I still am routing my trips around the US. If at all possible I do not go through US airports. The laptop thing is only the latest example of the intrusive Barney Fife on steroids stupidity that is the DHS and TSA.

I have a trip to China coming up next year and I have told the travel agency they can send me through Vancouver, Edmonton, or Toronto but under no circumstance to route me via Seattle, SF or LAX.

Does anybody here actually KNOW anybody who has had their laptop seized by TSA?

I've never seen them do it, nor have I ever had it done to me (and I travel a lot). The article makes it seem like the policy is to seize laptops rather than a policy that ALLOWS the seizure of laptops (big difference). I'm not saying that I agree with the policy, but it seems many are jumping to the conclusion that their laptop will be seized by TSA at a US airport. That is clearly not the case.

Just because it hasn't happened to you yet doesn't mean it won't, and you may very well whistle a different tune if and when it does.

I can imagine what a gigantic hassle this would be and how I would feel if some snoop fingered me for the laptop anal probe.

I don't blame people for avoiding U.S. airports, though it makes me concerned for my job if enough people start treating the U.S. like it's a diseased country.

Are you traveling internationally? It's the customs and immigration folks who might take it away when you come back into the USA. I think geoduck is smart avoiding the USA for international travel.

That said, I've traveled to China and Japan with a laptop and have never had them look at it twice. Might be different for other countries however. oh and my name is not Nabila Mango.

http://tinyurl.com/yvp3on - Washington Times article on the topic. For more search "laptop seizures at u.s. airports"

Quote

ctopher wrote:
Are you traveling internationally? It's the customs and immigration folks who might take it away when you come back into the USA. I think geoduck is smart avoiding the USA for international travel.

That said, I've traveled to China and Japan with a laptop and have never had them look at it twice. Might be different for other countries however. oh and my name is not Nabila Mango.

http://tinyurl.com/yvp3on - Washington Times article on the topic. For more search "laptop seizures at u.s. airports"

I travel almost exclusively internationally. Europe, Asia, South America, Middle East, Africa (occasionally). Nobody has given my computer a look at all.

I would be willing to bet that, compared to the sheer number of travelers per day/week/month/year, the number of instances where a computer has been confiscated is statistically insignificant.

It is the DHS that can seize you laptop at the border upon re-entry to the USA. Not the TSA.

MJ

TSA is part of DHS.

DHS is:

U.S. Customs Service ( Treasury)
U.S. Coast Guard (Transportation)
U.S. Secret Service (Treasury)
Immigration and Naturalization Service (Justice)
United States Federal Protective Service (ICE)
Transportation Security Administration (Transportation)
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (Treasury)
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (Agriculture)
Office for Domestic Preparedness (Justice)
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Strategic National Stockpile and the National Disaster Medical System (HHS)
Nuclear Incident Response Team (Energy)
Domestic Emergency Support Teams (Justice)
National Domestic Preparedness Office (FBI)
CBRN Countermeasures Programs (Energy)
Environmental Measurements Laboratory (Energy)
National BW Defense Analysis Center (Defense)
Plum Island Animal Disease Center (Agriculture)
Federal Computer Incident Response Center (GSA)
National Communications System (Defense)
National Infrastructure Protection Center (FBI)
Energy Security and Assurance Program (Energy)

Don't misunderstand me. I'm not agreeing with the policy. I am just saying that the probabilities of being stopped and having your electronic devices taken is very low.

Low chances or not, I am bothered by a policy that ALLOWS the seizure of a property without probable cause of illegal activity. The requirement for probable cause removes the possibility of personal whim, bias or bad intentions "cause he didn't get laid last nite" kind of reasons. In other words, under the current policy, they CAN use racial profiling, and don't need to admit it.

If this bill passes, there is a renewed requirement for probable cause - they MUST suspect you of illegal activity as a result of probable cause that can stand up in court. That is a huge protection for travelers, as a vast majority of folks do not exhibit behavior that shows probable cause that they are doing anything illegal. This restores court oversight over TSA activities.

That is a good thing!!

As I said, I am not supporting the policy. I agree that there needs to be probable cause rather than profiling or whim. But I am not going to alter my travel plans just because of the current policy.

With around 800 million passengers carried into, inside and out of the US in a year, the chances are probably less than being struck by lightning (if it were the same, then over 2800 laptops and other such items would have been confiscated).

The point is NOT how rarely (or not) the DHS seizes notebooks. It's the idea that they can do this AT ALL. You guys are missing the big picture.

Let's review: there's a POSSIBILITY (particularly if you've been to/from the middle east lately) that DHS will STEAL, COPY and ERASE your notebook and its contents, taking months to return it to you (if ever) and arresting you if they find ANYTHING of questionable legality on there (songs, pr0n, pictures of your children if not fully dressed, etc).

NOW THEN -- does that sound like a democracy, innocent until proven guilty, or land of the free TO YOU???

Sounds like the kind of KGB Police State that Vladmir Putin can only DREAM of to ME ...

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
The point is NOT how rarely (or not) the DHS seizes notebooks. It's the idea that they can do this AT ALL. You guys are missing the big picture.

Let's review: there's a POSSIBILITY (particularly if you've been to/from the middle east lately) that DHS will STEAL, COPY and ERASE your notebook and its contents, taking months to return it to you (if ever) and arresting you if they find ANYTHING of questionable legality on there (songs, pr0n, pictures of your children if not fully dressed, etc).

NOW THEN -- does that sound like a democracy, innocent until proven guilty, or land of the free TO YOU???

Sounds like the kind of KGB Police State that Vladmir Putin can only DREAM of to ME ...

I love melodrama. First, this pertains to people who are outside the United States seeking entry into its sovereign borders. Not people who are already inside the United States. Even if you are at the International Terminal of an Airport in the U.S. is legally NOT the same thing as being on the other side of the terminal, outside the security zone. Second, the proposed law only codifies in LAW the idea that there must be reasonable suspicion of illegal activity in order for a seizure to take place. This is already POLICY of DHS. I have a news flash for all of you paranoids out there: These DHS personnel have no desire to randomly search your electronics. As every time they do, they are saddled with a mountain of paperwork to include reports justifying the seizure, property receipts for every item seized, and submission paperwork for the analysis requested. On top of that, government computer work on the DHS side of the house is a far cry from what Hollywood and TV portray. Forensic computer analysis is slow, arduous work and lab resources, FRED terminals, and forensic analysts are in short supply. Your kick-butt illegal .mp3 collection isn't THAT big of a deal. Your kiddie-porn may be and if youare trafficking in THAT, then I have ZERO sympathy. Third, the United States of America is NOT a democracy. It never has been. it was designed, from the beginning, as a representative republic. Finally, Putin's KGB police state wouldn't limit this to people entering Russia...ALL of its citizens, anywhere, at any time would be subject to such intrusions.