My wife and I are thinking of going to Montreal for a weekend this summer. Looking at plane tickets, flying into YUL is about $500 more per ticket than flying into BTV. It doesn't look like Burlington is a long drive from Montreal. How is the border crossing on I-89? Are there long lines? We have Global Entry which allows us to use the Nexus lanes returning back into the US (but not going into Canada). Would the best route be I-89 to Quebec 133 to 35 to 10? It looks like I-89 doesn't transition directly to a freeway in Canada but rather to small back roads.
133 is a decent-quality road.
Quote from: NE2 on January 09, 2012, 11:06:50 AM
133 is a decent-quality road.
Yes, it's decent but get lots of traffic especially in summer with the tourists traffics, PQ A-35 is finally in construction from St-Jean to the border. http://www.montrealroads.com/roads/A-35/
Also, here some pictures from a French blog showing the construction progress
http://richard3.net/2010/07/29/a-35-en-2010-lentement-mais-surement/
http://richard3.net/2011/10/28/a-35-2011-ca-avance-un-peu/
The time I crossed back into the US at I-89 last spring, there was a bit of a line, but it moved quickly and my questioning was brief. This was on a Sunday morning.
If you're both American citizens, the US Border Patrol will likely give you more trouble than the Canadian Border Patrol.
You've got the best route down, and it's a pretty easy drive with one exception: Pont Champlain. Expect traffic there if it's anywhere near rush hour.
No traffic, the drive is a couple hours.
Quote from: Duke87 on January 09, 2012, 06:30:04 PM
The time I crossed back into the US at I-89 last spring, there was a bit of a line, but it moved quickly and my questioning was brief. This was on a Sunday morning.
If you're both American citizens, the US Border Patrol will likely give you more trouble than the Canadian Border Patrol.
You've got the best route down, and it's a pretty easy drive with one exception: Pont Champlain. Expect traffic there if it's anywhere near rush hour.
No traffic, the drive is a couple hours.
I've always had the opposite experience with other US/Canadian immigration - Canadian immigration officers tend to be huge jerks, Bo at land borders and airports. I've never had any issues coming back into the US. This will be my first time at a land border with Global Entry since they started accepting it at US Nexus lanes and I don't expect US CBP to do much more than check our IDs and ask if we have anything to declare.
What kind of hassle have you experienced coming back into the US? You have a constitutional right to be in the US so they can't exactly keep you out.
Lately, Canada has given me more trouble than the USA, that's a recent development. I would suggest returning to Burlington via A-15/I-87, US 11 north, US 2 east through North Hero and Grand Island. It's a very scenic drive and you won't lose much time on it.
Quote from: realjd on January 09, 2012, 07:17:58 PM
[What kind of hassle have you experienced coming back into the US? You have a constitutional right to be in the US so they can't exactly keep you out.
My worst experience (recounted in another recent topic) was a half-hour, thorough (including picking through my dirty laundry, and maybe a quick scan of the data on my laptop, cellphone, etc.), and unexplained full vehicle search, crossing back into the U.S. at the MB 75/I-29 border crossing after a short visit to Winnipeg. In about two dozen crossings into Canada, I've had two vehicle searches where I was pulled out of line (and on another crossing, a quick peek into my trunk while I was still in line), but they were quicker, less intrusive, and friendlier.
But I'd add that the unpleasantry coming back from Winnipeg in 2008 didn't stop me from making one or two round trips across the Canadian border in 2009, two or three in 2010, and three in 2011.
Here are the two above blog links, translated to English:
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Frichard3.net%2F2010%2F07%2F29%2Fa-35-en-2010-lentement-mais-surement%2F&act=url
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Frichard3.net%2F2011%2F10%2F28%2Fa-35-2011-ca-avance-un-peu%2F&act=url
Quote from: oscar on January 09, 2012, 08:38:33 PM
Quote from: realjd on January 09, 2012, 07:17:58 PM
[What kind of hassle have you experienced coming back into the US? You have a constitutional right to be in the US so they can't exactly keep you out.
My worst experience (recounted in another recent topic) was a half-hour, thorough (including picking through my dirty laundry, and maybe a quick scan of the data on my laptop, cellphone, etc.), and unexplained full vehicle search, crossing back into the U.S. at the MB 75/I-29 border crossing after a short visit to Winnipeg. In about two dozen crossings into Canada, I've had two vehicle searches where I was pulled out of line (and on another crossing, a quick peek into my trunk while I was still in line), but they were quicker, less intrusive, and friendlier.
But I'd add that the unpleasantry coming back from Winnipeg in 2008 didn't stop me from making one or two round trips across the Canadian border in 2009, two or three in 2010, and three in 2011.
That sucks. Like I said, I've never had any real problems with US CBP on land borders or at airports. I do know that they'll do random secondary inspections even of Global Entry/Nexus/Sentri trusted travelers (I heard 3% somewhere, don't remember where though) so maybe you were just unlucky.
I've never been searched going into Canada either, just hassled by the CBSA agents. They basically made it sound like they were doing me a favor by letting me in.
I like the way the rest of the world does it where immigration and customs are separate functions handled by separate people. It seems to make things more pleasant.
I got searched at the NY 22 crossing entering the US. Border guards wondered why I was driving so much out of my way on a backroads crossing, and didn't buy "I'm taking the scenic route". Though, in their defense, I was worried about being given trouble there and was visibly nervous when I pulled up to the checkpoint. That implies that you've got something to be nervous about and tends to make them want to check you out.
Quote from: Duke87 on January 10, 2012, 07:20:09 PM
I got searched at the NY 22 crossing entering the US. Border guards wondered why I was driving so much out of my way on a backroads crossing, and didn't buy "I'm taking the scenic route". Though, in their defense, I was worried about being given trouble there and was visibly nervous when I pulled up to the checkpoint. That implies that you've got something to be nervous about and tends to make them want to check you out.
Nothing to be worried about coming back. Unlike going into a foreign country (like crossing into Canada), CBP can't legally deny you entry if you're a US citizen. The worst they can do is hassle you and search you before letting you go.
Quote from: realjd on January 11, 2012, 01:25:37 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 10, 2012, 07:20:09 PM
I got searched at the NY 22 crossing entering the US. Border guards wondered why I was driving so much out of my way on a backroads crossing, and didn't buy "I'm taking the scenic route". Though, in their defense, I was worried about being given trouble there and was visibly nervous when I pulled up to the checkpoint. That implies that you've got something to be nervous about and tends to make them want to check you out.
Nothing to be worried about coming back. Unlike going into a foreign country (like crossing into Canada), CBP can't legally deny you entry if you're a US citizen. The worst they can do is hassle you and search you before letting you go.
As long as you have your passport with you, of course! Surprisingly, there are still a lot of Americans who don't know that a passport is now required to return to the US when you travel to Canada by car (or foot or bike).
Yes, well, being denied entry is not my worry. My worry is about getting hassled. Border guards, like police, freak me out and I would rather keep my dealings with them as brief as possible.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 11, 2012, 03:23:15 PM
As long as you have your passport with you, of course! Surprisingly, there are still a lot of Americans who don't know that a passport is now required to return to the US when you travel to Canada by car (or foot or bike).
Even without a passport, they can't stop an American citizen from entering. It may just take a long, long time for them to make that determination as to your citizenship!
My Global Entry card is a WHTI-certified travel doc so it's good at land borders in place of a passport. Nexus and Sentri cards are as well. A few states issue "enhanced drivers licenses" that are also. I still plan on taking my passport though since I don't like the idea of being outside the US without it. Even on cruises where the cruise line strongly encourages people to leave their passports in their rooms when in port, I take it with me.
Quote from: Duke87 on January 10, 2012, 07:20:09 PM
I got searched at the NY 22 crossing entering the US. Border guards wondered why I was driving so much out of my way on a backroads crossing, and didn't buy "I'm taking the scenic route". Though, in their defense, I was worried about being given trouble there and was visibly nervous when I pulled up to the checkpoint. That implies that you've got something to be nervous about and tends to make them want to check you out.
In 2009, I reentered the U.S. at another lonely New York crossing, US 11 a few miles east of I-87. The customs agent asked why was using that port of entry rather than I-87. I told him I wanted a change of pace from the Interstates, was "shunpiking" my way back home including a lot of US 11, and wanted to start that trip at the north end of US 11. The agent seemed to get it, no search, just a minute or two of the usual routine questions before I was allowed to go on my way.
It may have helped that my excuse was true. I did end up staying on US 11 all the way to I-81 in Watertown NY, got back on US 11 in Scranton, and didn't return to the Interstates until just north of Hagerstown MD.
Rule 1: Don't ever offer the border guard any more information than he/she asks for.
Rule 2: Be polite.
I have been to Ontario 4 times...
1. With my family, no problems
2. Went alone, no problems
3. Went alone, questioned and searched, both ways
4. Went alone, not only questioned and searched both ways, but was threatened with prison, escorted into both US and Canadian customs buildings. They didn't buy my story of why I was there, and more drama. They sounded an alarm and border agents came out to the booth and I was escorted into a garage and escorted upstairs where I waited until my car was searched. Talk about a hassle to cross! Anyone who knows me knows I take random trips just because. Doesn't go over well with them.
So all this happened in Michigan at the International Bridge in Sault Ste. Marie. US Customs were total jerks coming back from Canada. And just for the record, on the last trip I did have an Enhanced Michigan Drivers License with the RFID chip.
As a frequent crosser (and crossing into the US tomorrow morning in fact) I've never had to get through anything more than (relatively rare) car searches (once by the CBP, twice by the CBSA, in a few years). But almost all of the times it's nothing more than "Where are you from, where are you going, why, anything to declare?" and on some occasions, "Open your trunk, please unzip the bag that's on your rear seat." Still, 85% of the time it's a 2-minute business for me, each way, even when I do have something to declare. On one occasion a CBSA agent didn't even take my passport out of my hand. Perhaps I've gotten used to it and generally don't look nervous or suspicious (although some may say otherwise from my hair and occasional unshaven beard.)
I cross at various places between the Thousands Islands (ON/NY) and Stanstead/Derby Line (QC/VT) depending on my destination (I've probably been through more than ten different crossings by now), but most of the time it's in Lacolle or Hemmingford, QC (Champlain, NY).
nds76, I'm amazed, I really have no idea what actually happened with you. I've never even been close to getting something like that. :/
Saying "I'm going nowhere in particular for no particular reason" is a great way to raise red flags. Because, even if it's completely honest, it makes you look very suspicious since it's strange. Ordinarily, people don't do such things, so they assume you're trying to hide something. What you need to do is have a destination in mind and have an excuse for going there before you cross the border. Or, if you can't do that, simply avoid crossing the border if you don't have a reason to.
I have crossed a number of times over the years, and have been searched by both US and Canadian officials a few times. Typically these days I just say that I am going to visit friends or will be shopping.
When I was younger I would say that I wasn't going (or hadn't gone) for any particular reason and subsequently got searched. I recall getting a hard time coming back from Rochester about 5 years ago because in the customs officials mind the fact that it was 'a nice day' wasn't a great reason to have gone to New York State.
I really didn't have a reason to go other than wanting to. I mean I was already in Soo, Michigan and the border is right there and since I had my newly issued EDL I thought I'd give it a try, what roadgeek wouldn't? I was nervous and apparently it showed. But in any case I was accused of lying about why I was going there. It was quite an ordeal for me and was hysterical all the way home after getting back to Michigan.
Wow. I had thought it would be nice to drive up to Canada and take a tour of at least some of the country for maybe a couple of weeks or more (if I had the money and the time), but now I'm not so sure. Is it harder to cross the border now than it was before 9/11? Would it be easier to cross if I had, say, copies of reservation confirmations at Canadian hotels to show the border guards that I have a legitimate, peaceful reason for crossing the border? I just don't want to have a frightening experience at the border which would leave me emotionally scarred and unable to enjoy my trip...
Quote from: broadhurst04 on January 22, 2012, 12:32:33 AM
Wow. I had thought it would be nice to drive up to Canada and take a tour of at least some of the country for maybe a couple of weeks or more (if I had the money and the time), but now I'm not so sure. Is it harder to cross the border now than it was before 9/11? Would it be easier to cross if I had, say, copies of reservation confirmations at Canadian hotels to show the border guards that I have a legitimate, peaceful reason for crossing the border? I just don't want to have a frightening experience at the border which would leave me emotionally scarred and unable to enjoy my trip...
Sounds like a plan that would leave a fair amount of your money behind in Canada. That should help with Customs Canada, especially if you mention some popular tourist destinations among the places you'll visit.
I've sometimes been asked, crossing into Canada, about my first night's lodging reservations. Once I supplied a specific location, but the customs agent then grilled me about why that particular place (not a typical tourist destination) before letting me go -- sometimes you just can't win. Another time I told the customs agent where I was headed, and that I didn't have lodging reservations but would arrange them that afternoon depending on how much progress I made by then. That answer satisfied the customs agent, though it helped that it was low season so it was unlikely I'd end up stuck overnight someplace with no lodgings. As advised upthread, be prepared to answer the question at least generally, but don't volunteer details.
Quote from: broadhurst04 on January 22, 2012, 12:32:33 AM
Wow. I had thought it would be nice to drive up to Canada and take a tour of at least some of the country for maybe a couple of weeks or more (if I had the money and the time)
33 Million vehicles cross the US/Canada border each year and that's just what a lot of these people are doing: touring and spending money. Certainly nothing that will set of an alarm. Be honest and tell the border officer just that.
http://www.ezbordercrossing.com/the-inspection-experience/
http://www.ezbordercrossing.com/border-congestion/
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2009/05/11/f-border-by-the-numbers.html
Quote from: broadhurst04 on January 22, 2012, 12:32:33 AM
Wow. I had thought it would be nice to drive up to Canada and take a tour of at least some of the country for maybe a couple of weeks or more (if I had the money and the time), but now I'm not so sure. Is it harder to cross the border now than it was before 9/11? Would it be easier to cross if I had, say, copies of reservation confirmations at Canadian hotels to show the border guards that I have a legitimate, peaceful reason for crossing the border? I just don't want to have a frightening experience at the border which would leave me emotionally scarred and unable to enjoy my trip...
Yes, it's harder than before 9/11. But it's not worse than any other international trip by land or air. The border folks may give you a hard time if you're suspicious but they do eventually let you through in most cases. Don't let a few bad stories scare you from traveling internationally.
Like any time you travel internationally, having printed hotel reservations and printed return flight confirmations or other proof of ties to your home country will help things. They are primarily looking for contraband and for people who may overstay and/or be a burden on the government. Showing that you have a reason to go home makes them much friendlier. And even trusted travelers are subject to random searches chosen by the border agent's computer.
Having a specific destination and list of things to do also helps. If you fly to London and you can't answer when immigration agent asks what sights you wanted to see, that raises red flags. Same with entering Canada and the US.
Returning to the US, they MUST let you back in. It's the law. Worst you'll get is a car search and an interrogation (where you're not actually required to answer any of their questions if you don't want to).
Don't bring produce across in either direction. That's a big no-no.
^ Agreed. Whatever you do, don't let a fear of crossing the border (into any country, not just Canada) forbid you from crossing. The world is such an interesting and diverse place -- don't miss out on seeing that.
Quote from: realjd on January 22, 2012, 08:39:59 AMDon't bring produce across in either direction. That's a big no-no.
It is certainly important not to transport produce that is banned in either country or finished products which are made from banned produce (I am thinking in particular of a type of berry--blackberry?--which is a common eating fruit and infusion herb in Europe but is banned in North America because it is considered a weed). But in general I would not worry about things bought at a supermarket.
Quote from: broadhurst04 on January 22, 2012, 12:32:33 AM
Wow. I had thought it would be nice to drive up to Canada and take a tour of at least some of the country for maybe a couple of weeks or more (if I had the money and the time), but now I'm not so sure. Is it harder to cross the border now than it was before 9/11? Would it be easier to cross if I had, say, copies of reservation confirmations at Canadian hotels to show the border guards that I have a legitimate, peaceful reason for crossing the border? I just don't want to have a frightening experience at the border which would leave me emotionally scarred and unable to enjoy my trip...
I would say it's quite a bit harder now. Before 9/11, customs was just a formality, mainly a way to prove to the government that the customs officials were actually doing work. At least on the NY/ON border, nobody cared if you illegally crossed by boat either (though it helped that there was no legal mechanism for doing so beyond calling customs at the time).
Quote from: realjd on January 22, 2012, 08:39:59 AM
Worst you'll get is a car search and an interrogation (where you're not actually required to answer any of their questions if you don't want to).
Wait, really? I thought right to remain silent, probable cause, and all that didn't apply with the border patrol.
Anyways, I wouldn't recommend pleading the fifth even if you are allowed to. Refusing to answer questions is generally taken to mean you have something to hide, which never helps your case.
Quote from: J N Winkler link=topic=5910.msg131510#msg131510
It is certainly important not to transport produce that is banned in either country or finished products which are made from banned produce (I am thinking in particular of a type of berry--blackberry?--which is a common eating fruit and infusion herb in Europe but is banned in North America because it is considered a weed). But in general I would not worry about things bought at a supermarket.
All produce MUST be declared when entering the US, and the list of things that will be allowed into the country is extremely short:
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/clearing/agri_prod_inus.xml
Even things as harmless as apples will be confiscated.
Quote from: Duke87 on January 22, 2012, 02:36:20 PM
Quote from: realjd on January 22, 2012, 08:39:59 AM
Worst you'll get is a car search and an interrogation (where you're not actually required to answer any of their questions if you don't want to).
Wait, really? I thought right to remain silent, probable cause, and all that didn't apply with the border patrol.
Anyways, I wouldn't recommend pleading the fifth even if you are allowed to. Refusing to answer questions is generally taken to mean you have something to hide, which never helps your case.
You have no 4th amendment right to refuse to consent to a search (no probable cause needed for them to search your car for instance), but you do still have a right to remain silent. There was a case last year where a flyer exercised that right and blogged about it:
http://nomadlaw.com/2010/04/i-am-detained-by-feds-for-not-answering-questions/
http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2010/09/dealing_customs_agents
The border crossing sure is quite a hassle, but I don't let it deter me from travelling to places that are as close as a half hour drive from my home. I enjoy exploring too much to stop doing it just because of arrogant CBP and CBSA staff.
I always find a reason to tell them when I cross. Even if it's something as futile as "I'm just going to take photos of the wind turbines just across in Chateaugay". Even "Sightseeing in Plattsburgh" is a better answer than "No reason." Plus, I don't think anything keeps you from changing plans midway through, right?
I never lie either, even if my legit answer doesn't make sense at first. I frequently go skiing in Vermont in November and late April and even May. I got weird stares and extra questions, but was let through every time. I've been asked to show my hotel reservation once, to which I answered "It's in the car you've just let through," which was true. It was kind of an annoying "bad cop" lady, and it took a while despite the lineup behind us, but what do you want...
I've explained what a roadmeet is on a handful of occasions. "Seeing a friend who lives there, sightseeing in his area" also works, I guess.
They do log your crossings, I got the confirmation yesterday when I was asked "Why have you been using so many different crossings?" - "Depends on the destination and traffic," I said, which was a legitimate and satisfying answer.
The language barrier has been a real problem with me only once, when I was asked if I "have ever been fingerprinted" without specifying any context. Took a few minutes to get things sorted out properly. On the other hand, I have heard at least one count of Quebecers being interrogated in French by a CBP agent, and I have been asked one or two questions in a very broken French in the past – to which I answered in English.
On the Canadian side, I require customs service in French, even outside of Québec. They have to comply by law.
Quote from: realjd on January 22, 2012, 03:27:19 PMAll produce MUST be declared when entering the US, and the list of things that will be allowed into the country is extremely short:
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/clearing/agri_prod_inus.xml
Even things as harmless as apples will be confiscated.
I have brought supermarket goods (which qualify as agricultural produce) across the border many times undeclared, without being brought up short once. Notwithstanding what they say at that link, I stand by my original point: they don't sweat the supermarket stuff.
The one time my car was seriously searched I had a couple roast beef sandwiches with tomatoes on them with me. When the Customs Canada person said "Just tell me what the illegal things in your car are- that will make this much easier," I told him that I had the sandwiches. After they searched my car without me present, they told me they didn't find any drugs but they did find the sandwiches.
They let me keep the sandwiches.
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 23, 2012, 01:16:53 AM
Quote from: realjd on January 22, 2012, 03:27:19 PMAll produce MUST be declared when entering the US, and the list of things that will be allowed into the country is extremely short:
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/clearing/agri_prod_inus.xml
Even things as harmless as apples will be confiscated.
I have brought supermarket goods (which qualify as agricultural produce) across the border many times undeclared, without being brought up short once. Notwithstanding what they say at that link, I stand by my original point: they don't sweat the supermarket stuff.
I'll second Winkler on the Supermarket stuff. Back when Kraft had hockey cards on almost anything they sold in the fall in Canada, I bought up (well, my parents did technically) and we had no problems getting back to the states after a successful trip getting almost always a complete set. :)
When I was asked by US Customs coming back if I had anything to declare, they said if they found anything after searching my car that I didn't declare then they bluntly told me that I would go to prison, NOT jail but prison is exactly what they told me.
Quote from: nds76 on January 23, 2012, 07:41:04 AM
When I was asked by US Customs coming back if I had anything to declare, they said if they found anything after searching my car that I didn't declare then they bluntly told me that I would go to prison, NOT jail but prison is exactly what they told me.
that's just pure horseshit right there. at that point, you need to take down their badge number and contact someone higher-up. there is no reason to treat you like a criminal and give you the "good cop, bad cop" routine.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 23, 2012, 10:33:38 AM
Quote from: nds76 on January 23, 2012, 07:41:04 AM
When I was asked by US Customs coming back if I had anything to declare, they said if they found anything after searching my car that I didn't declare then they bluntly told me that I would go to prison, NOT jail but prison is exactly what they told me.
that's just pure horseshit right there. at that point, you need to take down their badge number and contact someone higher-up. there is no reason to treat you like a criminal and give you the "good cop, bad cop" routine.
Yep, it was. I never even thought to do that at the time. I was just too upset at the time with something like that happening. I would really like to continue going to Canada but this has somewhat deterred me from going back. It's a shame it has to be that way but I am not gonna be bullied like that. I can tell you this, although I was questioned and searched both ways, at least the Canadians were cordial and not mean.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 23, 2012, 10:33:38 AMQuote from: nds76 on January 23, 2012, 07:41:04 AMWhen I was asked by US Customs coming back if I had anything to declare, they said if they found anything after searching my car that I didn't declare then they bluntly told me that I would go to prison, NOT jail but prison is exactly what they told me.
that's just pure horseshit right there. at that point, you need to take down their badge number and contact someone higher-up. there is no reason to treat you like a criminal and give you the "good cop, bad cop" routine.
Ooooh, this kind of thing makes me very angry.
In this situation I wouldn't ask him just for his badge number. I would also ask him for the name of the director of the port and advise him of the possibility of a complaint being filed under 18 USC 241 (conspiracy against rights) and 18 USC 242 (deprivation of rights under color of law). And if that does not force him to back off, I would go ahead and take notes on everything that happens, and then go ahead and file a complaint with the Department of Justice's civil-rights division.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/federal-statutes
There is no reason for a federal officer to be anything but polite to a person who approaches him or her politely.
In regard to declaring goods to Customs, it helps to keep in mind the following points:
* You are not expected to declare any goods unless the total value or quantity exceeds one or more of the duty-free exemptions. (There is a duty-free exemption for total value up to $800 and quantity exemptions for alcohol and tobacco.) I have bought relatively small amounts of merchandise in foreign countries over the years and brought it back to the US, but each time I have written "-0-" on Form 6059B without this being queried. (IANAL, but I think the threshold for prosecution under the federal false-writing statute is
material misstatement of fact.)
* You can be assessed for duty only on goods which are meant to be consumed or left in the country you are entering. You will not be assessed duty on household goods of US origin if they are being returned to the US, even if their total value is in excess of the duty-free exemption. You will similarly not be assessed duty on any goods that are brought into the US and then taken out at the end of your sojourn in the US. If the douanier tries to make out that a given item is dutiable and is being left in the US, then you should ask for a receipt for any duty paid so that you can reclaim that duty when you leave the US, taking that item with you. If he tries to claim that you attempted to smuggle the item and confiscates it, then you should ask him for his badge number, the procedure for appealing confiscation, and the name of the director of the port. If this does not produce satisfactory results, remind him of 18 USC 241 et seqq.
* Remember at all times that it is not just you versus the douanier. He has to answer to a supervisor who in turn has to answer to the director of the port. He and his bosses must also follow federal law and if they fail to do so, e.g. by intimidating you unnecessarily, they risk prosecution by the DOJ's civil-rights people, with the possibility not just of job loss but also prison. If anything he does leads not just to administrative proceedings (which can be kept intra-department) but also to a request that the US attorney file criminal charges, then he and his chain of command have to satisfy the US attorney (or more likely an assistant US attorney) that prosecution is in the public interest. This will never be true in the case of an ordinary traveler who comes in a few dollars over the duty-free exemption. A better example of the type of case they are interested in is Mrs. Jeb Bush, who was detained several years ago for attempting to import $50,000 worth of gold jewelry undeclared.
^^^
I strongly disagree with the advice about declaring goods. Bringing something into the US without declaring it is smuggling and the officers absolutely are allowed to confiscate anything undeclared. Why lie on the form? Just put down a ball-park figure on the 6059B form and declare it as "misc souvenirs". The $800 duty free exemption is only valid once every 30 days, and that's one reason why they need to know.
Just because Americans have an absolute right to reenter their own country doesn't mean their purchases do.
As for actually paying duty, I can speak first-hand about that. On several occasions I've brought back more than the 1L duty free limit on alcohol. I always declare it and have always had the duty waived. It's not worth the officer's time to collect duty of only a few dollars. I have also seen people try to bring back undeclared alcohol before or after me in line and they almost always have it confiscated.
EDIT: I found a news article about bringing back undeclared produce:
http://money.msn.com/saving-money-tips/post.aspx?post=56087a81-0b1f-48a1-bc6b-2efe6d6e1ac0
Also:
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/vacation/kbyg/what_you_declare.xml
Quote from: realjd on January 23, 2012, 03:44:49 PMI strongly disagree with the advice about declaring goods. Bringing something into the US without declaring it is smuggling and the officers absolutely are allowed to confiscate anything undeclared. Why lie on the form? Just put down a ball-park figure on the 6059B form and declare it as "misc souvenirs". The $800 duty free exemption is only valid once every 30 days, and that's one reason why they need to know.
KBYG does agree with what you are saying: however, note that CBP's instructions for filling out Form 6059B still include the qualification ". . . articles intended to be sold or
left in the United States" (my emphasis) in relation to declarations of commercial merchandise (page 6 of 18 in the following PDF file):
http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/newsroom/publications/travel/traveler_entry_forms.ctt/traveler_entry_forms.pdf
I stand by my experience. They just aren't interested in hearing about general merchandise that clearly falls under the $800 exemption.
KBYG goes into a lot of detail, for example, on how you can register things like laptops so you can bring them in duty-free every time, but I have never bothered even though I own a laptop I bought in Britain and for years routinely carried it separately from my backpack in one of those suitcase-like laptop bags which people are encouraged not to use anymore because they supposedly attract thieves.
It is a fundamental principle of how Customs agencies are run worldwide that you do not owe import duty on goods that are not, in fact, imported (i.e., that remain in your possession in the country of arrival and which you then take out when you leave). Provisions for transfer of household goods tend to be expansive as well, because assessing duty on every single household good brought in from abroad would involve administrative complexity and cost in entire disproportion to the duty collected. (In any case, charging import duty on household goods is conceptually equivalent to charging you income tax on a capital transfer from abroad, which is a form of currency control and thus a limitation on convertibility of currency. In today's world there is such a strong stigma attached to having an incompletely convertible currency that no country will suspend convertibility unless it absolutely has no choice.)
KYBG as currently written may presume that commercial goods brought into the US will be left in the US and are therefore imports and, as such, dutiable and requiring declaration on Form 6059B. However, I don't recall it saying this in the past and I doubt the underlying law has changed.
QuoteAs for actually paying duty, I can speak first-hand about that. On several occasions I've brought back more than the 1L duty free limit on alcohol. I always declare it and have always had the duty waived. It's not worth the officer's time to collect duty of only a few dollars. I have also seen people try to bring back undeclared alcohol before or after me in line and they almost always have it confiscated.
Yes, they do watch for alcohol and tobacco. Alcohol in particular is harder to hide because it tends to come in glass bottles which knock and clink, and people typically don't take pieces of their household liquor supplies with them on trips--the alcohol customs officers can hear clinking and glugging away in bottles has nearly always been bought abroad. On the other hand, customs officers just don't like to waste their time on goods which
might have been brought abroad but are not clearly differentiable from ordinary household goods, which are admitted duty-free.
I am actually not a huge fan of buying alcohol abroad--less because of the problems getting it through Customs and more because the alcohol that looked good in a shop in Italy or Turkey or wherever tends to look very unappetizing in the liquor cabinet back home. I have taken alcohol through Customs only twice: once in 2001, when I bought a bottle of raki at Atatürk International and brought it back to Britain (where it fit under the quantity exemption for alcohol, so I didn't bother to declare it), and again in 2006, when I flew from London to Turin and bought a bottle of Scotch in the duty-free as a house present (no need to declare since it was well under the indicative limit for blue-channel alcohol).
QuoteEDIT: I found a news article about bringing back undeclared produce:
http://money.msn.com/saving-money-tips/post.aspx?post=56087a81-0b1f-48a1-bc6b-2efe6d6e1ac0
I have to question whether that piece tells the whole story. The type of traveler the Customs produce specialists tend to zero in are older people from Middle Eastern countries who bring in locally produced food that has ingredients which are either not permitted or are restricted in the US. I am sure I have brought in half-finished peanut packets in my backpack many times without running into problems.
Edit: Re-reading the story, I see the family arrived at EWR after a
19-hour flight. This raises the question: flight from where? In my own case, for example, LHR-ORD (part of a typical one-stop LHR-ORD ORD-ICT itinerary) takes just 10 hours. If this was a transatlantic flight, it could have originated somewhere in Africa or central Asia, and that would have had the Customs produce people on high alert. There is also the question of how Customs found the food in the first place; perhaps the parents failed to tell the kids that eating in the Customs queue is a no-no.
This is a really good exchange of information here. I consider myself a novice international traveler since only being in Canada 4 times. And those times there were several years apart. That said, I am still not really sure how to answer the questions customs asks. And at this point, I am not sure I will renew my EDL since renewal will probably cost more than a standard license. I only got the EDL since I wanted to travel to Canada but that really seems in question with what I have experienced.
I frequently carry a camera bag with about $3000 worth of equipment in it and I've never been asked a single question about it entering any country.
this makes me wonder about laptops - would customs officials not have a similar idea about their usage pattern? namely, the traveler keeps it with them at all times and does not intend to leave it behind in any country, regardless of where they purchased it.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 23, 2012, 06:31:38 PMI frequently carry a camera bag with about $3000 worth of equipment in it and I've never been asked a single question about it entering any country.
When I still shot film, I used SLRs and I was never asked about them despite wearing a photographer's vest with lenses stuffed in the pockets. At the time I made my first trip to Mexico in 2002, there was still advice floating around on the Web and in print to the effect that Mexican douaniers tightly controlled imports of photographic supplies (one bit of advice I saw said not to take in more than 20 rolls of film, which is a ridiculously low amount for a serious photographer). But I went through Customs twice (once at the border, and once again at the internal frontier checkpoint), and the officers showed zero interest in my photo gear.
Quotethis makes me wonder about laptops - would customs officials not have a similar idea about their usage pattern? namely, the traveler keeps it with them at all times and does not intend to leave it behind in any country, regardless of where they purchased it.
That might be part of it. Another part is that laptops can be plausibly represented as tools of a trade, which are exempt from duty. A US Customs officer also has no way of knowing whether a particular laptop bag contains a brand-new laptop, which would be dutiable as a foreign purchase, or a laptop bought more than a year ago, which counts as household effects (regardless of where bought) and is not dutiable. Unless you ask for the laptop to be opened for inspection, you can't tell where it might have been bought, and could easily find that a suspected foreign laptop is in fact an American-purchased laptop being repatriated. Customs officers don't have the time to inquire into, let alone verify, the provenance of every single thing you bring in that might be dutiable and so they have to be selective.
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 23, 2012, 04:55:09 PM
KBYG does agree with what you are saying: however, note that CBP's instructions for filling out Form 6059B still include the qualification ". . . articles intended to be sold or left in the United States" (my emphasis) in relation to declarations of commercial merchandise (page 6 of 18 in the following PDF file):
I'm writing from the perspective of a US Citizen returning home from a vacation declaring purchases made abroad. I've never declared anything entering a foreign country and I would expect foreigners on vacation would similarly not need to declare anything on their landing card when entering the US.
I wish we operated more on a European model where the immigration officer was concerned only with immigration and customs was set up with the red and green channels.
Quote
It is a fundamental principle of how Customs agencies are run worldwide that you do not owe import duty on goods that are not, in fact, imported (i.e., that remain in your possession in the country of arrival and which you then take out when you leave).
I agree completely. If you're not from here and plan on taking it with you when you leave, you'll have no issue whatsoever because you're not importing anything.
Quote
I am actually not a huge fan of buying alcohol abroad--less because of the problems getting it through Customs and more because the alcohol that looked good in a shop in Italy or Turkey or wherever tends to look very unappetizing in the liquor cabinet back home. I have taken alcohol through Customs only twice: once in 2001, when I bought a bottle of raki at Atatürk International and brought it back to Britain (where it fit under the quantity exemption for alcohol, so I didn't bother to declare it), and again in 2006, when I flew from London to Turin and bought a bottle of Scotch in the duty-free as a house present (no need to declare since it was well under the indicative limit for blue-channel alcohol).
I have a soft spot for Caribbean rums and for that duty-free whiskey shop at Heathrow.
Quote
Edit: Re-reading the story, I see the family arrived at EWR after a 19-hour flight. This raises the question: flight from where? In my own case, for example, LHR-ORD (part of a typical one-stop LHR-ORD ORD-ICT itinerary) takes just 10 hours. If this was a transatlantic flight, it could have originated somewhere in Africa or central Asia, and that would have had the Customs produce people on high alert. There is also the question of how Customs found the food in the first place; perhaps the parents failed to tell the kids that eating in the Customs queue is a no-no.
The longest commercial flight currently operating is the SQ flight from EWR-SIN. I wouldn't be surprised if that's the one.
As for how customs found the apple, you've never seen the Beagle Brigade? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beagle_Brigade
You'll usually see them walking around in the international bag claim areas at airports. If you watch, I guarantee you'll see them find things like apples, bananas, oranges, and other produce items buried in people's bags. I've never heard of anyone getting fined for innocently bringing something like that back though, other than that story above.
The family also may have been sent for a random agriculture check. There's two types of secondary when entering the US by air. The first is the full-blown secondary screening run by CBP personnel. That's the unpleasant one. The second type is an agriculture check run by USDA officers. It's usually random (unless you declare food) and they rarely do more than x-ray your bag. It's quick and painless. It's no different than the agriculture checks you encounter when flying from Puerto Rico or Hawaii to the mainland.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 23, 2012, 06:31:38 PM
I frequently carry a camera bag with about $3000 worth of equipment in it and I've never been asked a single question about it entering any country.
this makes me wonder about laptops - would customs officials not have a similar idea about their usage pattern? namely, the traveler keeps it with them at all times and does not intend to leave it behind in any country, regardless of where they purchased it.
I've never had an issue with not declaring computer or camera equipment, but there are a few countries (that will automatically charge duty on any laptops in excess of one because they operate on the assumption that the second one is going to be sold or otherwise left behind. You'll have to google it because I can't remember which ones, but I think most of them were in South America.
On our last trip to Canada when we went through Customs at the ferry terminal in Portland after taking the Cat Ferry from Yarmouth, we declared everything and for whatever reason the item the guy wanted to ask about was the rainsuits we bought for playing golf. Really simple there–we had a tee time on the Highlands Links and the weather was iffy, so we bought rainsuits. The guy acted puzzled that they made rain gear for playing golf. I think on the whole he was just picking something off the form to test how I answered him and to see if I got tripped up, which might be an indicator of something else suspicious. That wouldn't surprise me at all because several times the guy checking passports at the airport has asked some seemingly odd questions. I assume it's similar in theory to the way El Al security personnel do behavior profiling.
As others have noted, I've never had a problem with being over the limit on alcohol. On that last trip to Canada we had six or seven bottles of whisky purchased at the Glenora Distillery and probably another six or seven bottles of wine from Jost Vineyards, but he didn't care. Prior to the days of the liquid restrictions at the airports I brought back large quantities of whisky from the shops in Edinburgh, and while I was clearly over my limit the Customs people at JFK (one trip) or Dulles (more recently) just didn't want to bother. Nowadays the liquid policy makes it a whole different animal, but for security reasons rather than Customs reasons. (I suppose for me it's easy if I buy it at the airside duty-free at Heathrow since the first airport I reach in the USA–almost always Dulles–is my final destination, so I need not worry about putting the bottles into checked baggage. Those of you who have to connect, or who arrive in Atlanta, face a much bigger hassle.)
The best policy is simply to be up-front with the Customs people and to know what you have with you. I brought coffee beans back from Mexico and I figured it was safest to declare them as food. The Customs guy at the Philadelphia airport immediately noted it and asked what kind of food; when I said "a pound of coffee beans in a sealed vacuum package" he had no problem with it. They're after things that might pose an agricultural or other threat. If you ever fly to or from Hawaii you'll pass through agricultural checkpoints; same applies if you take the ferry to the Island of Newfoundland, as you will pass through a car wash when you depart the island. I seem to recall they were focused on stopping the spread of a potato parasite. Stuff like that is no joke!
One last Customs point for people travelling to Canada: Don't forget that even though you can legally buy Cuban cigars in Canada, you cannot legally bring them back to the United States. I don't smoke and so this hasn't been an issue for me, but I've been told that if you bring back cigars and you try to hide their Cuban origin by removing labels or the like it just makes it look more suspicious. Of course you could try to smuggle them in your spare tire well or something like that, but in my mind it's not worth it.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2012, 11:36:45 AM
One last Customs point for people travelling to Canada: Don't forget that even though you can legally buy Cuban cigars in Canada, you cannot legally bring them back to the United States. I don't smoke and so this hasn't been an issue for me, but I've been told that if you bring back cigars and you try to hide their Cuban origin by removing labels or the like it just makes it look more suspicious. Of course you could try to smuggle them in your spare tire well or something like that, but in my mind it's not worth it.
or to other countries. I do not officially know anything about this, but a friend of mine drove down to Mexico for the day and he purchased a bottle of Cuban rum. the vendor wrapped it in a newspaper. when we returned, we were asked if we had bought anything, and he said - quite honestly - "a bottle of alcohol". He held it up, covered in newspaper and all; the border patrol official did not inquire further.
and that may or may not be my story about abetting a Very Very Serious Drug Smuggling Operation. Remember, kids, if you see a Cuban today, murder him. they're worse than Mexicans, those damn dirty hippies.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 24, 2012, 11:49:09 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2012, 11:36:45 AM
One last Customs point for people travelling to Canada: Don't forget that even though you can legally buy Cuban cigars in Canada, you cannot legally bring them back to the United States. I don't smoke and so this hasn't been an issue for me, but I've been told that if you bring back cigars and you try to hide their Cuban origin by removing labels or the like it just makes it look more suspicious. Of course you could try to smuggle them in your spare tire well or something like that, but in my mind it's not worth it.
or to other countries. I do not officially know anything about this, but a friend of mine drove down to Mexico for the day and he purchased a bottle of Cuban rum. the vendor wrapped it in a newspaper. when we returned, we were asked if we had bought anything, and he said - quite honestly - "a bottle of alcohol". He held it up, covered in newspaper and all; the border patrol official did not inquire further.
and that may or may not be my story about abetting a Very Very Serious Drug Smuggling Operation. Remember, kids, if you see a Cuban today, murder him. they're worse than Mexicans, those damn dirty hippies.
Very true; I focused my comment on Canada primarily because that was the original subject in this thread and because I figured that on the whole people would be more likely to drive to Canada than to any other country (Mexico included).
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2012, 11:36:45 AM
One last Customs point for people travelling to Canada: Don't forget that even though you can legally buy Cuban cigars in Canada, you cannot legally bring them back to the United States. I don't smoke and so this hasn't been an issue for me, but I've been told that if you bring back cigars and you try to hide their Cuban origin by removing labels or the like it just makes it look more suspicious. Of course you could try to smuggle them in your spare tire well or something like that, but in my mind it's not worth it.
While I've never brought cigars back from Canada, I have brought back cigars on cruises. I've had no issue bringing back small quantities of unlabeled cigars. I just declare them as "hand rolled". Usually the customs officer wants to see them, but once he sees that they don't have Cuban bands I get waved through. I wouldn't think there would be any easy way to tell a Cuban cigar from an actual hand rolled, unlabeled cigar, and bringing back four or five isn't large enough quantity for them to act on even if it is suspicious.
Don't smuggle though. The above is advice on how to bring home legal, hand rolled, unlabeled cigars. Enjoy your Cubans before you come home.
Quote from: realjd on January 24, 2012, 12:16:49 PM
Don't smuggle though. The above is advice on how to bring home legal, hand rolled, unlabeled cigars. Enjoy your Cubans before you come home.
I cannot officially endorse smuggling, but let it be said that if anyone breaks that dumbfuck of a law, I will raise no protest.
I am okay with believing that Cubans are people too, despite their grievous sin of having been born on the wrong side of an invisible line.
Quote from: realjd on January 24, 2012, 12:16:49 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2012, 11:36:45 AM
One last Customs point for people travelling to Canada: Don't forget that even though you can legally buy Cuban cigars in Canada, you cannot legally bring them back to the United States. I don't smoke and so this hasn't been an issue for me, but I've been told that if you bring back cigars and you try to hide their Cuban origin by removing labels or the like it just makes it look more suspicious. Of course you could try to smuggle them in your spare tire well or something like that, but in my mind it's not worth it.
While I've never brought cigars back from Canada, I have brought back cigars on cruises. I've had no issue bringing back small quantities of unlabeled cigars. I just declare them as "hand rolled". Usually the customs officer wants to see them, but once he sees that they don't have Cuban bands I get waved through. I wouldn't think there would be any easy way to tell a Cuban cigar from an actual hand rolled, unlabeled cigar, and bringing back four or five isn't large enough quantity for them to act on even if it is suspicious.
Don't smuggle though. The above is advice on how to bring home legal, hand rolled, unlabeled cigars. Enjoy your Cubans before you come home.
I agree with agentsteel about the whole embargo being stupid, but I'm not going to roll the dice on violating it in terms of bringing back cigars or liquor, simply because in my case it's not worth running the risk. While I don't think a conviction for that sort of thing would be the sort of conviction that would pose a problem with the State Bar, I don't wind to find out otherwise the hard way, you know?
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 24, 2012, 11:36:45 AMThe guy acted puzzled that they made rain gear for playing golf. I think on the whole he was just picking something off the form to test how I answered him and to see if I got tripped up, which might be an indicator of something else suspicious. That wouldn't surprise me at all because several times the guy checking passports at the airport has asked some seemingly odd questions. I assume it's similar in theory to the way El Al security personnel do behavior profiling.
They've done similar things with me pretty often. "How come are you skiing in May?" - "The resort's still open" ...and it's only a few miles from that port of entry, so it's impossible that they didn't know.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 24, 2012, 12:33:53 PMI am okay with believing that Cubans are people too, despite their grievous sin of having been born on the wrong side of an invisible line.
Agreed.
I would like to remind everyone that we have NAFTA. This means you have to declare BUT no duty or tax should be imposed regardless of the monetary amount of goods you are bringing back. This rule affects all goods manufactures in any three of the NAFTA signature countries-USA, Canada, and Mexico. As for the treatment from some Customs agents, you are not required to be treated in a threatening, disrespectful, or degrading manner. You are crossing the border for legitimate reasons. Even if it is just to sight-see for the afternoon. Is there a problem driving from Pennsylvania to New York for the day. What's the difference except for the fact you have to explain yourself to someone who is trained to be suspicious! And yes, 9/11 has made it a lot rougher, even with a NEXUS or SENTRI card. I truly agree with the writer above. If you do have real hassles, get names and ask to see the Port Director. Also, do mention the Federal Code which the writer has thankfully posted and write a complaint to Justice AND CBP. Most important, don't let a simpleton agent deter you from going to Canada/USA and back. If you do because you don't need the hassles, they won. I've crossed the Canada/USA border hundreds of times. More times than not, it was a few questions and off I went. One time I was asked one question (how long was I in Canada) not even what country I was a citizen of, and I was on my way. Other times I got the full grilling-car search, stupid questions asked over and over again only in a slightly different context. One time I was even interrogated why I was crossing into Minnesota from Ontario (I live in Philadelphia). I answered "I'm a US Citizen; I'll cross where ever I want, and I'm not allowed to enter my country where I want? Don't let them destroy your day or your trip. Just write those letters. You will get a response. :-D
Quote from: averill on January 17, 2013, 05:59:22 PM
This means you have to declare BUT no duty or tax should be imposed regardless of the monetary amount of goods you are bringing back. This rule affects all goods manufactures in any three of the NAFTA signature countries-USA, Canada, and Mexico.
That is incorrect. The standard rules apply when entering the United States from Canada and Mexico - namely, $800 duty free (once every 30 days, $200 otherwise) and 1L of alcohol. NAFTA is about commercial import/export, not personal.
realjd beat me to it. Non-commercial import is still subject to duties, with a threshold depending on the length of the stay outside of the country.
What would happen if you created a business whose sole purpose was to manage your life and assets, thus making all personal transactions business transactions?
Quote from: deanej on January 18, 2013, 05:15:15 PM
What would happen if you created a business whose sole purpose was to manage your life and assets, thus making all personal transactions business transactions?
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/trade/trade_programs/international_agreements/free_trade/nafta/
Read this dense nonsense, hire a good lawyer, and good luck!
FWIW, I've never been charged duty on entry to the US. I've never gone over the $800 limit but I have declared alcohol volumes much greater than the 1L limit. They always just wave me through.
I've never had to pay duty on alcohol purchased either, and I have brought excess back on a few occasions myself.
I think if you start crossing regularly and bringing more than your allowance of alcohol back they will start to enforce the limits.
Quote from: realjd on January 19, 2013, 12:30:51 AM
Quote from: deanej on January 18, 2013, 05:15:15 PM
What would happen if you created a business whose sole purpose was to manage your life and assets, thus making all personal transactions business transactions?
http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/trade/trade_programs/international_agreements/free_trade/nafta/
Read this dense nonsense, hire a good lawyer, and good luck!
FWIW, I've never been charged duty on entry to the US. I've never gone over the $800 limit but I have declared alcohol volumes much greater than the 1L limit. They always just wave me through.
Come to think of it, you don't need to found a company, at least in the US. Corporations are people, and people are people, so therefore people must have all the rights corporations have or else it's discrimination!
I've brought stuff back after stays of less than 24 hours and Canada's CBSA agents have never charged me anything either.
One thing to bear in mind is that if you're in a trusted traveler program (NEXUS, Global Entry, SENTRI) you have to know the rules and make sure you're within them when you take advantage of the trusted traveler lane. If you don't declare something in that lane and you get caught, that's bad voodoo. (Of course you probably got the speech when you got the card.)
I think a party of three including myself once brought back 5 or 5.25 liters of tequila. they asked "how much did you bring back?" and we pointed to the back seat and said "that much". they looked quickly and waved us through.
Great thread! And I've read it with interest. Having made border crossings/arrivals at every corner of the USA, including Puerto Rico - literally hundreds of times - I have a couple of observations:
The first comment is simple: always say you have nothing to declare. Unless you have purchased a large or big-ticket item (i.e. something obvious), that's always your best answer. Sure, you can play Dudley Do-Right and declare every little thing you bought. In doing so, you actually have more exposure to being searched and delayed (which is my main issue, usually). The rules are so byzantine that you're opening yourself up to trouble without even knowing it.
Another thing that's good to know: if you are polite and don't have the appearance of a druggie/trouble maker, the odds of you being searched in any sort of thorough manner are minimal. Simply stated, they don't have time to give everyone a thorough going over.
About Cuban cigars (note my moniker), I've "smuggled" dozens of them into the USA (though not in the past 5 years). Never for resale or anything like that; only for my personal enjoyment. They're expensive and I worked hard to pay for them. I'll be damned if I let a stupid, bullshit, rule that predates my own birth, deny me from enjoying an otherwise legal product that anyone else in the world can legally enjoy! And what good does the stupid embargo do? NOTHING. It has kept Castro in power for 50 years, that's what. And our testicle-less politicians refuse to do the right thing and drop it. Given this, I have no respect for a stupid rule enforced by stupid people and I find ways around it. Frankly, Cubans are costly and I can usually only afford a few at a time. I tend to have a little baggie of cigars with me anyway and, they've never generated any interest from anyone. So, no issues there - ever.
It IS a little more difficult to talk your way across the border when traveling alone, especially with the Canadians. In fact, of anywhere I've traveled, I have had more hassles from Canadian Customs/Immigration than all of the other countries I've visited.....combined! Seriously. I've even been interrogated in the other room at the airport. Why? Because they think I might be doing work there and they want $$$ for a work permit. They do accept Visa and Mastercard for it, by the way. Even if that was true (and I was there on a project), I've stayed calm and cool and stuck to my story and - ultimately - won out every single time. But it's a pain. And the Canadian politeness is an inaccurate stereotype. I've encountered plenty of rude agents, especially the women.
As for getting back into the 'states, ironically I've never had an issue. Yes, they can be gruff and less than polite. But I always do fine with them. When they ask if I've bought anything, I usually comment on how everything is so expensive up there, which is quite true and they agree with that. The truth is that we never buy that much anyway, but I don't care to have to argue over every little item and whether we owe duty.
In both cases, have a good reason handy as to why you traveled across the border and you're fine. The Canadians like "tourism, visiting the casino, shopping". But don't tell the American side that last one. "Work" is the one that they like the very best. Whatever reason you give, be consistent with it. My last visit to Windsor, Canada last month had a 10 minute interrogation at the border from the (female) agent there and I really was going to do some Christmas shopping. I was relaxed as I had nothing to hide, but it still gives one a bad taste.
But, ultimately, I always crossed successfully and enjoyed whatever it was that I came over to enjoy. And Canada is a wonderful place to visit.
Lastly, traveling with your wife and/or family makes detailed interrogations or searches even less likely. Last time we arrived at ORD from Latin America, my (then) 4 year old threw such a fit that we went through US immigration and then customs without a single question being asked of any of us at either place!! They just wanted us OUT! That was a first......
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on January 25, 2013, 02:18:46 PM
Lastly, traveling with your wife and/or family makes detailed interrogations or searches even less likely. Last time we arrived at ORD from Latin America, my (then) 4 year old threw such a fit that we went through US immigration and then customs without a single question being asked of any of us at either place!! They just wanted us OUT! That was a first......
I'll just have to borrow a four year old. I'm sure border authorities don't care much about child trafficking.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 25, 2013, 04:15:24 PM
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on January 25, 2013, 02:18:46 PM
Lastly, traveling with your wife and/or family makes detailed interrogations or searches even less likely. Last time we arrived at ORD from Latin America, my (then) 4 year old threw such a fit that we went through US immigration and then customs without a single question being asked of any of us at either place!! They just wanted us OUT! That was a first......
I'll just have to borrow a four year old. I'm sure border authorities don't care much about child trafficking.
Well, naturally I had everyone's passports to show. That they checked. Very quickly. And having Mom there with the kids is somewhat of a necessity.
My border crossing tips....
1) Always have a destination. It is pretty standard to have to provide a destination address when you enter a foreign country, and just because you don't have to fill out forms to drive into Canada does not make an exception to this general rule.
2) Never lie. Border officers tend to be really good at spotting inconsistencies in stories and if they catch you, you're blacklisted and will get searched each and every time. Entering the foreign country, they will generally ask you what you plan to do there, where you are going, and no one says you cannot make adjustments after you are in, but at least stick to your story. When coming back home, they will ask you about what you did and where you were. No reason to not be honest. Remember, they can ask all the questions they want, but they cannot deny you entry to your own country.
3) Coming from really far away and only spending a very short time in the other country tends to raise red flags. It helps if you have an established reason to be near the border on your own side. This is one place where I may deviate from the rule of not volunteering information. For example, I'm from Washington DC, and I am driving across the Rainbow Bridge and say I will only be in Canada for 2 hours. "Really, you came all this way and are only staying 2 hours?" But Niagara Falls, ON is not my "primary destination" for the long trip, visiting family in Buffalo is. If I'm up visiting family in Buffalo for a week, and want to go drive 20 minutes to Casino Niagara and spend 2 hours there, that doesn't seem too odd. A couple of times I saw the questioning going towards "why did you come all this way..." and ended up mentioning visiting family in my own country 2 minutes into the questioning. A couple of times I've proactively stated when asked the purpose of my visit, "I'm in Buffalo visiting family and decided to take a few hours to check out...." That usually makes the questioning go a lot smoother!
4) Join one of the trusted traveler programs if you plan to cross frequently. Global Entry or SENTRI will give you US-bound access to NEXUS lanes at the Canadian border, and NEXUS will give you access to both directions at the Canadian border. Assuming you have a clean criminal record, haven't violated customs laws, and don't mind handing over some biometrics, applying is easy, and the interview isn't too difficult by any means. They really spend more time explaining the program than asking questions. You don't need a reason to cross the border "a lot", saying you cross occasionally and want to use the shorter lines is legit (saying you want it so you can avoid questioning or inspection procedures is not legit..don't go there when asked). These programs make crossing easier most of the time, with fewer questions, but not "no questions"...and in fact some times, you might get the full round of questions if the line isn't busy. There are random inspections, and while you'll get "head of the line benefits", keep in mind that these programs are one strike, you're out.
Otherwise, I've crossed the US/Canadian border probably about 25 times and never had a problem. Been grilled pretty good a few times by the US side. Been sent to secondary by the Canadians a couple times. But have always thought the border guards on both sides are professional, but thorough, and just doing their job. I'd far prefer that their screening method is asking questions and looking for inconsistencies to pick whom to search, rather than trying to search everyone. And although the US/Canada border isn't exactly an open border like intra-Schengen borders in Europe, it is still far less of a barrier than most other international borders, which tend to have lines lasting hours, lots of forms and fees, and generally you have to park and get out of your car, while the vast majority of US/Canada trips are cleared in the primary lanes without anyone having to leave their vehicle.
Quote from: mtantillo on March 05, 2013, 09:45:07 PM
My border crossing tips....
1) Always have a destination. It is pretty standard to have to provide a destination address when you enter a foreign country, and just because you don't have to fill out forms to drive into Canada does not make an exception to this general rule.
Agreed. The only time I ever got seriously hassled was when I did not, indeed, have a particular destination in mind. This was crossing back to the US at Detroit, after cutting across Ontario from my home in Rochester. I was taking a pretty aimless spring break roadtrip and planned to continue aimlessly from Detroit. For some reason I thought I should be a little more definitive with my story, but I didn't really succeed. I'd probably have been better off just being honest about having no set destination.
Quote from: mtantillo on March 05, 2013, 09:45:07 PM
2) Never lie.
Or to put it another way, don't try to tailor your story so it seems more palatable to them. As I said, although my trip was aimless, being upfront about that was probably a better idea than trying to justify my uncertainty.
I had another series of trips recently involving four border crossings in less than two days. I was picking up my girlfriend in Ontario during the dead of night, returning to NYS to attend a funeral service, then returning her the next day to Montreal where she was working, and returning alone. Although it was a pretty wild scenario, I explained it matter-of-factly at each crossing and there was no apparent suspicion.
I had the same issue of having no specific destination in Detroit, which ended me up with a 5-6 minute, very annoying series of questions and a very condescending explanation of how dangerous Detroit is (cue Nick Cage: "You don't say?"), and a request for hotel reservations which I didn't have because I have family in the area.
Mike: In fact, I just applied for NEXUS this week and my case is currently pending review, after which I'll have to book an interview.
To be continued...
Nexus would be even more important these days, since Obama is targeting customs on the Canadian border for the sequestration. Napoletano is doing everything she can to make it like the Mexican border wait time.
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on March 05, 2013, 11:43:43 PM
I had the same issue of having no specific destination in Detroit, which ended me up with a 5-6 minute, very annoying series of questions and a very condescending explanation of how dangerous Detroit is (cue Nick Cage: "You don't say?"), and a request for hotel reservations which I didn't have because I have family in the area.
Mike: In fact, I just applied for NEXUS this week and my case is currently pending review, after which I'll have to book an interview.
To be continued...
Haha, me too! I applied for Global Entry last month, went for my interview this past weekend at JFK, then realized, "what the heck is the point of only having expedited access in one direction at the Canadian border?" So I just submitted my "add trusted traveler program" application for NEXUS yesterday. My GE application was approved in a week, but I hear NEXUS is a little slower since the application goes through the two reviews, one on each side. Interview slots for NEXUS are hard to come by in the major cites (YYZ/YVR/YUL) though, so who knows, I may end up roadtripping to an oddball location like Sault St. Marie.
Quote from: mtantillo on March 06, 2013, 04:03:55 PM
Haha, me too! I applied for Global Entry last month, went for my interview this past weekend at JFK, then realized, "what the heck is the point of only having expedited access in one direction at the Canadian border?" So I just submitted my "add trusted traveler program" application for NEXUS yesterday. My GE application was approved in a week, but I hear NEXUS is a little slower since the application goes through the two reviews, one on each side. Interview slots for NEXUS are hard to come by in the major cites (YYZ/YVR/YUL) though, so who knows, I may end up roadtripping to an oddball location like Sault St. Marie.
SENTRI interviews are hard to come by as well. I applied at the end of January and my interview is April 18th.
can someone tell me what the difference is between NEXUS, SENTRI, Global Entry, Trusted Traveler, GOES, etc?
all I know is that NEXUS and SENTRI are basically the same thing, except for different borders. the others ... ??
Global Entry is essentially NEXUS except it works when entering the US from any country. Trusted Traveler is the umbrella term for both the programs and people enrolled in them. I think GOES is just the name of the website used to apply for any of these programs.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on March 06, 2013, 04:15:04 PM
SENTRI interviews are hard to come by as well. I applied at the end of January and my interview is April 18th.
can someone tell me what the difference is between NEXUS, SENTRI, Global Entry, Trusted Traveler, GOES, etc?
all I know is that NEXUS and SENTRI are basically the same thing, except for different borders. the others ... ??
Short version: NEXUS = US/Canadian border, SENTRI (Secure Electronic Network for Travelers Rapid Inspection) = US/Mexican border, Global Entry = US airports (and preclearance sites), GOES (Global Online Enrollment System) is the US online enrollment system for all of those programs.
Long version......
Once upon a time, someone had a great idea that those who could be trusted to comply with customs and immigration rules could get expedited processing at international borders. In Europe, this was done pre-Schengen where the border checks were really just formalities. But unlike Europe where they harmonized customs (EU) and immigration (Schengen) and eliminated their border controls, and thus the trusted traveler programs, here in the USA we are strengthening our borders. So trusted traveler status basically gives you "old fashioned 1990's treatment"...a few questions, verbal declarations, possibility of a random search, but most of the time you are through pretty quickly. Of course, you still need the fancy secure document to prove your trusted traveler status.
But even before 9/11 when the Canadian border was a mere formality, the northbound Mexican border was serious business, as were airport borders for those flying into the US and Canada. So those had trusted traveler programs going way back. CanPass for those flying into Canada, INSpass for those flying into the USA, and SENTRI at one of the busier border crossings on the Mexican border (Otay Mesa was the first SENTRI lane in the late 1990's). INSpass used handprints to identify the traveler, and was sponsored by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, which manned the immigration checks at airports, which was a separate agency from US Customs, which were concerned with goods, not people (now both immigration and customs are staffed by agents from US Customs and Border Protection).
NEXUS was a big breakthrough, because this program actually required extensive cooperation between US and Canadian agencies, one program, you were approved by both US CBP and CBSA (Canada Border Services Agency) and you could travel across the US/Canadian border. Of course, things weren't too simple, as there were actually two NEXUS programs, one for land border crossings which required you to have a card and register your car, and another called "Air NEXUS" for flying, which also required a card but was based on iris scans. The machines were set up to process travelers both into Canada and into the US at Canadian airports with US pre-clearance. I think there may have even been a marine version of NEXUS for boaters.
So, NEXUS expanded, SENTRI at the southern border expanded, and even included a "pedestrian SENTRI" lane at San Ysidro, which of course was a completely separate program. INSpass vanished after 9/11. And CanPass still existed. Air NEXUS could be used to enter Canada from anywhere in the world, not just from the USA. If you were a Canadian who flys back and forth to Europe often, you can use NEXUS to enter when returning...but this requires US approval. If for some reason, the Canadians trust you, but you don't have access to the US (a likely situation would be a Canadian permanent resident, who's citizenship requires a visa to enter the US), you could still get the CanPass program. I think it still exists to this day.
Then someone had a bright idea that some of these programs should be streamlined. All of the NEXUS programs were combined, so any member could cross the US/Canadian border (and fly into Canada from a third country) by any means. The pedestrian and vehicle SENTRI programs were combined. The vehicle registration requirement for NEXUS was dropped, since taking an unregistered car isn't really a security risk, and it would enable travelers to use rental cars, etc. For SENTRI, the vehicle registration/inspection was kept because of smuggling concerns.
Then the US decided to roll out a program to expedite trusted US Citizens into the US from third countries, and developed the Global Entry program, which was at US airports, and uses passport scan and fingerprints for ID purposes. Then they started installing Global Entry kiosks at Canadian pre-clearance airports, and there was a little confusion. A NEXUS member could use the NEXUS kiosk, and could possibly use the Global Entry kiosk entering the US if all of their biometrics were up to date. A Global Entry member could only use the Global Entry kiosk entering the US from a Canadian airport, and had to use a standard customs line entering Canada. If you had both programs, you could use both.
Then someone had another bright idea. Lets combine these programs into one! If someone is trusted to enter the US from Mexico, why can't they be trusted to enter from Canada or fly in from Brazil? But they never really did combine them completely, the separate names are floating out there in seemingly random places. When you apply, your background is checked for "Into the United States", and if approved, you can enter from Canada, Mexico, or via a US airport. You can also chose to apply for "Into Canada", meaning you can cross the US Canadian border, fly across the US Canadian border, enter either the US or Canada from a third country by air, and enter the US by land from Mexico.
But of course the application process on GOES is somewhat confusing, because part of the application deals with "Into the US" and "Into Canada" questions, but then at the very end, you have to pick a program which chooses who gets the application and where you can enroll. Global Entry = $100 fee, "Into the US" access, and enrollment at a US (or Canadian with preclearance) airport. NEXUS = $50 fee, "Into the US"/"Into Canada" access, and enrollment at a Canadian airport with pre-clearance or along the US border. SENTRI = "Into the US" access plus the required vehicle inspection to use the SENTRI lanes, with a $122.50 fee. What makes no sense at all (this is the government afterall) is that NEXUS = Global Entry + "Into Canada", but is half the price of Global Entry! If you are a Global Entry or NEXUS member, you can do a vehicle inspection to use SENTRI lanes for $42. Apply for NEXUS and add on the vehicle inspection later = $92. Apply for SENTRI and apply for NEXUS later for "Into Canada" access...$172.50. Both give the same result, just switching up the order!
Another difference is eligibility. Global Entry is open to all residents of the US, including some temporary residents in the US on a visa...but Canadians can use Global Entry becuase they have "Into the US" access with NEXUS. NEXUS is only open to residents of the US and Canada, but Global Entry and SENTRI members can use US bound NEXUS lanes at the land border. SENTRI only to US and Mexicans...for a US resident, it is essentially Global Entry with a vehicle inspection. Mexicans can add-on Global Entry access to their SENTRI benefits if they submit extra paperwork, which presumably would give them access to US-bound NEXUS lanes. I don't think there is any way for a Mexican that is not a resident of the US or Canada to be able to use Canadian-bound NEXUS lanes, as Mexicans require a visa to enter Canada.
So essentially, NEXUS/SENTRI/Global Entry just means the name of the lane or kiosk you use, but the access is extended not based on the name of the program on the card, but based on "Into the US" or "Into Canada" rights assigned to the card, with the caveat that to use SENTRI lanes, the vehicle must be inspected.
So after applying for Global Entry, my GOES account says I have both "Global Entry" and "SENTRI", meaning I have "Into the US" access...and mentions nothing about entering from Canada in NEXUS Lanes, but the documentation that came with my card confirms that it will indeed work coming in from Canada. Of course, I cannot use SENTRI lanes unless I get my car registered/inspected, or travel in someone else's car that is already inspected.
Now to add to the confusion, there is FAST (Free and Secure Trade), which is for truck drivers crossing both the US/Canadian and US/Mexican border. There is also FLUX (Fast Low-risk Universal Crossing), which is a program started by the US and Dutch governments to link the US Global Entry program and the Dutch equivalent, giving citizens "Into the US" and "Into the Netherlands" access. Supposidly other countries are supposed to become part of the FLUX network, meaning you'll ultimately be able to get "Into.......fill in the blank....." access if you are a member of your own country's program. Though not part of FLUX, US Global Entry members are invited to apply for South Korea's "Smart Entry Service", and vice versa. US Global Entry members can also use "Smart Gate" kiosks to enter Australia, though you have to have a card, and it's not clear if you can still use Smart Gate if you have Global Entry by way of a NEXUS or SENTRI card. Global Entry members also get expedited processing through the "Aussie/New Zealand" citizens line entering New Zealand, but you still get processed manually I think.
Then there is expedited airport security. CATSA (Canadian TSA) has expedited lines for NEXUS members, but I think it is just a shorter line. Global Entry and SENTRI means nothing to CATSA, so those don't get any Canadian benefits. In the US, TSA has its "Pre-check" program. But there's a catch. It is only open to US and Canadian members of Global Entry/NEXUS/SENTRI, only if you are flying on a participating airline at a participating airport, only if you are flying domestically, and only if you provide you membership ID number to TSA in advance of your flight at the time of reservation. If you meet all of those requirements, you get to use the TSA pre-check line to get to the document checker. They scan your boarding pass. Then you find out if you actually get pre-check or not! If you do, you can keep on your shoes, coat, and keep laptop and liquids in the case. If you don't end up with pre-check, it is a normal screening, but at least you get a shorter line!
What. A. Clusterfuck. Of. Nonsense. They really need to simplify this.
I'm still hesitating between YUL and Champlain for the interview. If YUL has too much wait, I'll just head down to Champlain... but they're only open on weekdays!
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on March 06, 2013, 09:03:47 PM
What. A. Clusterfuck. Of. Nonsense. They really need to simplify this.
I'm still hesitating between YUL and Champlain for the interview. If YUL has too much wait, I'll just head down to Champlain... but they're only open on weekdays!
No kidding! I liken it to what will soon become electronic toll collection interoperability in the US. Transponder X is accepted at facility A and B, but transponder Y is only accepted at B and transponder Z is only accepted at A, but can be image tolled at B if you have the license plate associated with the account......just wait, its coming to a toll road near you soon!
Different states have different protocols, some states have multiple ETC protocols and have to use all of the "channels" on their readers for their tags, other states have only one protocol and can use a spare "channel" to read out of state tags, some facilities with the same brand ETC have gates and can't do image tolls while other facilities have no gates, some facilities (HOT Lanes mostly) can't do image tolls of single occupant vehicles because the lack of a tag means you are declaring yourself as HOV........but the deadline for national interoperability is in 2016, so they have to scrape together some rudimentary interoperability before then.
As for trusted traveler programs, my guess is that the names of the lanes are either so commonly used that to change them now would be more trouble than it is worth, or in some cases might be legally required (I bet an act of Canadian govt. would be required to change the name NEXUS). Ideally, they'd just use Global Entry everywhere going into the US, and NEXUS going into Canada. As a Canadian, its pretty simple. You get all the benefits, at the lowest price, through the only program you can qualify for: NEXUS. Had I fully understood the process before I applied, I would have applied for NEXUS first too ($50 = NEXUS with GE benefits), instead of Global Entry first and then NEXUS ($100 for GE, $50 to add "into Canada" benfits/NEXUS). Oh well, wouldn't have been the first time I threw $100 out the window by mistake...I only wish it wasn't to the government!
Carl: If YUL and Champlain are both booked solid, try Lansdowne, ON (I-81/ON 137 crossing). The wait for big city appointments can be awful, but every crossing with NEXUS has an enrollment center nearby with the same number of available appointments, even the little ones like Houlton and Pembina! Apparently people from Montreal go to Champlain, and people from Toronto travel to Niagara/Buffalo, but not nearly as many use Lansdowne. The one catch is that the iris scans used for airport NEXUS clearance can only be done on Canadian soil (???), so if you go to Champlain, you'll have to get the iris scan done some other time. I think they might do them at St. Bernard-de-Lacolle just across from Champlain, or you can just go to YUL, no appointment necessary once you're approved. Or you could just not do iris scans if you only plan to use it for land crossings.
The thing with NEXUS interviews (and I assume for Global Entry and SENTRI too) is that once you schedule an appointment, you can go in to the online booking system (GOES) regularly and check for an opening sooner. I originally thought I'd have to make a separate trip to Buffalo to do the interview at Fort Erie, but I lucked out and benefitted from a cancellation on a day I planned to be in Toronto anyway.
The only downside of NEXUS is that you will have to go through two interviews. My sense is that if the "other" country interview goes fine (you interview with the Canadian official first, if you're an American), though, you won't have any trouble with your country's unless there's some red flag the Canadians don't care about but the US does. But anything seriously disqualifying would probably be screened out before the interview anyway–for example, the Canadians are notoriously anal about anything DUI-related on your record; if you haven't paid a massive rehabilitation fee to CBSA already, you're not even going to be admitted to the country in the first place. The main thing I think they're looking for is explanations for why you want to be in the program and any sign of "shiftiness" that wouldn't show up on a background check.
I guess my question is: what are the payoff points for these processes? How often do you have to cross the border annually before it becomes worth it to join any of these programs?
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 07, 2013, 12:03:44 PM
I guess my question is: what are the payoff points for these processes? How often do you have to cross the border annually before it becomes worth it to join any of these programs?
I believe the entire hassle of SENTRI is less than even a single
seven and one half hour border delay, which is becoming more and more commonplace at the San Diego crossings.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on March 07, 2013, 01:02:55 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 07, 2013, 12:03:44 PM
I guess my question is: what are the payoff points for these processes? How often do you have to cross the border annually before it becomes worth it to join any of these programs?
I believe the entire hassle of SENTRI is less than even a single seven and one half hour border delay, which is becoming more and more commonplace at the San Diego crossings.
What?? Oh my...is that recent as a result of sequestration? I don't think I've ever heard of anything more than 3 hours in the past.
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 07, 2013, 12:03:44 PM
I guess my question is: what are the payoff points for these processes? How often do you have to cross the border annually before it becomes worth it to join any of these programs?
Good question. And like the topic of "extreme commutes", each individual has a different amount of how much they are willing to put up with. I personally do not mind doing up front work to expedite my travels (the fact that I have 4 ETC transponders in my car's console is proof). On average, I probably take as many international trips in one year as many business travelers do in the span of a couple of days. In other words, not much. But if I'm taking my one roadtrip to Canada in a year on limited vacation time, I'd rather spend time exploring the sites (and roads) and not sitting in a border line-up. Likewise, after getting off a 12-hour international flight from Beijing to JFK with a 12-hour time zone difference, the last thing I really feel like doing is waiting for an hour to clear immigration (we came in right behind Air France and Korean Air jumbo jets...and we were lucky, our tour guide is not a US Citizen and it took her two+ hours to get through).
So conservatively, lets say I applied right before my birthday, so I only get 5 years of membership (apply right after your birthday, you'll get almost 6 years), and I take 1 trip across the land border each year (5 Canadian entries, 5 US entries), and enter the US once by plane each year (5 entries). That's 15 expedited trips for $50 with NEXUS membership that includes Global Entry benefits, or $3.33 per trip. To me, that is well worth it. Sure, there is a little up front work involved, which will likely involve me taking a trip to Buffalo for the interview. But since I enjoy travel, I don't mind, and I look at it as an excuse to visit the Falls at an off-peak time of year. Then add in the TSA Pre-check benefit...and its absolutely worth it for me.
An added benefit to the Canadian economy...in the past I never would have thought of flying internationally through Canada, because clearing US and Canadian immigration control in Canadian airports can kill a lot of time and make one risk missing their connection. As a Star Alliance frequent flier, I've typically looked at United and Lufthansa for US to Europe flights...typically connecting through a Star Alliance hub like Frankfurt. But now Air Canada is suddently an appealing option since I can expedite my way through Toronto-Pearson or Montreal while connecting there...and I can depart from Reagan National instead of Dulles, the former is a lot more convenient to where I live.
Quote from: mtantillo on March 07, 2013, 04:48:23 PM
What?? Oh my...is that recent as a result of sequestration? I don't think I've ever heard of anything more than 3 hours in the past.
August 5th, 2012, Otay Mesa. end of the line at 9.45am, receiving inspection at 5.15pm.
I've been debating about whether to get NEXUS after I graduate. I don't fly though, and since I'm not sure where I'll be (though probably not as close to the border where I am now) I'm not sure how often I'd be crossing.
I've heard multiple horror stories of people getting stuck at the Sonoyta/Lukeville crossing coming back from Rocky Point for 7-10 hours- it happens.
Quote from: corco on March 07, 2013, 06:58:46 PM
I've heard multiple horror stories of people getting stuck at the Sonoyta/Lukeville crossing coming back from Rocky Point for 7-10 hours- it happens.
that one looked bad, but not awful, when I drove through Sonoyta last July. are there just not a lot of open booths?
that said, I had a 25 minute wait at Nogales Mariposa several weeks ago. not all the crossings are terrible.
Quotethat one looked bad, but not awful, when I drove through Sonoyta last July. are there just not a lot of open booths?
Was it a Sunday afternoon? That's when everybody comes back from Rocky Point and it becomes a disaster. Couple that with the American fear of driving in border area Mexico and the Californians use that crossing now too instead of going to Algodones or Mexicali (which is ridiculous because Mexicali might just be the safest town along the entire border at this point) and it's a disaster.
Which, side note, that fear is kind of blown out of proportion by people. I'll never forget when I was working at the resort in Tucson, I had a couple come up to me wondering if they should take I-10 to get from Tucson to San Diego instead of I-8 because they were afraid I-8 might be dangerous because it's close to Mexico. They very reluctantly believed me when I told them just to take I-8, but I have a hunch they took I-10 anyway just to be safe.
Quote from: corco on March 07, 2013, 07:11:06 PM
Was it a Sunday afternoon? That's when everybody comes back from Rocky Point and it becomes a disaster.
was Sunday around 1pm, so probably not late enough to make it the "afternoon" quite yet.
I crossed that day at Mexicali East and it took me about one hour 45 minutes. not too bad.
QuoteCouple that with the American fear of driving in border area Mexico and the Californians use that crossing now too instead of going to Algodones or Mexicali (which is ridiculous because Mexicali might just be the safest town along the entire border at this point) and it's a disaster.
I'm doing a Sonora trip in two weeks and I'm contemplating crossing in Naco! I hope that's east enough to avoid the Caltards.
QuoteWhich, side note, that fear is kind of blown out of proportion by people. I'll never forget when I was working at the resort in Tucson, I had a couple come up to me wondering if they should take I-10 to get from Tucson to San Diego instead of I-8 because they were afraid I-8 might be dangerous because it's close to Mexico. They very reluctantly believed me when I told them just to take I-8, but I have a hunch they took I-10 anyway just to be safe.
assholes. you should have told them that anything south of I-80 is considered dangerous.
Quote from: corco on March 07, 2013, 06:58:46 PM
I've heard multiple horror stories of people getting stuck at the Sonoyta/Lukeville crossing coming back from Rocky Point for 7-10 hours- it happens.
If people really want to wait and are too dumb to take a detour, than be my guest. As for me, I'd try to cross at Sasabe...least busy border crossing on the US/Mexican border, and the very next one to the east of Lukeville. To put it in perspective, San Ysidro sees twice as many vehicles in a day as Sasabe sees in a year. http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/20111115arizona-border-outpost-sasabe.html
Yeah but good luck getting from Sasabe to Rocky Point without 4WD- there's no direct road once you're in Mexico and that road is absolutely terrible from what I understand, deep ruts in places and ridiculously washboarded in others, and if there's actually a spot outside of Juarez that's dangerous from a safety standpoint, that's it. Lots of illegals and coyotes (both the person and the animal) use that road before crossing- you do not want to get stuck there.
There's a reason nobody uses that crossing, and believe it or not it has nothing to do with human stupidity- I'm usually first in line to blame people for being stupid, but this isn't one of those times.
(I just moved to Montana after two years in Tucson, btw)
Heh, just spent an hour Googling El Sasabe and Sasabe. I had no idea it was that bad! Still, Rocky Point to one of the Nogales crossings seems like a worthwhile detour on peak days at Lukeville.
Quote from: mtantillo on March 09, 2013, 01:00:53 AMHeh, just spent an hour Googling El Sasabe and Sasabe. I had no idea it was that bad! Still, Rocky Point to one of the Nogales crossings seems like a worthwhile detour on peak days at Lukeville.
At all of the Arizona crossings delays are quite variable. I have, for example, "crossed" at Lukeville with minimal delay. In counterpoint to Jake's account of getting through at Mariposa with a very short wait, I have had a long wait (close to two hours) at Mariposa, which would have been much longer if I had not used battery failure as an excuse to jump the queue. In an Arizona DOT report I skimmed some time ago, it was said that the agency wishes to expand Mariposa because it is subject to severe delays (especially on holiday weekends) and is an important transit point for fruits, vegetables, and other perishable goods between Mexico and the US. Food has literally rotted while waiting to clear Customs at Mariposa, where 16-hour delays are not uncommon.
In the same report, Sasabe was identified as pretty much the only crossing for which some form of improvement was not considered necessary, largely because it does not have a paved through road connection on both sides of the border. Even Douglas and Naco are considered occasionally problematic. The DeConcini crossing (downtown Nogales) is considered so congested that Customs does not even attempt to process rail traffic anywhere near the main POE site--freight trains are waved through to a secondary facility at Rio Rico, seven miles north of the border, where they are gone through with a fine-tooth comb. They do have to cross the border gate at a walking pace, so long trains essentially cut Nogales in half and create problems with emergency response.
(BTW, Mike, thank you for your post upthread laying out the circumstances under which joining the trusted-traveler programs pays off for the ordinary tourist.)
The benefit of NEXUS is just less hassle and faster processing and, in some case, dedicated lanes. I don't think that you need to be a frequent crosser to get it (although if you cross less than once a year, you might as well not waste your money on that.) I cross about 15 times a year and, although I try to not consider the border as a block of sorts when I plan my travels, it gets kind of annoying. Although I have really nothing to hide, it gets you less questions and much lesser chances of getting searched, which in the end reduces the risk of losing precious time on a long road trip. One of my most recent crossings involved an argument with an especially condescending CBP agent in Detroit about how dangerous the city is, and it's what made me take the decision to enroll to NEXUS. (A lengthy, irritating "conversation" with a presumably PMSed lady in North Troy two years ago comes to mind, too...)
Mike, Landsowne does look like an interesting option, albeit far. But if they're open on weekends, I'll consider it. And yes, I'll want the iris scan. It might be useful in the future, even though I have never flown yet.
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 07, 2013, 12:03:44 PM
I guess my question is: what are the payoff points for these processes? How often do you have to cross the border annually before it becomes worth it to join any of these programs?
Once IMO. The first time I skipped an hour immigration line at the ATL airport made the $100 for GE and hassle with the interview worth it. Plus, TSA PreCheck makes air travel MUCH nicer. Several of my coworkers who never travel internationally have gotten GE just for PreCheck, but living near two GE interview locations (MCO and SFB) makes it easier for us where I live.
Alright, an update for those interested.
28 Feb: Application for NEXUS sent.
22 Mar: Conditional Approval Notification received. Interview booked for YUL.
17 Apr: Interview at YUL, early afternoon. I must have been lucky, as 1½ week before the interview, the place was booked well into July.
Arrived at the airport during their lunch break, eventually made it in after someone else and took a number at 1 PM (interview is at 1:20 PM.) My number was called and I gave my notification, passport and driver's license and went back in the waiting room for barely 5 minutes before being called for my Canadian interview.
The Canadian agent greeted me and basically explained the rules of the program, how to cross and such, then took an iris scan (used by the airport kiosks). No questions asked. Back in the waiting room waiting for the U.S. interview... oh. already.
To sum it up: "I assume you mostly cross for vacation," to which I answered "Yes, that and skiing in New England". - "Right, I see you're a former ski instructor" (the application form asks you to list your former jobs). He explained the rules, took a photo with his webcam then took my fingerprints and told me I would receive the card in about three weeks.
23 Apr: Envelope from Champlain NY with a card in it in my mailbox. Yup, less than a week after the interview.
I didn't get to use it alone or in a dedicated lane yet, but it did work for crossing into Derby Line with a friend.
Quote from: corco on March 08, 2013, 10:48:16 PM
Yeah but good luck getting from Sasabe to Rocky Point without 4WD- there's no direct road once you're in Mexico and that road is absolutely terrible from what I understand, deep ruts in places and ridiculously washboarded in others, and if there's actually a spot outside of Juarez that's dangerous from a safety standpoint, that's it. Lots of illegals and coyotes (both the person and the animal) use that road before crossing- you do not want to get stuck there.
I had not seen this post before driving down there at the end of March. having not had success finding some good tequila in Imuris or Nogales a few hours before, due to the shops not being open early on Sunday morning, I decided to head down to Sasabe. I had assumed that Sasabe was similar to Naco - a dusty little town on the Mexican side of the border. I had crossed into Naco on foot before, for lunch and a bottle of tequila, and found it to be safe, quiet and friendly.
I drove down to the border at Sasabe, looking for a place to park and walk across, and was stopped by US customs at the last possible turnaround point. when I explained the purpose for my trip, they told me that there is no tourism, no tequila, nothing but lots of crime. They recommended that I turn around, so I did. I was asked a few brief questions, and they visually inspected my passport and green card, without entering it into the computer. no complaints on my part; they were professional and friendly. I was at the border for maybe 10 minutes total.
(as an addendum, my crossing at Nogales Mariposa was 17 minutes of waiting in line, and another 14 minutes of primary and secondary inspection, thanks to all the camping equipment in my trunk. Sunday morning around 9.)
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on April 30, 2013, 09:05:24 PM
Alright, an update for those interested.
28 Feb: Application for NEXUS sent.
22 Mar: Conditional Approval Notification received. Interview booked for YUL.
17 Apr: Interview at YUL, early afternoon. I must have been lucky, as 1½ week before the interview, the place was booked well into July.
Arrived at the airport during their lunch break, eventually made it in after someone else and took a number at 1 PM (interview is at 1:20 PM.) My number was called and I gave my notification, passport and driver's license and went back in the waiting room for barely 5 minutes before being called for my Canadian interview.
The Canadian agent greeted me and basically explained the rules of the program, how to cross and such, then took an iris scan (used by the airport kiosks). No questions asked. Back in the waiting room waiting for the U.S. interview... oh. already.
To sum it up: "I assume you mostly cross for vacation," to which I answered "Yes, that and skiing in New England". - "Right, I see you're a former ski instructor" (the application form asks you to list your former jobs). He explained the rules, took a photo with his webcam then took my fingerprints and told me I would receive the card in about three weeks.
23 Apr: Envelope from Champlain NY with a card in it in my mailbox. Yup, less than a week after the interview.
I didn't get to use it alone or in a dedicated lane yet, but it did work for crossing into Derby Line with a friend.
please take me to niagara falls
QuoteI drove down to the border at Sasabe, looking for a place to park and walk across, and was stopped by US customs at the last possible turnaround point. when I explained the purpose for my trip, they told me that there is no tourism, no tequila, nothing but lots of crime. They recommended that I turn around, so I did. I was asked a few brief questions, and they visually inspected my passport and green card, without entering it into the computer. no complaints on my part; they were professional and friendly. I was at the border for maybe 10 minutes total.
That's crazy- I hadn't heard that CBP was actively discouraging people from going down there, just that going down there was a bad idea. When I clinched SR 286 last November I was followed down by a CBP vehicle almost all the way to the border even though I was going 2 under the speed limit hoping I'd be passed and did get more thoroughly checked by CBP at the checkpoint heading back north than I have at any other checkpoint (nothing major, they just wanted me to roll down my rear windows and asked questions about why I was down there instead of just where I was going/coming from).
Quote from: Steve on May 01, 2013, 10:01:22 PMplease take me to niagara falls
You'll still need a Nexus card to be with me on the Whirlpool Bridge, or I'll lose mine. Plus, I don't even have the prepaid toll thing on mine.
Quote from: corco on May 01, 2013, 10:11:19 PM
That's crazy- I hadn't heard that CBP was actively discouraging people from going down there, just that going down there was a bad idea.
I wasn't actively discouraged. basically, I was told by CBP that it was a bad idea, so I voluntarily decided to alter my own plans. I did not have any purpose other than to acquire a bottle of tequila, so if that was not gonna be happening...
had I wanted to go down there to take photos, I'll bet they would have told me "be careful" and let me through.
QuoteWhen I clinched SR 286 last November I was followed down by a CBP vehicle almost all the way to the border even though I was going 2 under the speed limit hoping I'd be passed
I saw plenty of CBP by the side of the road, but was not followed at all. interestingly, on the way up I saw a tiny car with Mexico plates. I assume they were from the town of Sasabe itself, if the road from Altar or Caborca is as bad as is claimed.
Quoteand did get more thoroughly checked by CBP at the checkpoint heading back north than I have at any other checkpoint (nothing major, they just wanted me to roll down my rear windows and asked questions about why I was down there instead of just where I was going/coming from).
I was just asked to show my green card, and then no further questions. so I bet the officers at the actual border radioed up "the green-card holder in the silver Taurus is harmless".
always easier to get into Canada than back into the US, even before 9/11, even as an American.
Quote from: texaskdog on May 02, 2013, 01:37:23 PM
always easier to get into Canada than back into the US, even before 9/11, even as an American.
Yeah, there's not so nice things I can say about US customs. The nicest I can say is that they're not very welcoming.
Oddly enough I've never had trouble with US customs. One time traveling back with a group, everyone else was amazed by how fast we were cleared!
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on May 02, 2013, 11:58:20 AM
Quote from: Steve on May 01, 2013, 10:01:22 PMplease take me to niagara falls
You'll still need a Nexus card to be with me on the Whirlpool Bridge, or I'll lose mine. Plus, I don't even have the prepaid toll thing on mine.
One question I've always had is if it's would be considered OK to fudge a clinch of NY 182 (http://cmap.m-plex.com/hb/hwymap.php?r=ny.ny182&sys=usany&rg=all&u=deanej); while I will often fudge roads that end at the border, I don't usually fudge bridges. Then again, if/when I join NEXUS, I probably would enroll in the toll thing since the Peace and Whirlpool Bridges would be the most convenient crossing points for heading west, and traffic often backs up onto the Peace Bridge, limiting the effectiveness of NEXUS if it's busy.
I would say no just by driving, personally.
However, Amtrak crosses that bridge - so that is an alternative if you do not have NEXUS.
I would consider it an accepted fudged clinch for cause of restricted area.
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on May 02, 2013, 08:36:58 PM
I would consider it an accepted fudged clinch for cause of restricted area.
You can't clinch something by looking at it. If your access is restricted to the entire length of something, it is by definition unclinchable. It's a different case from "oh, let me turn around within sight of the border," because at least you've
been on the road until that point.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 30, 2013, 09:13:55 PM
Quote from: corco on March 08, 2013, 10:48:16 PM
Yeah but good luck getting from Sasabe to Rocky Point without 4WD- there's no direct road once you're in Mexico and that road is absolutely terrible from what I understand, deep ruts in places and ridiculously washboarded in others, and if there's actually a spot outside of Juarez that's dangerous from a safety standpoint, that's it. Lots of illegals and coyotes (both the person and the animal) use that road before crossing- you do not want to get stuck there.
I had not seen this post before driving down there at the end of March. having not had success finding some good tequila in Imuris or Nogales a few hours before, due to the shops not being open early on Sunday morning, I decided to head down to Sasabe. I had assumed that Sasabe was similar to Naco - a dusty little town on the Mexican side of the border. I had crossed into Naco on foot before, for lunch and a bottle of tequila, and found it to be safe, quiet and friendly.
I drove down to the border at Sasabe, looking for a place to park and walk across, and was stopped by US customs at the last possible turnaround point. when I explained the purpose for my trip, they told me that there is no tourism, no tequila, nothing but lots of crime. They recommended that I turn around, so I did. I was asked a few brief questions, and they visually inspected my passport and green card, without entering it into the computer. no complaints on my part; they were professional and friendly. I was at the border for maybe 10 minutes total.
(as an addendum, my crossing at Nogales Mariposa was 17 minutes of waiting in line, and another 14 minutes of primary and secondary inspection, thanks to all the camping equipment in my trunk. Sunday morning around 9.)
One of my coworkers went to Juarez recently on foot to pick up some antibiotics. CBP stopped him outbound and told him that under no circumstances should he go so far into that hell hole that he lose sight of the border crossing. They said the few blocks within sight of the border were safe for bars, restaurants, and shops (including pharmacia) but nothing beyond.
I wouldn't hesitate to visit most of Mexico. Border towns across from TX, not so much.
I got stopped by the CBP when entering Detroit at night. The agent was ridiculously condescending. I eventually argued my way in.
Quote from: vdeane on May 02, 2013, 03:48:08 PM
One question I've always had is if it's would be considered OK to fudge a clinch of NY 182 (http://cmap.m-plex.com/hb/hwymap.php?r=ny.ny182&sys=usany&rg=all&u=deanej); while I will often fudge roads that end at the border, I don't usually fudge bridges. Then again, if/when I join NEXUS, I probably would enroll in the toll thing since the Peace and Whirlpool Bridges would be the most convenient crossing points for heading west, and traffic often backs up onto the Peace Bridge, limiting the effectiveness of NEXUS if it's busy.
Luckily, I can avoid that particular fudge since we used to use the Whirlpool Bridge as our preferred (i.e., non-tourist-clogged) route to Niagara Falls before it was restricted to NEXUS holders.
Quote from: Steve on May 02, 2013, 11:16:03 PM
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on May 02, 2013, 08:36:58 PM
I would consider it an accepted fudged clinch for cause of restricted area.
You can't clinch something by looking at it. If your access is restricted to the entire length of something, it is by definition unclinchable. It's a different case from "oh, let me turn around within sight of the border," because at least you've been on the road until that point.
Well, this is essentially that for NY 182, the difference being the end is on a bridge and a TOTSO at that.
My experiences in NY, VT, ME, and MI crossings have been consistent with the rest here -- by and large, the process is painless. I let my girlfriend drive, since she's much nicer than me, and we play nice and answer honestly. Never been searched, only detained once for her pepper spray (which was very cordial, and she had to consent to surrender it to the Crown, which she found very amusing).
Québec has a big hydroponic tomato industry. During the winter, we now have tomatoes worth eating thanks to this. Once, on an early summer day in Montréal, we stopped at a farmers' market and sampled perfect, full-ripe tomatoes as good as any you would grow yourself and pick here in August. They were plentiful and cheap, too. We agonized for a full twenty minutes, poring over regulations online before giving up and deciding to wait two more months to taste that again. We'd been specifically asked about tomatoes in the past, and if you remember how the tomato blight swept through plant distribution channels three or so years ago, you get why. Their disease transmitability puts them near the top of the agricultural no-no list, and we didn't want ourselves on any list at all.
I have witnessed some really boorish behavior by US agents in the past, which is infuriating because they're pretty much the first impression people get of you and me (if you're a US person). I've found Canada agents to carry themselves more consistently professionally, though the majority of US agents have been better than the bad apples.
Best bets for getting into and out of Canada easily:
* Keep your car clean and organized. And if your car screams "sketchy," consider taking the bus across.
* Be courteous and direct with your answers.
* Smile. Canadian agents like that you're happy to come into Canada, and US agents like that you're respecting your own laws when you return.
* Have a clear purpose to state for your visit. I have gone to Montréal to just wander and hang out plenty of times, but I don't phrase it that way. Vague people are suspicious people.
* Don't choose the border crossing to demonstrate your "rights" (which you surrender the moment you leave the US anyway), not even a little.
* Dignity, respect, and honesty will speed your trip. You might get treated poorly sometimes, but taking the high road is always in your best interest.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 03, 2013, 12:53:13 PM
I've found Canada agents to carry themselves more consistently professionally, though the majority of US agents have been better than the bad apples.
the only time I've had dickish US agents was coming in from Canada, or at inland points near Mexico.
when I was coming in from Mexico or flying in, they have always been ranging from efficiently courteous to actually friendly. the friendly ones seem to be assigned to the less-traveled outposts: at Sasabe I was actually chatting with one officer about Hermosillo, where his family happened to be from, while the other one searched my car.
inland encounters are a toss-up. once, an officer observed me taking an exit off I-8, driving around a bit, and then getting back on the freeway, and his first question was "who were you picking up at the Sentinel exit?", a classic presumptuous "bad cop" routine, because apparently looking for bits of old US-80 infrastructure is suspicious. however, I've also been taking photos at night on dirt roads and encounters have resulted in some friendly chats because their initial impression of me was that I was harmless.
Quote from: realjd on May 02, 2013, 11:31:51 PMCBP stopped him outbound and told him that under no circumstances should he go so far into that hell hole that he lose sight of the border crossing. They said the few blocks within sight of the border were safe for bars, restaurants, and shops (including pharmacia) but nothing beyond.
"should" being the operative term. I do not believe that CBP has the authority to prevent a person from leaving the country, except in a few well-defined cases (terms of sentencing of a felony conviction, outstanding warrants, etc). nor can CBP refuse to readmit a legal resident, not even to say "we warned you not to go past 10 blocks, now you can't come back in, so nyah".
The last time I crossed the border I was greeted by a pretty friendly US agent. I was driving to Buffalo to fly to Phoenix, and had printouts of my itinerary (plane tickets, car rental and first nights hotel accommodation) handy for his inspection. Once the border agent found out what I did for a living, (I have a pretty reputable job), he relaxed a lot, and preceded to tell me that his daughter just came back from Phoenix and loved it. He wished me a pleasant journey.
I generally find border staff to be somewhat abrasive, but generally highly professional.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on May 03, 2013, 01:16:47 PM
The last time I crossed the border I was greeted by a pretty friendly US agent. I was driving to Buffalo to fly to Phoenix, and had printouts of my itinerary (plane tickets, car rental and first nights hotel accommodation) handy for his inspection. Once the border agent found out what I did for a living, (I have a pretty reputable job), he relaxed a lot, and preceded to tell me that his daughter just came back from Phoenix and loved it. He wished me a pleasant journey.
I generally find border staff to be somewhat abrasive, but generally highly professional.
I stumbled once when a Canadian agent asked me my profession. I'd been at a new job for two weeks after several months of temp jobs and the like and I could barely remember what my job was. I think I said "assistant" or something equally evasive-sounding, but it all worked out.
QuoteThe last time I crossed the border I was greeted by a pretty friendly US agent. I was driving to Buffalo to fly to Phoenix, and had printouts of my itinerary (plane tickets, car rental and first nights hotel accommodation) handy for his inspection. Once the border agent found out what I did for a living, (I have a pretty reputable job), he relaxed a lot, and preceded to tell me that his daughter just came back from Phoenix and loved it. He wished me a pleasant journey.
I crossed the border for the first time since I've been 21 back in February, and it was decidedly more pleasant than it had been- but the focus was definitely on my employment, and once it was discerned I have a stable job I was pretty much waved through. CBSA grilled me a little bit about why I was crossing where I was crossing and where I worked and asked me to pull in for secondary. I pulled in for secondary and went in the building and two minutes later a lady walked out with my passport and said "Welcome to Canada!" I assume they ran a credit check or employment verification or something.
Going back into the USA the lady was very nice- asked where I worked and what I did. When I said I was a GIS Coordinator for [where I work] she said "and what does GIS stand for?" and after I responded she did the usual alcohol/tobacco/firearms questions and sent me on my way- very polite and very fast.
NEXUS Application certified and sent on March 28, 2013.
Conditional Approval for NEXUS on April 17, 2013.
Interview scheduled for Fort Erie this Saturday, May 11. On April 17, the appointments were booked solid well into July at all of the Toronto/Niagara/Buffalo enrollment centers, but I refreshed often for a half a day and snagged a cancellation on a weekend in May...not bad! Doing the touristy thing in Niagara Falls this weekend while I'm there.
With a little bit of luck, I'll have the card in-hand for when I fly up to Toronto over Memorial Day weekend for a mini-vacation.
I don't go to Canada much (average once per year), but I figure if I am a "trusted traveler", I might as well have the benefits in the foreign country I travel to most often (as opposed to just in the US with the more expensive Global Entry).
I will be doing the toll thing on my NEXUS card eventually. I hope it works though, since I understand the NEXUS toll and ExpressPass used by the Niagara Falls Bridge Commission is essentially the same as a TransCore 6C sticker tag, and I aleady have one of those stuck to my windshield (a Georgial PeachPass). Hopefully the system is smart enough to "keep looking" for a valid tag if it reads what it thinks is an invalid tag (the PeachPass). I suppose I could always disable the PeachPass...sticker tags are easily "turned off" by taping a mass of metal over the back, such as a piece of aluminum foil folded over several times...supposidly the metal will drown out the radio signal to render the tag inoperable. At any rate, this shouldn't be an issue for the Whirlpool Bridge, since the toll/NEXUS verification works like a proximity card at that crossing, as opposed to a toll pass like it does at Lewiston-Queenston and Rainbow. Too bad all of the Niagara crossings don't go to E-ZPass like Peace Bridge...supposidly the NFBC toll readers can read E-ZPass tags, but just aren't connected to the back end of E-ZPass to actually process E-ZPass transactions.
Interesting to note...the Detroit-Windsor Tunnel also does a similar program..you establish a "NEXPRESS" account with them and link it to your NEXUS card that you can tap at the toll plaza. And like Niagara crossings, the ON/MI crossings use different technology. Ambassador Bridge uses sticker tag "decals", and Blue Water Bridge does not have ETC.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on May 03, 2013, 01:10:02 PM
Quote from: realjd on May 02, 2013, 11:31:51 PMCBP stopped him outbound and told him that under no circumstances should he go so far into that hell hole that he lose sight of the border crossing. They said the few blocks within sight of the border were safe for bars, restaurants, and shops (including pharmacia) but nothing beyond.
"should" being the operative term. I do not believe that CBP has the authority to prevent a person from leaving the country, except in a few well-defined cases (terms of sentencing of a felony conviction, outstanding warrants, etc). nor can CBP refuse to readmit a legal resident, not even to say "we warned you not to go past 10 blocks, now you can't come back in, so nyah".
Frankly, I'm surprised they even go so far as to say "should", considering how many people cross the border between El Paso and Juárez. Don't they have anything better to do?
Port Name Year Pedestrians
TX: El Paso 2005 7,613,546
TX: El Paso 2006 7,500,141
TX: El Paso 2007 8,454,434
TX: El Paso 2008 8,029,106
TX: El Paso 2009 7,637,649
TX: El Paso 2010 6,930,357
TX: El Paso 2011 6,172,346
TX: El Paso 2012 6,090,841
[source=Bureau of Transportation Statistics] |
I wondering if "traveler origin" is a factor here. These stories are both from people who live far from the area to be visited.
Very likely just helpful friendly advice. In the case of the guy going to Juarez,
US CBP can't tell you what to do once you drive past that bridge. In Dr. frankensteinas case, as a visitor to the US, I think CBP can put stipulations on what you can and can't do, but that would be extremely rare in the case of a Canadian.
I was once in El Paso and thought about walking over to Juarez. This was before it got really bad, and I had been in Tijuana about 3 days prior. I talked myself out of it realizing I had no idea what was on the other side or how safe the area was that I'd have to walk through to cross over to the US bound side, so I didn't go. I assume that they may think if you aren't from the area that you don't know what it is really like and are trying to be helpful.
One of the most pleasantly surprising situations I've found myself in while traveling was in Juárez. This was the evening of January 1, 2002; I was 20 years old at the time, on my way back from visiting southern Chihuahua with my dad. I had left a small bag in the back seat of a taxi when we got out at our hotel. By the time I realized it at check-in, the taxi was already gone, so I had the hotel clerk call another taxi. I had very little hope that I would ever see my bag or its contents again.
When the taxi dropped me back off at the bus station, I asked a couple of the other drivers there if they had seen the bag. Several of them very eagerly said, yes, they remembered a driver coming back with a lost bag, and told me I should check with bus station security. I went inside, found a guard, and he escorted me upstairs to their office. (A nagging voice in my head was telling me that being led up a lonely flight of stairs in Juárez after dark by a man with a gun might be the beginning of a really bad experience.) As it turned out, the bag had been locked away, and the guard with the key had gone home for the evening. So I took another taxi back to our hotel. The next morning, both of us took another taxi back to the station and found another guard, who escorted us upstairs. He found the bag, verified it was mine by asking me what was inside and looking, and gave it back to me. We then took another taxi (yes, this was my fifth taxi ride within 15 hours) to the border and made our way to the El Paso airport.
What made the experience so pleasantly surprising is that–even back in 2002, before the upturn in violence–Juárez already had a bad reputation. Yet every single person I dealt with (the hotel clerk, the crowd of taxi drivers, the security guards) was very friendly and eager to help. What could have been a very stressful and unhappy experience turned out to be no big thing.
All that is to say, it's not "helpful friendly advice" to tell someone that 95 percent of a city is a hell hole where he is certain to meet an untimely death, for such a portrayal of a city is sure to be erroneous. In 2011, for example, the murder rate in Juárez was 149 per 100,000 population. While that is quite high when compared to other cities, don't forget to put it into context. For example, I had a delivery job in 2007 that occasionally took me to East Saint Louis, Illinois. That city posted a murder rate of 102 per 100,000 that year, yet I don't recall any federal officers giving me "helpful friendly advice" to not go there. And our company certainly didn't give up doing business there just because the crime rate was above average. Amazingly (not), I survived. There is no reason the CBP should be telling people what places they should and should not visit–especially when the place they "should not" visit is on a border crossed by more than 6 million pedestrians every year. Grrr..
[/rant]
Quote from: kphoger on May 06, 2013, 08:15:54 PM
All that is to say, it's not "helpful friendly advice" to tell someone that 95 percent of a city is a hell hole where he is certain to meet an untimely death, for such a portrayal of a city is sure to be erroneous. In 2011, for example, the murder rate in Juárez was 149 per 100,000 population. While that is quite high when compared to other cities, don't forget to put it into context. For example, I had a delivery job in 2007 that occasionally took me to East Saint Louis, Illinois. That city posted a murder rate of 102 per 100,000 that year, yet I don't recall any federal officers giving me "helpful friendly advice" to not go there. And our company certainly didn't give up doing business there just because the crime rate was above average. Amazingly (not), I survived. There is no reason the CBP should be telling people what places they should and should not visit–especially when the place they "should not" visit is on a border crossed by more than 6 million pedestrians every year. Grrr..
[/rant]
Good point...with current life expectancy in the U.S. at 77.97 years, your odds of dying on any given day are better than 1 in 28,478.
(I'm sure that's totally non-fuzzy math. After all, the older you are the less likely you are to die, since if you die on your third day of life, the odds are one in three that you'll die on any given day of your life. If you live longer than three days, well, Q.E.D.)
Quote from: empirestate on May 06, 2013, 11:52:06 PMthe older you are the less likely you are to die
I'll be sure to remember this when I'm 98 years old and decide to go hunt tigers with nothing but a sharp stick.
in before alan hall problem
Quote from: NE2 on May 07, 2013, 07:33:26 PM
in before alan hall problem
the Alan Hall problem is the seeming paradox that, even after a door is opened revealing a tantalizing goat, the game show contestant appears to be bent on opening a door with a motorcycle behind it, as opposed to the other goat door.
Quote from: mtantillo on May 06, 2013, 06:39:23 PM
Very likely just helpful friendly advice. In the case of the guy going to Juarez,
US CBP can't tell you what to do once you drive past that bridge. In Dr. frankensteinas case, as a visitor to the US, I think CBP can put stipulations on what you can and can't do, but that would be extremely rare in the case of a Canadian.
This wasn't the CBP officer putting actual stipulations on where my coworkers was allowed to go once he entered Mexico. The guy was just trying to offer friendly suggestions to the only gringo crossing the border on foot about how to not get robbed. It wasn't even a formal exit check.
Quote from: mtantillo on May 06, 2013, 12:22:55 AM
NEXUS Application certified and sent on March 28, 2013.
Conditional Approval for NEXUS on April 17, 2013.
Interview scheduled for Fort Erie this Saturday, May 11. On April 17, the appointments were booked solid well into July at all of the Toronto/Niagara/Buffalo enrollment centers, but I refreshed often for a half a day and snagged a cancellation on a weekend in May...not bad! Doing the touristy thing in Niagara Falls this weekend while I'm there.
With a little bit of luck, I'll have the card in-hand for when I fly up to Toronto over Memorial Day weekend for a mini-vacation.
Even without the card, you should be able to use the Global Entry kiosks at the Toronto Airport when you go through US CBP preclearance heading home. That won't do you any good getting into Canada but it will at least let you take the shortcut back into the US if you don't have the card since GE uses passports for air travel and not the card.
Also, once you get the card, go into the frequent flyer account profile for any airlines you fly and enter the PASSID from the back of the card as your "known traveler number". That will get you TSA PreCheck privelages when flying domestically within the US at participating airports.
EDIT: I also wanted to add that GE/NEXUS travelers can use the SmartGate immigration lines going into Australia if you have one of the newer e-passports.
Quote from: realjd on May 08, 2013, 11:22:08 PM
the only gringo crossing the border on foot
Seriously?
Quote from: kphoger on May 09, 2013, 01:38:05 PM
Quote from: realjd on May 08, 2013, 11:22:08 PM
the only gringo crossing the border on foot
Seriously?
Yes. He was in El Paso for work and went across the border in the evening when all of the Mexican workers were heading home. Besides, Ciudad Juarez is widely considered a no-go zone by El Paso residents (of any ethnicity) so I would expect there to be a lower proportion of Americans crossing the border in general when compared to safer places like Nuevo Laredo or Tijuana.
FWIW, I sat next to an American engineer working for a Mexican manufacturing company on a flight last year. He said Juarez is the only plant location where his company will not let him stay on the Mexican side of the border when he is visiting.
Quote from: realjd on May 10, 2013, 02:36:05 AM
Quote from: kphoger on May 09, 2013, 01:38:05 PM
Quote from: realjd on May 08, 2013, 11:22:08 PM
the only gringo crossing the border on foot
Seriously?
evening
Actually that says a lot right there. There's a world of difference between night and day–in fact, it's like night and day.
Just passed NEXUS interview. They were really curious why I wanted it when I only come to Canada a couple times a year, but the , "I frequently visit friends in the Buffalo area and pop over for a short time, and don't like waiting in the border lineup" seemed to work just fine.
US side pretty much just explained how land crossings work, Canadian side wanted to know how often I thought I'd use it, business or pleasure, where I cross, and gave the stern warning to over-declare if in doubt.
Then had to go to a different office to meet with US for photo and fingerprints, then meet again with Canadians for iris scan, so a total of 4 stops. My eyesight is bad enough that the iris scan machine won't work with my glasses, so I have to take them off to enter Canada via air...
And today I came back stateside, and used my Global Entry card in the NEXUS lane at the peace bridge. The main lanes were congested and almost back to the bridge, easily a 25
Minute wait. In the NEXUS lane there were 6 cars ahead of me, and I cleared in 3 minutes. A couple more of those and NEXUS will easily be worth it....
Here's a map of what the A-35 extension to I-89 will look like upon completion later this year:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.montrealroads.com%2Froads%2FA-35%2Fimg17.gif&hash=1e57ee7fdf7bc9d0b95dc50c0fafc6e40e6478c2)
Also, here's a notice of the changes regarding the existing route on its montrealroads.com page:
QuoteNEW EXIT NUMBERS FOR THE EXISTING A-35: Upon the scheduled completion of the A-35 extension south to the Quebec-Vermont border in late 2013, the extended autoroute will have the existing interchanges renumbered as follows:
EXIT 40 (existing EXIT 3): QC 104 East
EXIT 43 (existing EXIT 6): QC 133 North
EXIT 44 (existing EXIT 7): QC 223
EXIT 46 (existing EXIT 9): QC 219
EXIT 48 (existing EXIT 11): QC 223 / QC 104 West
EXIT 51 (existing EXIT 14): St. Andre Road
EXIT 55 (existing EXIT 18): A-10 / Eastern Townships Autoroute
So this means that all three Interstates (I-87/A-15, I-89/A-35 and I-91/A-55) will connect to an Autoroute by 2014.
Quote from: Henry on May 12, 2013, 03:28:37 PM
Here's a map of what the A-35 extension to I-89 will look like upon completion later this year:
I would be surprised that A-35 be completed this year. The first 24.5 km between Iberville and Saint-Sébastien will open in 2014. In 2010, the last 13.4 km towards was scheduled to be inaugurated in 2017, although the northernmost section was planned to open in 2013 at that time...
Here's the page of the project. (http://www.mtq.gouv.qc.ca/portal/page/portal/grands_projets_en/trouver_grand_projet/parachevement_a35)
Crossed many boarders in Europe during the 60s as US citizen. A buddy and I drove to Greece via Yugoslavia in August 1968 (Russians rolled tanks into Prague). We were only asked routine questions and showed my passport. Only once was I searched. It was midnight crossing into Italy from Austria south of Innsbruck through the Brenner Pass. Never been searched there before. There had been terrorists activity and it was very late. We were three young college boys and I am sure we did not have the right answers as we had not planned to travel south of Innsbruck. We weren't detained long.
In '74 I drove into Mexico with no problem. Returning to the US we were about to be searched. I can understand why as we were two young guys with beards and a loaded car, no drugs just a few beers. I started to take things out of my VW when a guard came out and talked to the other guard and we were sent on our way. In the 2000s I made a few trips to Mexico without problems but it was with a church group.
In '74 a buddy and I were on our way to Alaska. We crossed near Glacier Nat'l Park. I was carrying a 357. The guard asked the usual questions and I said I had the gun. I thought it was OK but he politely told me it wasn't but I could leave it there and pick it up on my way back. I did. Boy have things changed. I don't do that anymore. US entry was a wave.
I have crossed into Canada several times at Sault Saint Marie. Once late at night when the Olympics were in Montreal ('76) we were about to be searched. They were very concerned about a TV we had (we were going to a fishing cabin without TV but we wanted to watch the Olympics with "rabbit ears") so the search was almost on. After declaring and paying tariff on having too much food, we went on our merry way, no search. Return was routine.
All other crossings since were almost a stop and go. ID shown, where you going, anything to declare, and have a nice day. At Winsor I don't think we even stopped.
My last crossing at Sault Saint Marie in 2010 by motorcycle was very different. I saw no cars period. Not even in the search area. Odd, as I remember on my fishing trips there was some sort of line. It was mid day, mid week. I stopped at the "guard station" and waited for someone to appear. I had my passport easy to reach. The guy said something to me. I did not really understand him very well. I told him I was going to ride around Lake Superior. He never even saw my passport. He did not ask any questions. He told me to have a good time. I did.
When I crossed back into the US south of Thunder Bay (a line) it was pretty routine. I believe I did show my passport. I was asked where I lived, anything to declare, and my license plate number which I did not know but volunteered to get off my motorcycle and look. He said he'd look at it, which he did. Have a good day and on my way.
I know it is random and work from leads for the most part but one's attitude, body English, time of day, and what else is going on is all part of it. I don't want to be searched because it is a pain to unload everything and then reload it all. However, I know it is their right to do that. I will bitch about it later but at the border it is all yes sir, no sir and as said above I only answer the questions asked and very politely.
I hope the ones in September from Vermont to Quebec, NB to Maine, Maine to NB, NB back to Maine go smooth. But I'll have everything in order so only time will be lost.
I can chime in on this thread now that I've crossed the border (as of a few weeks ago).
Entering Canada from I-89 was uneventful, just asked the purpose of our visit and how long we'd be staying, and scanned our passports.
Crossing back into the U.S. at Rouses Point (QC 223/US 11) on the other hand took 2 hours (even though there was a line of only ~20 cars in front of us), and we were not searched, but pretty thoroughly interrogated. They wanted to know all about our personal lives, and then lectured me about how "stupid" it was for me to have driven to Canada from Massachusetts and back in one day. All while the car was surrounded by armed CBP officers and dogs, staring at us.
Fairly painless, but it shocked me how much more difficult it was to return to a country my family has been citizens of for several generations than to leave it for another.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on July 29, 2013, 09:31:50 PMhow "stupid" it was for me to have driven to Canada from Massachusetts and back in one day. All while the car was surrounded by armed CBP officers and dogs, staring at us.
fuck that; I once drove from Ann Arbor to Canada non-stop.
I crossed in Sweetgrass, Montana.
Yeah that's ridiculous- I drove from Madison WI to Lincoln NH via Port Huron ON and Sherbrooke QC nonstop once and only got regular questioning into Canada and a good search for booze going back into the US, but nobody commented on how far we had driven
I've gotten that before, both directions in the same trip, and it wasn't even that far of a drive! I guess it's because "normal" people hate driving, so they're suspicious of people who obviously don't mind.
That sounds like one of those questions asked just to trip you up and see if your story is straight- similar to the " if you're from Montana why are you crossing at Eastport [US 95 Idaho] instead of Roosville [US 93 Montana]" question I got last time I entered Canada, which was asked after I explained that the purpose of my trip was to "sightsee new things"
Quote from: corco on July 29, 2013, 10:26:41 PM
That sounds like one of those questions asked just to trip you up and see if your story is straight- similar to the " if you're from Montana why are you crossing at Eastport [US 95 Idaho] instead of Roosville [US 93 Montana]" question I got last time I entered Canada, which was asked after I explained that the purpose of my trip was to "sightsee new things"
I figured that's what it was, so I responded with "Well, I thought it was fun."
He then actually said "Yeah I'll bet until you got here."
I didn't bother telling him that it's because I love driving and the trip was a birthday present from my mother, though he clearly knew it was my birthday since he had my passport.
In a way it somewhat makes sense: if the place you are crossing is not on a direct route between where you say your origin and destination points are, that is a potential red flag that you might be lying about where you were and what you were doing, so the customs agents may be inclined to probe further... sometimes. I've gotten searched for crossing in a backwater spot for no apparent reason. But on another occasion in a similar spot I was waved through after 30 seconds of questioning so the agent could go back to napping.
Incidentally, the latter occurred at... Rouses Point/US 11. A much different experience from yours!
Quote from: Duke87 on July 29, 2013, 10:59:51 PM
In a way it somewhat makes sense: if the place you are crossing is not on a direct route between where you say your origin and destination points are, that is a potential red flag that you might be lying about where you were and what you were doing, so the customs agents may be inclined to probe further... sometimes. I've gotten searched for crossing in a backwater spot for no apparent reason. But on another occasion in a similar spot I was waved through after 30 seconds of questioning so the agent could go back to napping.
Incidentally, the latter occurred at... Rouses Point/US 11. A much different experience from yours!
As I mentioned way upthread, that was one of the few border crossings where I used a "roadgeek" explanation for why I was crossing there (in that case, trying to clinch the north end of US 11), which worked fine for me.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on July 29, 2013, 09:31:50 PMCrossing back into the U.S. at Rouses Point (QC 223/US 11) on the other hand took 2 hours (even though there was a line of only ~20 cars in front of us), and we were not searched, but pretty thoroughly interrogated. They wanted to know all about our personal lives, and then lectured me about how "stupid" it was for me to have driven to Canada from Massachusetts and back in one day. All while the car was surrounded by armed CBP officers and dogs, staring at us.
Dafuq?
Making that comment is none of his f'ing business. I went to Boston and back in a day before, and nothing should prevent you from doing it. Also, I've never been surrounded by CBP agents with dogs
while I was in the customs lane before. However, it's happened to me while I was in the secondary coming back in Canada,
sans the dogs... I let them search my car without saying a word (unless asked a question) until they got tired of it.
Quote from: Duke87 on July 29, 2013, 10:59:51 PM
In a way it somewhat makes sense: if the place you are crossing is not on a direct route between where you say your origin and destination points are, that is a potential red flag that you might be lying about where you were and what you were doing, so the customs agents may be inclined to probe further... sometimes. I've gotten searched for crossing in a backwater spot for no apparent reason. But on another occasion in a similar spot I was waved through after 30 seconds of questioning so the agent could go back to napping.
Incidentally, the latter occurred at... Rouses Point/US 11. A much different experience from yours!
I must have gone through on an unusually busy day then, because there was a fairly lengthy backup. Hardly a sleepy crossing then.
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on July 30, 2013, 10:39:23 AM
Dafuq?
Making that comment is none of his f'ing business. I went to Boston and back in a day before, and nothing should prevent you from doing it. Also, I've never been surrounded by CBP agents with dogs while I was in the customs lane before. However, it's happened to me while I was in the secondary coming back in Canada, sans the dogs... I let them search my car without saying a word (unless asked a question) until they got tired of it.
That's what I thought. I refrained from saying anything snarky in response though because I had already been sitting there for 2 hours and still had a long drive ahead of me, so I didn't want to be delayed any more. I could tell he was just itching to find some excuse to send us to secondary.
I just can't get over how the entire setup was so tremendously different from the setup entering Canada.
Also, I've been curious ever since why they couldn't have one of the officers standing around watching us open up one of the other lanes so people didn't have to wait 2 hours?
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on July 29, 2013, 09:31:50 PM
I can chime in on this thread now that I've crossed the border (as of a few weeks ago).
Entering Canada from I-89 was uneventful, just asked the purpose of our visit and how long we'd be staying, and scanned our passports.
Crossing back into the U.S. at Rouses Point (QC 223/US 11) on the other hand took 2 hours (even though there was a line of only ~20 cars in front of us), and we were not searched, but pretty thoroughly interrogated. They wanted to know all about our personal lives, and then lectured me about how "stupid" it was for me to have driven to Canada from Massachusetts and back in one day. All while the car was surrounded by armed CBP officers and dogs, staring at us.
Fairly painless, but it shocked me how much more difficult it was to return to a country my family has been citizens of for several generations than to leave it for another.
That's HIGHLY unusual on the CBPs part. My guess is that they must have received some specific intel they were acting upon. Usually the setup entering the US is nearly identical to the setup entering Canada, with my personal experiences skewing toward curt/rude Canadian officers and friendly US CBP officers.
The comment about driving there and back in one day may have been simply to gauge your response. While your trip is harmless, it is uncommon and they usually ask about unusual things.
Quote from: realjd on August 05, 2013, 06:36:39 PM
That's HIGHLY unusual on the CBPs part. My guess is that they must have received some specific intel they were acting upon.
"we've got a report of a stupid man who is driving to Canada and back in one day."
Quote from: realjd on August 05, 2013, 06:36:39 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on July 29, 2013, 09:31:50 PM
I can chime in on this thread now that I've crossed the border (as of a few weeks ago).
Entering Canada from I-89 was uneventful, just asked the purpose of our visit and how long we'd be staying, and scanned our passports.
Crossing back into the U.S. at Rouses Point (QC 223/US 11) on the other hand took 2 hours (even though there was a line of only ~20 cars in front of us), and we were not searched, but pretty thoroughly interrogated. They wanted to know all about our personal lives, and then lectured me about how "stupid" it was for me to have driven to Canada from Massachusetts and back in one day. All while the car was surrounded by armed CBP officers and dogs, staring at us.
Fairly painless, but it shocked me how much more difficult it was to return to a country my family has been citizens of for several generations than to leave it for another.
That's HIGHLY unusual on the CBPs part. My guess is that they must have received some specific intel they were acting upon. Usually the setup entering the US is nearly identical to the setup entering Canada, with my personal experiences skewing toward curt/rude Canadian officers and friendly US CBP officers.
The comment about driving there and back in one day may have been simply to gauge your response. While your trip is harmless, it is uncommon and they usually ask about unusual things.
That's understandable. I'd even expect them to find that suspicious, and maybe use it as cause to ask me a few more questions.
That doesn't make it okay for him to tell me my travel plans are stupid though.
Quote from: realjd on August 05, 2013, 06:36:39 PMwith my personal experiences skewing toward curt/rude Canadian officers and friendly US CBP officers.
IMO, it probably depends on which country you're a citizen of, since my experiences are pretty much the opposite.
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on August 06, 2013, 10:36:18 AM
IMO, it probably depends on which country you're a citizen of, since my experiences are pretty much the opposite.
for me, the Canadians are cold but professional. the US folks - coming back from Canada - always give me the whole 9 yards. I've been held for an hour and a half, and when I noted that I had to use the bathroom, the interrogating officer just made some remarks on his pad of paper.
coming back from Mexico, the US border patrol is generally friendly at the actual border, and kinda impatient/bored at the internal checkpoints. at the smaller border stations, one can actually expect real conversation (see: Sasabe).
The first time I came trough Highgate Springs (I-89), it was not a pleasant experience. I enerered Canada from Detroit at Windsor and in Canada I got sent to the special room while they searched my car. They were unawhere what tags I had just because they were Texas tags, so they gave me a little crap for that, and for me saying I was either going to London or Toronto depending on how far I could go since it was already late (I drove from Texas to Cape Girardeau, MO the day before and from Cape Girardeau to there the next, so I was exhausted). Apparently, they don't like it if you just say,"I am gonna drive until I can't anymore." They also had to access and go through my brother's laptop for some reason. But, I braved it all and I got to drive all of Ontario 401 and Autoroute 20!!! But back to the I-89 crossing, I am not sure how much progress they have made extending Autoroute 35 to the border, since I haven't crossed there in 2 years, but the first time I crossed back into the US, it was days before New Years Eve, and I pulled up the the Customs Officer and she looked all over the car and wanted to know where we were headed. I paused for a second because I was about to say that it doesn't make any difference since I am going into my country, but I was a good boy and said I was headed to New York to watch the ball drop for New Years in Times Square. She the said, "why come all the way up here? They don't have New Years in Texas?" I was getting angry and I should have reported her, but I can't believe that I get more crap from the country I am a citizen of. I mean, it's a free country, but we will give you a bunch of crap if you leave, because it is a utopia!!!
I swear, I get less crap coming back from Mexico than coming back from Canada. Maybe it is because on the Canadian border everyone is bored so they f with people for the hell of it, and everyone lives in the boonies and they get bitter about people being on vacation and actually enjoying their life. On the Mexican border everyone has a serious job to do so they are very professional.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 05, 2013, 08:34:28 PMThat's understandable. I'd even expect them to find that suspicious, and maybe use it as cause to ask me a few more questions.
That doesn't make it okay for him to tell me my travel plans are stupid though.
This is the kind of situation where it would be useful to have a transcript of what was actually said, just to get a more precise idea of the motivations underlying the various questions. In the absence of a more detailed understanding of the context, I would tend to interpret the characterization of your itinerary as "stupid" as an attempt to provoke you into saying something that would give them a reason for additional search. The question then becomes: what about your car or you and the people with you might have given the CBP officers the impression that looking at you more closely would be fruitful?
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 06, 2013, 01:24:53 PM
This is the kind of situation where it would be useful to have a transcript of what was actually said, just to get a more precise idea of the motivations underlying the various questions.
Probably not useful to CBP, though. In secondary searches, CBP seems to make a point of separating you from your cellphone and other electronic devices, whether or not they try to search the data on them. My guess is that they don't want the proceedings to be recorded, unless they control the record.
Quote from: oscar on August 06, 2013, 01:55:41 PM
Probably not useful to CBP, though. In secondary searches, CBP seems to make a point of separating you from your cellphone and other electronic devices, whether or not they try to search the data on them. My guess is that they don't want the proceedings to be recorded, unless they control the record.
that sounds plausible. I was instructed, prior to getting sat down in the Special Room while my car was given a secondary search, to leave behind two items: 1) a leatherman tool which I had declared when asked 'do you have any weapons on you', and 2) my cell phone.
from what I could tell, my phone was untouched. I left the two items on the driver's seat and there they were, waiting for me.
Quotefor me, the Canadians are cold but professional. the US folks - coming back from Canada - always give me the whole 9 yards. I've been held for an hour and a half, and when I noted that I had to use the bathroom, the interrogating officer just made some remarks on his pad of paper.
You're not a US Citizen though, right? They probably see "Hungary" and that flags the sketchy Eastern European former communist anti-terrorism alarm (even if Hungary is a perfectly stable EU nation at this point) even if you have a green card and are a permanent resident.
I feel like my dealings with US Customs have generally been a lot more pleasant than with CBSA- the US has only secondaried me once and that was a 2 AM crossing with two other 18 year olds, all of us unshowered and unshaven and in a car registered in Idaho, driving from Quebec into Vermont- we were pretty much asking for a secondary in that case (and it was still the friendliest secondary I've ever gotten- they were cracking jokes with us as the casually searched our car for beer- at that time of night there were only two folks on staff so we had to just stand by our car while they searched).
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 06, 2013, 01:24:53 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 05, 2013, 08:34:28 PMThat's understandable. I'd even expect them to find that suspicious, and maybe use it as cause to ask me a few more questions.
That doesn't make it okay for him to tell me my travel plans are stupid though.
This is the kind of situation where it would be useful to have a transcript of what was actually said, just to get a more precise idea of the motivations underlying the various questions. In the absence of a more detailed understanding of the context, I would tend to interpret the characterization of your itinerary as "stupid" as an attempt to provoke you into saying something that would give them a reason for additional search. The question then becomes: what about your car or you and the people with you might have given the CBP officers the impression that looking at you more closely would be fruitful?
I probably will record my next interaction with them, based on this experience. Never thought I'd need to though.
As for why they might think that, I really have no idea. My car was fairly clean (messy inside, but hey, we were on a long road trip) and respectable, I do have a beard that I think it had been a few days since I'd trimmed, but I'd showered recently and was dressed casually but not like a bum. The only person I was with was my mother, who I think also looks quite respectable, and, while she doesn't have any stamps in this passport book, has extensively traveled abroad in the past. Unless they found a 20-year-old traveling with a woman twice his age questionable (even with our passports, from which they could surely quickly figure out that I was her son), I can't imagine it was because of some way we looked.
I definitely wouldn't risk the hassle you'll get if they think you're recording the crossing based on that comment. They're abrupt, and they'll ask questions and say shit to try to trip you up. That's what they do. It's an easy, effective way to determine whether or not you're lying. If they thought you looked like a good, honest kid who doesn't want to get in trouble, I could easily see them chastising you for your driving length to see if you'll break down with a different truth. I'm 95% sure that's all it was and I'd let it go or write a letter to CBSA if that makes you feel better. Don't risk getting caught recording the crossing though- that's just going to make your life hell.
Even if you have a "right" to do it (I don't think you as a US Citizen has any rights beyond basic international law entering Canada), it's something you really need to consider whether it's worth exercising that ability before you do it, because the consequences will end up being a pain in the ass.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 06, 2013, 09:32:10 PMAs for why they might think that, I really have no idea. My car was fairly clean (messy inside, but hey, we were on a long road trip) and respectable, I do have a beard that I think it had been a few days since I'd trimmed, but I'd showered recently and was dressed casually but not like a bum. The only person I was with was my mother, who I think also looks quite respectable, and, while she doesn't have any stamps in this passport book, has extensively traveled abroad in the past. Unless they found a 20-year-old traveling with a woman twice his age questionable (even with our passports, from which they could surely quickly figure out that I was her son), I can't imagine it was because of some way we looked.
It sounds curiouser and curiouser--it is even more unusual for a family group to receive that kind of treatment than a person travelling alone, which is my usual scenario when crossing the border (and yes, I have a beard).
Quote from: corco on August 06, 2013, 09:43:53 PMI definitely wouldn't risk the hassle you'll get if they think you're recording the crossing based on that comment.
I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable encouraging someone to try to "bug" the immigration interview and Customs search. Even if it is not explicitly banned, it is almost impossible to know what equipment may be in use to detect covert operation of electronic devices, and being caught doing that--even if it is legal--is enough to convert a perfectly routine crossing into an experience that is memorable in all kinds of unwelcome ways.
What I would suggest instead is taking down detailed notes immediately after clearing the frontier post, while the experience is still fresh.
I don't remember whether the US attempts to ban casual use of electronic devices in the areas where port-of-entry functions are being carried out (e.g. talking on a cellphone when standing in the passport control queue), but in Britain mobile phone usage in front of the passport control desks is forbidden, with signs posted to that effect.
QuoteThey're abrupt, and they'll ask questions and say shit to try to trip you up. That's what they do. It's an easy, effective way to determine whether or not you're lying. If they thought you looked like a good, honest kid who doesn't want to get in trouble, I could easily see them chastising you for your driving length to see if you'll break down with a different truth.
I don't think it is actually all that plausible. What DTP described is essentially the first stage of a Reid interrogation--denounce the suspect to his face, putting him in the wrong and refusing to allow him to defend himself, before you move on to minimization and confession. It is very rare (and, in my experience, completely unknown) for the entry interview to
start that way. This is why others have suggested CBP was acting on intelligence; it is also why I wonder whether there was something said or done (probably inadvertently) that led the CBP officer to conclude that DTP and his mother were persons of interest.
QuoteEven if you have a "right" to do it (I don't think you as a US Citizen has any rights beyond basic international law entering Canada), it's something you really need to consider whether it's worth exercising that ability before you do it, because the consequences will end up being a pain in the ass.
His difficult interview was not while entering Canada, but rather while returning to the US.
Judging from the experiences others have had, I must be a "honorary Canadian" since it is when I return to the US that the experience is usually less than pleasant. I have always found the Canadian officials to be polite at minimum, and usually cheerful, although they have a script that they run through without fail (Alcohol? Tobacco? Goods to be consumed or left in Canada?). With the US officials the Canadian minimum is the American maximum: more often curt and abrupt than polite.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 06, 2013, 01:24:53 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 05, 2013, 08:34:28 PMThat's understandable. I'd even expect them to find that suspicious, and maybe use it as cause to ask me a few more questions.
That doesn't make it okay for him to tell me my travel plans are stupid though.
This is the kind of situation where it would be useful to have a transcript of what was actually said, just to get a more precise idea of the motivations underlying the various questions. In the absence of a more detailed understanding of the context, I would tend to interpret the characterization of your itinerary as "stupid" as an attempt to provoke you into saying something that would give them a reason for additional search. The question then becomes: what about your car or you and the people with you might have given the CBP officers the impression that looking at you more closely would be fruitful?
Well put. My first thought was also that the CBP officer was being intentionally antagonistic as a basic interrogation technique.
It sounds like everyone was being scrutinized that day though which is what lead me to believe they were acting on specific intelligence.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 06, 2013, 10:31:46 PM
I don't remember whether the US attempts to ban casual use of electronic devices in the areas where port-of-entry functions are being carried out (e.g. talking on a cellphone when standing in the passport control queue), but in Britain mobile phone usage in front of the passport control desks is forbidden, with signs posted to that effect.
The same goes for Ireland, but based on my recent visit it's utterly unenforced, unless the prohibition refers only to the telephone function of the device, or only to the period while actually dealing with agents. Certainly the vast majority of people in the immigration hall were engaged in usage of their mobile phones.
I can say with certainty in British airports I've witnessed people in immigration chatting on their phones whilst waiting to be served by passport control even though there's signs everywhere saying no phones or cameras. And regarding cameras there's often news reports that feature amateur video footage of long lines at immigration whenever there's been strikes or disruption.
I was planning on being discreet about it anyway. I have a dash mount I keep my phone in, since I use it as a GPS and it makes it easier to get to if it rings, so I figured I'd leave it in there with the screen off. There's nothing to indicate that it is recording, as it can do so in the background.
I don't know if I would try that in a secondary search or not though.
And JN, entering Canada we weren't even asked those questions you mentioned. Just the purpose of our visit, how long we'll be there, and whereabouts we're going. Under a minute.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 06, 2013, 10:31:46 PM
Reid interrogation--denounce the suspect to his face, putting him in the wrong and refusing to allow him to defend himself, before you move on to minimization and confession.
aka "let's be power-hungry assholes". I've had that happen to me, and I absolutely hate it as a form of human interaction.
starting off an inquiry with "who are you here to pick up" just makes me want to say "your question is presumptuous; I am not here to pick up anyone. also, the word you're looking for is 'whom'"... but fighting asshole with asshole would get me thrown in a jail. therefore, the Reid is an abuse of power.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 07, 2013, 12:49:25 PMstarting off an inquiry with "who are you here to pick up" just makes me want to say "your question is presumptuous; I am not here to pick up anyone. also, the word you're looking for is 'whom'"... but fighting asshole with asshole would get me thrown in a jail. therefore, the Reid is an abuse of power.
As an interrogation technique it is designed to elicit a confession, not information, and in fact it has been shown to be quite effective at squeezing
false confessions from the innocent (generally under duress so severe that they confess just to end the interrogation, either because being shouted at causes them to develop genuine doubts as to their innocence, or because they have a misplaced faith that additional investigation will show that their confessions cannot possibly be true and therefore exonerate them). But it continues in use in the US because the bedrock doctrine--however false it may be--is still that no innocent person will confess to a crime.
I blame reliance on Reid interrogation for helping overstuff US prisons and feed the prison-industrial complex. Many European countries either discourage the Reid technique or ban it outright, and still manage to have low rates of both crime and imprisonment. Correlation does not prove causality, of course, and crime in the US is demonstrably driven by other factors in addition to police interrogation technique. Even so, Reid's proven track record in eliciting false confessions from the innocent is a strong argument in favor of reducing reliance on it in favor of more effective (and arguably more efficient) investigatory procedures.
Anyway, this is mostly off-topic for this thread. For a person being subjected to a hostile interrogation, the immediate problem is to break the Reid playbook. A key rule is not to allow the suspect to maintain his innocence verbally, so I would suggest just saying, "I disclaim responsibility for any wrongdoing," talking over the officer's voice if you have to, and repeating this as a broken record, never directly answering any follow-up questions such as the obvious ones: "What wrongdoing?" "Why would we suspect you of wrongdoing today?" If the officer shouts, I suggest dropping your voice almost to a whisper, so he has to stop shouting if he wants to understand what you are saying. These responses ensure that any verbal compliance techniques the officers try will not find any purchase, and thus make it more likely that the case will be escalated to someone who is more likely to decide that the interrogation is not worth pursuing.
These are extreme responses, however, so I suggest keeping them up your sleeve until they are really needed. I wouldn't wheel them out for the situation DTP describes, frankly. Yes, it is offensive for a border officer to characterize your travel plans as "stupid," but outside the context of a line of questioning that evinces suspicion of specific criminal conduct, it is gratuitous. There is no answer that can be given to such a thing that contributes toward the goal of crossing the border with minimum hassle. It is much better to
mokusatsu it, which is what I assume DTP did.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 07, 2013, 01:24:55 PM"Why would we suspect you of wrongdoing today?"
I would definitely have a hard time not coming up with an utter-asshole response to this one. "I cannot tell you why. standard interrogation procedure involves you telling me, in fact. so, let's go, let's hear it."
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 07, 2013, 08:08:24 AMI was planning on being discreet about it anyway. I have a dash mount I keep my phone in, since I use it as a GPS and it makes it easier to get to if it rings, so I figured I'd leave it in there with the screen off. There's nothing to indicate that it is recording, as it can do so in the background.
There is an old Holocaust survivor's rule: make sure you are thinking two or three steps ahead of the people who want to do you in.
To that end, I can think of at least one scenario I would want to have covered before I attempted covert recording in the manner you outline. What if the Customs officer points to the cellphone sitting in the windshield mount and asks, "Is that recording?" If you say No, then what do you do if he says, "Hand it over, please, so that I can examine it"? If you say Yes, do you have a convincing explanation ready for why you are recording the procedure? Etc.
Right, and even if they don't know you're recording and then you get selected for secondary for entirely other reasons, there's a good chance they'll find out that you're covertly recording during the secondary inspection and what would have been just a quick lookover in your car could become something a lot more significant.
is "do not record the police" an international universal, or is it just US overreaction to who-knows-what? it seems to be an abuse of power.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 07, 2013, 04:26:57 PM
is "do not record the police" an international universal, or is it just US overreaction to who-knows-what? it seems to be an abuse of power.
Even though it is a law on the books in Illinois, it has been deemed unconstitutional. Thus, it is an abuse of power.
Quote from: Brandon on August 07, 2013, 04:55:59 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 07, 2013, 04:26:57 PM
is "do not record the police" an international universal, or is it just US overreaction to who-knows-what? it seems to be an abuse of power.
Even though it is a law on the books in Illinois, it has been deemed unconstitutional. Thus, it is an abuse of power.
But NOT when entering the country. It's very well established by the courts that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply at the border. CBP can do what they like if you're trying to enter the country. Pretty much the only right a US citizen has at the border is the right to enter. CBP cannot block entry for a US Citizen but they can make it a very painful process, no probable cause needed.
What's more obnoxious is that the the courts also ruled that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to immigration enforcement within 100 or so miles of the border, thus the immigration roadblocks on I5, I8, I15, and other highways near the border that the USBP run.
Quote from: realjd on August 07, 2013, 07:26:42 PM
What's more obnoxious is that the the courts also ruled that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to immigration enforcement within 100 or so miles of the border, thus the immigration roadblocks on I5, I8, I15, and other highways near the border that the USBP run.
explain what warp in the space-time continuum puts I-40 at Needles within 100 miles of the border.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 07, 2013, 07:44:39 PM
Quote from: realjd on August 07, 2013, 07:26:42 PM
What's more obnoxious is that the the courts also ruled that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to immigration enforcement within 100 or so miles of the border, thus the immigration roadblocks on I5, I8, I15, and other highways near the border that the USBP run.
explain what warp in the space-time continuum puts I-40 at Needles within 100 miles of the border.
Blue stripe car CBP or green stripe car USBP? What were they doing there?
Quote from: realjd on August 07, 2013, 09:33:15 PM
Blue stripe car CBP or green stripe car USBP? What were they doing there?
green. what's the difference?
they were pulling people over who were coming out of the aggie station on I-40 westbound.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 07, 2013, 09:40:33 PM
Quote from: realjd on August 07, 2013, 09:33:15 PM
Blue stripe car CBP or green stripe car USBP? What were they doing there?
green. what's the difference?
they were pulling people over who were coming out of the aggie station on I-40 westbound.
CBP is Customs and Border Protection. They're the folks you encounter entering the country at ports of entry, whether at the physical border or at the airport. USBP is the United States Border Patrol and is in charge of patrolling the border away from ports of entry. They're the ones driving the fence with Mexico, manning the inland checkpoints, and driving around the Keys. You also see USBP watching traffic at the Florida ag checkpoints.
I was asking because its not unusual to see CBP inland because they work airport immigration. But if the USBP is pulling people over that far inland, I have no explanation.
EDIT: the simple version is CBP works ports of entry. USBP works the border between ports of entry, and ICE (who I didn't mention) enforce immigration laws inland and aren't uniformed from what I understand.
Quote from: realjd on August 07, 2013, 10:16:06 PM
EDIT: the simple version is CBP works ports of entry. USBP works the border between ports of entry, and ICE (who I didn't mention) enforce immigration laws inland and aren't uniformed from what I understand.
this is all well and good, but ... Needles. if Needles is on the border, I'm Elbridge Gerry.
Quote from: realjd on August 07, 2013, 10:16:06 PMI was asking because its not unusual to see CBP inland because they work airport immigration. But if the USBP is pulling people over that far inland, I have no explanation.
I think Jake has mentioned this before, in the context of a earlier discussion about Border Patrol checkpoints. Most of these checkpoints are operated under a legal doctrine that allows suspicionless checkpoints within 100 miles of the border. In the story Jake tells, however, the Border Patrol is surveilling traffic going through a California agricultural inspection checkpoint and allowing the agricultural inspectors to develop the suspicion for them. If evidence transpires in the course of an inspection that leads a reasonable person to suspect that a given vehicle is carrying undocumented aliens, then the Border Patrol can stop and detain that vehicle, since the 100-mile limit does not apply to searches that begin with reasonable suspicion.
I'll see you that and raise you... what is the constitutionality of subjecting passenger cars to "agricultural" inspections in the first place?
On both of my encounters with the Californian Customs Agents I have simply been waved through without a word, which makes entering California the most pleasant border crossing experience I have ever had. :spin:
Quote from: Duke87 on August 08, 2013, 12:16:36 AM
On both of my encounters with the Californian Customs Agents I have simply been waved through without a word, which makes entering California the most pleasant border crossing experience I have ever had. :spin:
I'd still put that behind every other border where they, you know, don't do anything at all?
the most pleasant border crossing I experience is ... oh, say Arizona to Utah on US-89A. just as an example.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 07, 2013, 10:32:39 PM
I think Jake has mentioned this before, in the context of a earlier discussion about Border Patrol checkpoints. Most of these checkpoints are operated under a legal doctrine that allows suspicionless checkpoints within 100 miles of the border. In the story Jake tells, however, the Border Patrol is surveilling traffic going through a California agricultural inspection checkpoint and allowing the agricultural inspectors to develop the suspicion for them. If evidence transpires in the course of an inspection that leads a reasonable person to suspect that a given vehicle is carrying undocumented aliens, then the Border Patrol can stop and detain that vehicle, since the 100-mile limit does not apply to searches that begin with reasonable suspicion.
how the fuck is that legal? the aggies should be strictly looking for agricultural goods.
if an aggie spots an illegal alien snorting coke off a hooker's ass in the back of my pervert van filled with human slaves who are knifing each other for the glory of Satan... I don't think they should have any right to do anything but look me in the eye and say "no vegetables? carry on, sir."
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 08, 2013, 12:45:57 PMhow the fuck is that legal? the aggies should be strictly looking for agricultural goods.
Simple: the agricultural inspection takes place in public. If anyone can see that the van is riding low . . .
Quoteif an aggie spots an illegal alien snorting coke off a hooker's ass in the back of my pervert van filled with human slaves who are knifing each other for the glory of Satan... I don't think they should have any right to do anything but look me in the eye and say "no vegetables? carry on, sir."
I think that is how the agricultural inspectors usually handle things in their official capacity. I don't know, however, if they are allowed to act as complainants in a personal capacity using information that comes to them solely through their official duties. ("911, what's your emergency?" "I'm an agricultural inspector at Needles. Just now, a man claiming to be a sign vendor from San Diego went through, in a van with license plate number XXXXXXX. There seemed to be prostitution and illegal use of Schedule A drugs going on in the back.") I also don't know if the California agricultural inspectors have an information-sharing arrangement with the Border Patrol. I would guess not, because that would raise all kinds of difficult constitutional questions, but I couldn't guarantee that they don't.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 08, 2013, 01:13:45 PM
Simple: the agricultural inspection takes place in public. If anyone can see that the van is riding low . . .
"riding low" is probable cause now?
I got pulled over for that on I-8 a few months ago; so I grumbled and thought to myself "we're within 100 miles of the border, so anything goes".
I hope they enjoyed looking at camping equipment.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 08, 2013, 01:18:23 PM"riding low" is probable cause now?
Probable cause--I'm pretty sure not. Reasonable suspicion--I am pretty sure it is. They only need reasonable suspicion to stop you.
in general, though, doesn't "placing a border patrol vehicle more than 100 miles from the border" count as some sort of "expecting to do unconstitutional things" and therefore unconstitutional already?
what is preventing, then, the border patrol from roving around the entire US, pulling over anyone who meets whatever standard is considered "reasonable suspicion" these days? taillight out, etc.
"but officer, my taillight wasn't out."
*smash* "yeah it was."
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 08, 2013, 01:27:22 PM
in general, though, doesn't "placing a border patrol vehicle more than 100 miles from the border" count as some sort of "expecting to do unconstitutional things" and therefore unconstitutional already?
what is preventing, then, the border patrol from roving around the entire US, pulling over anyone who meets whatever standard is considered "reasonable suspicion" these days? taillight out, etc.
"but officer, my taillight wasn't out."
*smash* "yeah it was."
Between 2001 and 2008, I saw the U.S. Border Patrol working at the old Washington, D.C. Greyhound/Peter Pan terminal, on First Street, N.E. apparently looking for undocumented persons (and arresting some) as they got off the bus.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 08, 2013, 01:27:22 PMin general, though, doesn't "placing a border patrol vehicle more than 100 miles from the border" count as some sort of "expecting to do unconstitutional things" and therefore unconstitutional already?
Not if they act on reasonable suspicion only outside the context of suspicionless checkpoints, which are allowed only within 100 miles of the border. Aside from the resource implications (see below), another issue is the possibility of jurisdictional conflict with other federal agencies responsible for enforcing immigration laws.
Quotewhat is preventing, then, the border patrol from roving around the entire US, pulling over anyone who meets whatever standard is considered "reasonable suspicion" these days? taillight out, etc.
Productivity: since they don't have a general policing function, they need to operate in areas and on routes that have a high concentration of illegal border-crossers. That is generally close to the border, and I suspect I-40 at Needles is a special case since, despite its distance from the border, it is favored by people smugglers to the degree necessary to justify the considerable resource cost of having Border Patrol officers surveil the agricultural inspection checkpoint.
I certainly wouldn't expect to see the Border Patrol operating on, say, US 54 in Kansas, notwithstanding the handful of recorded incidents where trucks of various descriptions have gotten into serious, multi-fatality accidents and are later found (by the Highway Patrol) to have been carrying undocumented aliens.
It should be noted that there are laws in some states requiring consent of all parties present to be recorded (this is why many companies state "your call may be recorded for quality control purposes"–if you stay on the line, that comprises consent). Recording the customs agents adjoining a state with such a law may well be illegal on those grounds.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 08, 2013, 01:13:45 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 08, 2013, 12:45:57 PMhow the fuck is that legal? the aggies should be
if an aggie spots an illegal alien snorting coke off a hooker's ass in the back of my pervert van filled with human slaves who are knifing each other for the glory of Satan... I don't think they should have any right to do anything but look me in the eye and say "no vegetables? carry on, sir."
"911, what's your emergency?" "I'm an agricultural inspector at Needles. Just now, a man claiming to be a sign vendor from San Diego went through, in a van with license plate number XXXXXXX. There seemed to be prostitution and illegal use of Schedule A drugs going on in the back."
"The knifing for the glory of Satan, however, is protected by the 1st Amendment."
Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 08, 2013, 02:37:59 PM
Between 2001 and 2008, I saw the U.S. Border Patrol working at the old Washington, D.C. Greyhound/Peter Pan terminal, on First Street, N.E. apparently looking for undocumented persons (and arresting some) as they got off the bus.
I believe DC is within 100 miles of a port, which is also part of the ruled exemption.
Needles, on the other hand, is maybe within 100 miles of East Ass and not much else. (I checked - Vegas is 110 miles away.)
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 08, 2013, 03:14:22 PM
Not if they act on reasonable suspicion only outside the context of suspicionless checkpoints, which are allowed only within 100 miles of the border. Aside from the resource implications (see below), another issue is the possibility of jurisdictional conflict with other federal agencies responsible for enforcing immigration laws.
while what you are saying is logically correct, it still feels wrong, in an even greater sense than "within 100 miles is a free-for-all". at least they got the Supreme Court to sign off on the 100 mile thing; here, they're just operating on a technicality.
also, fuck the aggies for being complicit with this. I suppose there is honor among low-level freedom-restricting functionaries.
QuoteProductivity: since they don't have a general policing function, they need to operate in areas and on routes that have a high concentration of illegal border-crossers. That is generally close to the border, and I suspect I-40 at Needles is a special case since, despite its distance from the border, it is favored by people smugglers to the degree necessary to justify the considerable resource cost of having Border Patrol officers surveil the agricultural inspection checkpoint.
also, I don't think the resource cost is all that high. the aggies are doing most of the work for them. "hey buddy, got one coming your way. smells of raw meat and Mexicans. have fun, old boy!"
^^ Given that the agricultural checkpoints started life as Okie checkpoints, I'm not too surprised.
For what its worth, I heard a second-hand observation of a USBP SUV parked in a movie theater parking lot in Ft. Collins. My first guess would be they are relocating vehicles from the Mexican to the Canadian border or vise-versa, but the movie theater isn't very close to the most likely thoroughfare (I-25). Besides, why would their vehicle be parked in a movie theater parking lot hundreds of miles from any border in the first place?
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 08, 2013, 06:26:08 PM
I believe DC is within 100 miles of a port, which is also part of the ruled exemption.
Do you mean airport? Anyone arriving by air from outside the U.S. is already having to pass through U.S. Immigration and Customs.
Or seaport? Aside from cruise ships (some of which call at ports in Baltimore and along the Delaware River), I don't think there is much person transport by sea within 100 miles of the District of Columbia.
I alas do not remember the details, but I think the rationale is to have a secondary net to catch illegal boat landings.
The coasts count as the border for the context of the constitution free zone.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 08, 2013, 12:45:17 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on August 08, 2013, 12:16:36 AM
On both of my encounters with the Californian Customs Agents I have simply been waved through without a word, which makes entering California the most pleasant border crossing experience I have ever had. :spin:
I'd still put that behind every other border where they, you know, don't do anything at all?
the most pleasant border crossing I experience is ... oh, say Arizona to Utah on US-89A. just as an example.
My comment was a dig at the stereotype that California acts like it's its own country. Your example is different because no such stereotype exists of Arizona or Utah, and thus you can't joke that crossing that state line is crossing an international border.
Texas.
QuoteUtah
Definitely has a reputation as being its own country- you realize Utah wanted to secede for a long time- that's part of why they ended up giving a big chunk of Utah Territory's original borders to Nevada (http://www.tahoenuggets.com/Websites/tahoenuggets/images/Nugget__239_Disputed_Border_Map.jpg) and why it became a state way later than all the surrounding states but Arizona
State of Deseret, anyone?
Yeah, Utah's pre-statehood history is pretty fascinating (here's a decent primer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_War) and not really talked about but the US government basically forcefully occupied Utah for several years before the Civil War forced them to divert resources. I'd say it's one of the states with the greatest claims to "is its own country"- even today it's culturally very different from the rest of the US (at least as far as places populated mostly by white people go). When you're in Utah (especially along the Wasatch Front), you know you're in Utah!
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 09, 2013, 12:32:32 AM
State of Deseret, anyone?
I recall seeing at a bookstore in Salt Lake City a book about the "Deseret Republic" dreams of some of the Mormon settlers. The boundaries didn't even include all of present-day Utah, but they did reach southwestward all the way to San Diego.
Of course, for that "whole other country" feeling, Utah has nothing on Hawaii, which has a substantial independence movement, its own second official language, reminders of its not-so-distant past as an independent monarchy (including Interstate H-1, named for two of the last reigning monarchs, Queen Lilioukalani and King Lunalilo), as well as serious agricultural inspections (most intrusively regulating importation of dogs, cats, and other critters, to keep the islands rabies- and snake-free).
I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one. offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany). it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.
Quote from: NE2 on August 08, 2013, 10:43:58 PM
Texas.
Since when did Texas stop people at its borders and inquire about agricultural goods or try to keep Okies out? That's all California. Texas, as much as it was its own country, and still feels a bit like it to some extent, gasp, actually follows the MUTCD of all things.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 09, 2013, 10:36:36 AM
I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one. offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany). it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.
How about the Vatican City? It's just something you see as a Roman tourist.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 09, 2013, 10:36:36 AM
I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one. offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany). it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.
Make Canada non-metric again and most of it is pretty close to just feeling like the USA
Quote from: corco on August 09, 2013, 07:12:06 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 09, 2013, 10:36:36 AM
I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one. offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany). it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.
Make Canada non-metric again and most of it is pretty close to just feeling like the USA
How do you tell a Canadian apart from an American? Tell them there's no difference and see how they react. :sombrero:
Quote from: corco on August 09, 2013, 07:12:06 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 09, 2013, 10:36:36 AM
I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one. offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany). it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.
Make Canada non-metric again and most of it is pretty close to just feeling like the USA
Except Quebec of course.
Quote from: vdeane on August 09, 2013, 09:37:01 PM
Quote from: corco on August 09, 2013, 07:12:06 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 09, 2013, 10:36:36 AM
I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one. offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany). it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.
Make Canada non-metric again and most of it is pretty close to just feeling like the USA
Except Quebec of course.
Of course- hence "most of it"- though probably Newfoundland and maybe some of the Maritimes aren't either. Never been there. Alberta and BC (and I suspect SK and MB and most of ON) though? May as well be America.
Ontario is a lot like the US although it's different enough to feel just a little off. I describe it as an odd parallel universe America.
Quote from: vdeane on August 09, 2013, 09:37:01 PM
Quote from: corco on August 09, 2013, 07:12:06 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 09, 2013, 10:36:36 AM
I wonder what the opposite of this is: which country feels least like its own independent country, but instead an extension of a neighboring one. offhand I would say Luxembourg, but I have barely been there (just once to clinch it, buy cheap gas, and return to Germany). it felt like an extension of either Germany or Belgium.
Make Canada non-metric again and most of it is pretty close to just feeling like the USA
Except Quebec of course.
Bienvenue en Louisiane, non?
I crossed the border at the Peace Bridge yesterday. There was a long lineup to get across, and some of the interviews in the line ahead of me were taking upwards of five minutes per car. For me, he took my passport, asked me where I was going, "Cleveland and Cincinnati, to go and see baseball", how long I was going to stay "I'll be back on Sunday" and if I had anything to declare, firearms, food, anything like that, for which "I dont". I was then told to have a nice day and sent on my way.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on August 10, 2013, 08:34:51 AM
I crossed the border at the Peace Bridge yesterday. There was a long lineup to get across, and some of the interviews in the line ahead of me were taking upwards of five minutes per car. For me, he took my passport, asked me where I was going, "Cleveland and Cincinnati, to go and see baseball", how long I was going to stay "I'll be back on Sunday" and if I had anything to declare, firearms, food, anything like that, for which "I dont". I was then told to have a nice day and sent on my way.
I certainly hope that he also returned your passport to you when he was done with it!
:-o
:-P
OTOH, how will you be treated by the Canadian customs guys on your return???
:hmmm:
Mike
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on August 10, 2013, 08:34:51 AM
.........For me, he took my passport, asked me where I was going, "Cleveland and Cincinnati, to go and see baseball", how long I was going to stay "I'll be back on Sunday" and if I had anything to declare, firearms, food, anything like that, for which "I dont". I was then told to have a nice day and sent on my way.
We usually go down to Boston for a ballgame at least once a year and come to think of it.........these encounters with CBP at Calais or Houlton are usually the friendliest. We just tell them we're going to a game......there's some smalltalk about the SOX....... then we're on our way.
Perhaps if you're an American......just tell CBSA you're coming to Canada to see a Hockey game! :)
Quote from: Brandon on August 10, 2013, 12:02:30 AM
Quote from: vdeane on August 09, 2013, 09:37:01 PM
Quote from: corco on August 09, 2013, 07:12:06 PM
Make Canada non-metric again and most of it is pretty close to just feeling like the USA
Except Quebec of course.
Bienvenue en Louisiane, non?
Louisiana's French heritage is mostly just for show at this point. Unlike in Quebec, they do not still speak the language, or have a significant part of the culture. Realistically it's another southern state more than anything else.
Nova Scotia bears more resemblance to Louisiana than Québec does. In Québec, French is actually the major language.
Quote from: ghYHZ on August 11, 2013, 06:43:38 AM
Perhaps if you're an American......just tell CBSA you're coming to Canada to see a Hockey game! :)
Used the "hockey card show" routine before. Had no problems with that, especially when the big Toronto Expo Card Show is happening.
Heck, even used the "Going to McDonald's for Hockey Cards" back when they still had them. No problems with that either.
Quote from: Duke87 on August 11, 2013, 12:06:19 PM
Quote from: Brandon on August 10, 2013, 12:02:30 AM
Quote from: vdeane on August 09, 2013, 09:37:01 PM
Quote from: corco on August 09, 2013, 07:12:06 PM
Make Canada non-metric again and most of it is pretty close to just feeling like the USA
Except Quebec of course.
Bienvenue en Louisiane, non?
Louisiana's French heritage is mostly just for show at this point. Unlike in Quebec, they do not still speak the language, or have a significant part of the culture. Realistically it's another southern state more than anything else.
Maybe for folk in North and Central Louisiana....but try telling that to a Cajun down here in Acadiana, and you'll barely escape with your head. There's still plenty of Cajun French to be found down here, though it is fading a bit due to demographics.
Just got back from motorcycle trip. I crossed in ND on ND highway 28/Saskatchewan 8 between Sherwood, ND and Elmore, SK. No issues. Coming back to US by way of the International Peace Park I some how missed the entrance to the park. I told the U. S. Customs guy and he said to just turn around the customs building, go back to the park then cross after I finished the park. Which I did and entered the US after camping in the park. Good place to camp. No issues.
One thing the Canadian asked was if I had any weapons then mentioned guns or knives. I focused on the weapons and guns part with a reply of no as I did not have any guns. After riding off I recalled the conversation and the knives part. Yes I did have a couple of knives, multi tool, axe, and a hammer. I was camping. Weapons is sort of loose. What is the limit on knives? I wouldn't really call my knives weapons, just tools, but I have country roots and live in Texas. I guess a toothpick could be a called a weapon by a city guy. I'd hate to say no to knives then be searched and they see them. Could be a problem I don't want.
Quote from: leroys73 on August 14, 2013, 07:48:03 AMWhat is the limit on knives? I wouldn't really call my knives weapons, just tools, but I have country roots and live in Texas. I guess a toothpick could be a called a weapon by a city guy. I'd hate to say no to knives then be searched and they see them. Could be a problem I don't want.
I am a city slicker and was advised years ago when I was still living in Britain, by a friend who was then acting as a magistrate, that the Swiss army knife which I carried in my pocket all day could easily attract a six-month prison sentence. Apparently the blade was just over the 3" limit at which an ordinary knife becomes considered an offensive weapon.
Per Wikipedia, it seems there is no blade length limit in Canada, the intent being to ban fighting knives such as switchblades, flick knives, and gravity knives:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knife_legislation#Canada
I always declare my Leatherman tool, which has various poky and proddy appendages, including a blade about 2 1/2" long.
general reaction is indifference, with the occasional "take it out and leave it on the seat/give it to me for the duration of this interrogation".
coming back from Alaska into Canada, I had the following conversation.
"do you have any weapons?"
"I have a Leatherman tool, with a small knife on it."
"we mean weapons."
alas, no, no Gatling gun today. perhaps next time.
I once declared my ski poles during a secondary before the US officer went to inspect my car, after he asked if I had any weapons or something that could hurt him. Indifference ensued.
I would declare any knives just to stay on the safe side.
Funny. I've never declared the Leatherman tool or the Swiss Army Knife I keep in the car. Nor the tire iron for that matter (which, IMHO, is a far more dangerous weapon than any small knife). They never ask about weapons, usually just firearms, tobacco, and alcohol. That, and the harassment about driving from Illinois to Sarnia in a day and back by the bimbette at US customs.
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on August 14, 2013, 11:09:23 AM
after he asked if I had any weapons or something that could hurt him.
"gosh, a lot of things can hurt you, if you're insufficiently careful - or excessively adventurous. try not to have the car roll over your foot, don't bash yourself in the head repeatedly with my camera, and please swallow less than five dollars in loose change."
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on August 14, 2013, 11:09:23 AM
he asked if I had any weapons or something that could hurt him.
Yeah, I'm driving this thing called a car...
Heck, my fingernails can be pretty damaging weapons, if I decided to use them as such.
:spin:
Ditto my belt and socks/keys and coins.
:-P
Mike
I once declared a baseball bat entering Canada when asked if I had any weapons. The ensuing exchange was as follows:
"Hmm... yeah, that's kind of iffy. Do you play baseball?"
"Yes"
"Do you intend to use it in Canada?"
"No, I just keep it in my car"
"Okay"
Of course, I didn't quite tell the whole truth in this conversation. I do play softball (which is mostly the same as baseball), but the bat I had in my car was unrelated to that - indeed it was an old wooden tee ball bat, not useful to an adult for playing any sport. It was there specifically with the idea in mind that I might have it to use as an implement of self defense... and it did not occur to me until I got to the border that time that there might be any problem with that.
When I got home a few days later I promptly removed the bat from my car, lest it become an issue on future border crossings.
I just answer no to any of the standard "are you dangerous" questions. I've never been frisked to the point that they would find any small quasiweaponry on my person, and don't see that they ever would.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 14, 2013, 10:05:36 AM
Quote from: leroys73 on August 14, 2013, 07:48:03 AMWhat is the limit on knives? I wouldn't really call my knives weapons, just tools, but I have country roots and live in Texas. I guess a toothpick could be a called a weapon by a city guy. I'd hate to say no to knives then be searched and they see them. Could be a problem I don't want.
I am a city slicker and was advised years ago when I was still living in Britain, by a friend who was then acting as a magistrate, that the Swiss army knife which I carried in my pocket all day could easily attract a six-month prison sentence. Apparently the blade was just over the 3" limit at which an ordinary knife becomes considered an offensive weapon.
Per Wikipedia, it seems there is no blade length limit in Canada, the intent being to ban fighting knives such as switchblades, flick knives, and gravity knives:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knife_legislation#Canada
Thanks. I would call the switchblades, flick knives, and such more like weapons. So I guess I was OK. It is too late now. As one of the members said a tire iron sure could hurt someone. The car can be nasty when misused.
This doesn't quite fit the topic, since my encounter with U.S. Customs was at a Canadian airport rather than a land border crossing, but let me unload here.
My experience with U.S. Customs earlier this week at the Toronto airport, where U.S.-bound passengers clear customs before boarding their flights, was really stressful even though I breezed through Customs once I was allowed to get in front of the agent. The problem was that Customs was understaffed for the morning rush, so they were not letting people even leave the waiting area to see an agent until just before their flights were scheduled to depart. Getting to the Toronto airport really early (after getting off my red-eye from Edmonton before 6am), about four hours before my connecting flight home, did me absolutely no good. Then after getting in line for me and my carry-ons and checked bag to get past a U.S. Customs agent (nobody looked through the bags), I had to rush to get my checked bag to the bag drop to go onto my plane, get me and my carry-ons screened by Canada's equivalent to the TSA (no abnormal delays there), then run to my gate several minutes after my flight was scheduled to leave and the "last call" announcements for that flight were booming through the terminal. The flight was held for me and a few other passengers also affected by U.S. customs delays, so neither I nor my checked bag missed the flight. Still a lot of aggravation with my (later than) last-minute arrival at the gate, especially since when I fly (which isn't often) I normally get to my gate early and if possible grab a meal before boarding my flight.
I don't know how common this is, but it sounds like this wasn't the first time, and that air carriers are unhappy with how U.S. Customs delays screw up their flight schedules out of Toronto.
EDIT: One important exception I couldn't use -- Global Entry/NEXUS travelers were allowed to go to the head of the line, without waiting for their flight departure time to be called. That was repeatedly announced in the waiting area where I was stuck. I took that as rather heavy-handed pressure to pay money, etc. to get trusted traveler status for future trips (I rarely enter the U.S. by air, and don't do enough land crossings to justify the cost and hassle).
My entry into Canada, at the Montreal airport, was totally uneventful and stress-free. My checked bag there went around the Customs Canada checkpoint directly to baggage claim in a post-Customs area, though I assume that Customs Canada did whatever checking it needed to do (apparently none other than X-ray and other non-intrusive screening) in my absence while I and my carry-ons were in a short line for a customs agent.
Quote from: oscar on August 23, 2014, 09:55:15 PMwhen I fly (which isn't often)
says the man who has clinched nearly every jurisdiction in North America that is not reachable by car ...
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 03, 2013, 12:53:13 PMQuébec has a big hydroponic tomato industry. During the winter, we now have tomatoes worth eating thanks to this. Once, on an early summer day in Montréal, we stopped at a farmers' market and sampled perfect, full-ripe tomatoes as good as any you would grow yourself and pick here in August. They were plentiful and cheap, too. We agonized for a full twenty minutes, poring over regulations online before giving up and deciding to wait two more months to taste that again. We'd been specifically asked about tomatoes in the past, and if you remember how the tomato blight swept through plant distribution channels three or so years ago, you get why. Their disease transmitability puts them near the top of the agricultural no-no list, and we didn't want ourselves on any list at all.
I forgot about this thread, and wouldn't you know it, just after I posted this we went back to the same market in Montréal making sure to buy only approved, sealed, pasteurized products that could pose no threat at the border. Which is why I was utterly dumbfounded when the agent made me get out of the car and walk the sealed package of the most incredible lamb sausage I ever had over to a trash can and discard it. Apparently some lingering mad cow worries that ironically don't apply to beef (I smell a protectionist policy on behalf of the US lamb industry).
We just offed a lamb today, maybe we can make you some of that sausage. Got a recipe?
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on September 04, 2014, 11:53:51 PM
We just offed a lamb today, maybe we can make you some of that sausage. Got a recipe?
I'm jealous and flattered. If I had that recipe, I'd have made it by now myself!
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on September 04, 2014, 11:53:51 PM
We just offed a lamb today, maybe we can make you some of that sausage. Got a recipe?
Ingredients:
250lb lamb
55lb Scotch Bonnet pepper (substitute habanero to taste)
3lb peppercorns, crushed
5lb lamb blood (substitute virgin blood to taste)
Quote from: Alps on September 05, 2014, 05:43:24 PM
Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on September 04, 2014, 11:53:51 PM
We just offed a lamb today, maybe we can make you some of that sausage. Got a recipe?
Ingredients:
250lb lamb
55lb Scotch Bonnet pepper (substitute habanero to taste)
3lb peppercorns, crushed
5lb lamb blood (substitute virgin blood to taste)
You forgot the
love. And the nitrite.