get fingerprinted, retina scanned and photographed when I enter the country and financial and travel details recorded.

[c1ue]

Re: Searching laptops with or without reasonable cause is constitutional

At this point, if c1ue really believes that child porn is somehow an exception to contraband because it is so innocent, and that somehow the constitution should be invoked to change a centuries' old law that has been accepted all this time there is little I can do to persuade him otherwise. To go further is a waste of everyone's time.

Excuse me, but you are failing to acknowledge a key point in your role as apologist for the fascists:

Civil liberties involve privacy.

Search without reasonable cause is precisely the difference between living in an oppressive society and living in a 'free' one.

There are absolutely reasons and areas where search must be without probable cause - but when said areas are extended to involve all possible illegal activities, then the means for repression is greatly increased.

I have specifically said that the person involved was a scumbag - something which you apparently cannot understand that it means I do NOT approve of child pornography.

But equally I do not approve of targeted searches for those suspected of undesirable activity by the government.

This is the path which leads to 'random' shakedowns of African Americans driving nice cars.

Of 'random' searches of East Indian and Arabic appearing individuals.

Of 'random' canvassing of persons and property for those known to oppose government usurpation of powers.

A reading of the Customs Service mission statement makes it quite clear that the Customs Service's mission is the enforcement of US customs laws and taxes, followed by specific mention of narcotics.

Sure, anything illegal can be covered by the 'public safety' and 'contraband' clauses.

But do you really want to have your entire person and possessions searched at any time at whim (or desire) every time you enter the United States?

The reason there is a legal tactic known as 'discovery' is exactly for this purpose: the legal right to dig through everything remotely involved in a case to find violations.

It is rare indeed that a 'discovery' with a broad enough scope (i.e. anything illegal) is unable to find anything of note.