Sci-Fi Author Peter Watts Beaten, Charged During Border Crossing

JoeGee writes "On December 8th, Canadian sci-fi author Peter Watts, author of the Rifters trilogy and Blindsight, was crossing the US/Canadian border at Port Huron, Michigan when he was involved in an altercation with US Border Patrol agents. According to Watts, he was beaten, left half-naked in a cold cell, and finally dumped on the Canadian side of the border with no coat. A legal consultant from the Electronic Frontier Foundation was successful in helping a civil rights lawyer in Michigan free Watts. Watts faces US charges of assaulting a federal officer. Based on the accounts, one can assume Watts did so by hitting the officer's hand with his face. If convicted, Watts faces two years in a US Federal prison."

Comments

Wow,

[Ethanol-fueled]

They should give the border patrol the Nobel Peace Prize for keeping America safe.

Re:Wow,

[Anonymous Coward]

They should give the border patrol the Nobel Peace Prize for keeping America safe.

This probably is a horrible abuse of power... but you never know with these things.

To quote Babylon 5:

"Truth is a three-edged sword. One side is your truth, the other side is their truth, and the third side is the truth."

I'd like more information.

Re:Wow,

[Anonymous Coward]

To quote Babylon 5:

"Truth is a three-edged sword. One side is your truth, the other side is their truth, and the third side is the truth."

I'd like more information.

As a Canadian living in America for the past 10 years, and who would have gone home had the economy not imploded last year, allow me to quote Babylon 5:

"No more! No more of you! No more Nightwatch, no more hostages, no more lies. Not on my station, not on my watch. No more! No more."

-- Sheridan in Babylon 5:"Ceremonies of Light and Dark"

I love my adopted country, but since my name isn't John Sheridan, I'm tired of it and ready to just walk away and leave it to the Nightwatch.

Re:Wow,

[easyTree]

In my experience, "assaulting an officer" means "being assaulted by an officer".

Re:Wow,

[digitalunity]

Exactly. Or more accurately, assaulting an officer means trying to defend yourself from aggressive police.

I read a story about a homeless mean getting beat by cops for resisting arrest. The only charge? Resisting arrest of course. They had no reason to harass him in the first place, other than to give him a hard time for being homeless on public property.

Re:Wow,

[dryeo]

You do realize that America has over 2 million of its people in jail, with a good proportion in there for political reasons.
Like all successful police states these people aren't busted for expressing anti-Government views. Instead laws are passed taking away fundamental rights (remember your bill of rights is not an exhaustive list and IIRC amendment #9 basically states this) then the undesirables are targeted.
The favourite rights to be removed are things like the right to grow plants and have the products in your possession.
While this is bad enough, it's your country and if the citizens like having a police state so they can feel safe that is your right.
What really pisses me off about America is the way you treat foreign political activists. If they're lucky they get extradited and spend years in the inhuman American jails perhaps being raped. If they're not lucky they get tortured and/or killed.
Also you push other countries around to remove the same rights from their citizens. See drug laws and the most recent thing being IP laws with ACTA being pushed by Americans to take away my right to play the DVD I purchased on my computer and my right to make personal copies of stuff and lend stuff to you to make personal copies.
Shit, when the leader of a political party that I voted for is being threatened with the death penalty on a trumped up charge of money laundrying (making him a king pin) and a charge of selling seeds, a law that has only been enforced against political activists, there is something wrong. One article, http://peacesecurity.suite101.com/article.cfm/marc_emery_and_the_bc3 google Marc Emery for many more.
Of course like all police states if you are a respectable citizen you don't have much to worry about. Just keep your nose clean and you won't have your life ruined by being accused of diddling children.

Re:Wow,

[Narpak]

Or more accurately, assaulting an officer means trying to defend yourself from aggressive police.

I can't speak about this particular case, but there is always in regards to hierarchical organizations, especially military and law-enforcement, people draw into its ranks seeking authority and respect. To such a mentality any slight against their authority is in itself a crime worthy of physical punishment. And anyone from within their own ranks that dare speak up are themselves criminals and traitors; often such whistle-blowers are effectively committing career-suicide.

Unfortunately proving that law enforcers used excessive force is almost practically impossible, unless the incident were clearly recorded, or the victim is an obvious cripple of such a nature and appearance that it instils immediate feelings of sympathy in most people (read: media). For the rest of the citizenry the best they can hope for is to have the charges dropped. Peter Watts will, in my opinion, probably find himself banned from visiting the US for quite some time to come; regardless of how badly he might have been mistreated.

Re:Wow,

[Grishnakh]

Also you push other countries around to remove the same rights from their citizens. See drug laws and the most recent thing being IP laws with ACTA being pushed by Americans to take away my right to play the DVD I purchased on my computer and my right to make personal copies of stuff and lend stuff to you to make personal copies.

I'm as much against the stupid War on Some Drugs, ACTA, ridiculous IP laws, etc. as the next Slashdotter, but as an American, I think you citizens of other countries need to take responsibility for your own governments' actions and stop blaming ours. Just because our crappy government is asking yours to pass these stupid laws doesn't mean you have to; you are all sovereign nations, and you can pass or not pass any laws you choose. Just as our crappy government is our fault and our responsibility (we're the citizens and the voters), your crappy governments are your own fault and responsibility. If you don't like your government passing these crappy America-backed laws, then fix your government! Elect new officials!

There are some countries out there with enough balls to tell our government to shove it when they try to convince them to pass certain laws, such as Netherlands where pot is mostly legal, or China where they carry out all kinds of human rights abuses that our government complains about (though that certainly seems like the pot calling the kettle black). Maybe the rest of you guys can learn from these countries.

Honestly, if I make a choice and do something stupid, it's my own fault. If Bob tells me I should do something stupid, and I do it, whose fault is that? It's not Bob's fault primarily, it's mine for being stupid enough to listen to him. People (and governments by extension) are responsible for their own actions. You can't go around blaming others for your own choices, even if they advised you.

Re:Wow,

[dryeo]

I guess I just don't understand the reference to Nightwatch. I doubt that anyone thinks the American border guards are vampires as in the movie, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_Watch_(2004_film).
Anyways my apologies if I've misunderstood you. It seems to get harder and harder to communicate with Americans as their fork of English moves further away from English.

Re:Wow,

[somersault]

My friend's uncle and his family were trying to cross the border from Canada to the US for a day trip, when the uncle was taken into a side room for something like 8 hours. The fuckers wouldn't even give him a drink of water or let his family know what was going on. I can't remember the details of the story now, but I'm pretty sure he said they didn't even any questions, just kept staring at him and refusing to respond to his own questions. They eventually released him, but didn't let anyone across the border. It's disgraceful that they can get away with treating people like that. Maybe they're just hoping that people will get violent so that they have an excuse to beat on them?

The family name is Wlodarczyk, it's Polish. I think Polish names are pretty common in Canada though so I'm not sure if it had anything to do with it. Though in fact the local council here in Aberdeen (UK) tried to deport my friend to Poland even though he was born here! So he's really paranoid about his name and thinks it had something to do with how his uncle was treated.

Re:Wow,

[ViViDboarder]

While I appreciate your effort to make good discussion please spare us the babble and provide some facts please.

What exactly would you consider being in jail for "political reasons"? By the sounds of it you're considering laws (read legal reasons) that you disagree with invalid and therefore political.

Laws passed that "take away rights" are taken at the request of the public, where a majority exists that agrees. This is usually due to one's "right" infringing on another's. For example. I have the right to free speech, but my neighbor also has the right to live without me blaring derogatory remarks through his window all day. So it's illegal. What you mean by "fundamental" is unclear to me.

Your statement about the "police state" that I live in leads me to believe you see anarchy as a better solution. The USA is no more so than any other government and if you are opposed to all those then I challenge you to show me a functioning, no, successful Anarchy that has been able to accomplish the things that our current world economy has in the fields of collaborative research and scientific advancement. If the governments of our world were not paying the way for research who would? Don't you dare say the people because they barely pay taxes for it when required by them. There is a reason our world has evolved to be the way it is.

Seeing drug laws. Seeing IP laws. Not all pushed by "Americans". Nothing about IP is fundamentally American even. It's a capitalist necessity. The USA was not the first capitalist nation. Although I do not agree with the ACTA or most IP law, I think without a decent source your argument is not valid.

Charges of selling seeds where legit... And in YOUR country too. In fact the raid, according to the article, was only at the REQUEST of the US DEA. It's definitely illegal in the USA and our officials have every right to go after him considering he's probably responsible for many seeds in America. If your government didn't agree they should have left him alone. Congrats. You're a small minority of people who don't have the pull to get things done. Personally, I wish this whole war on MJ would end. I see it more as a waste of tax money, but what do I know.

Re:Wow,

[Shakrai]

It's from a sci-fi series called Babylon 5. One of the sub-plots involves the ambitious Vice President of the Earth Alliance assassinating the President so he can advance his own agenda. That agenda includes the suppression of civil liberties and extreme xenophobia towards non-Earth influences/culture. He sets up an organization called the Ministry of Peace which runs another organization called the Night Watch. Night Watch is primarily made up of regular citizens whom are encouraged to inform on their neighbors if they notice any "subversive" activities.

It's a great show if you are into the genre. Worth checking out just for that storyline alone. It shows just how many people are willing to be co-opted into such a system but provides the occasional glimmer of hope as others see what's happening and refuse to go along with it.

Re:Wow,

[russotto]

Defend yourself in court, not on the scene.

Right. When that fist or nightstick is headed towards your face, don't throw up your arm to protect yourself, just take the hit. We have advanced dental science in America; once you get out of prison your teeth can be made almost as good as new. In fact, it's recommended that with every kick or punch, you say "Thank you sir may I have another".

Asshole.

Allowing cops to beat on people with no punishment for them and punishment for their victims even if the cops were in the wrong -- that's what's really anathema to the rule of law. That's rule of men, men with badges.

Re:Wow,

[Maxo-Texas]

America is immensely less free, with much less privacy, than when I was 20, less than 30 years ago. It's amazing how much freedom we've lost and people don't even seem to notice because they are told we are so much better than other places.

Re:Wow,

[dryeo]

In principle you are perfectly right. The problem comes when the nation doing the pushing is 10 times larger (population) spends most of their money on weapons and you are economically dependent on them.
America has a long history of beating the shit out of countries that have something they want and don't give it. Just today I was reading in the paper Obama saying that he won't hesitate to enter a just war. And America is very good at twisting something into a just war, 2 of them happening right now. Iraq was disobedient and got invaded and Afghanistan wanted proof that Bin-Laden was behind the 9/11 actions and got invaded.
There is a reason that you guys have 10 or more carrier fleets spread around the world and it's not for self-defence.
Also it is kind of disheartening when our political activists end up in American jails where it is very hard to run for government.

Re:Wow,

[russotto]

And telling the cops not to enforce the law against a recalcitrant suspect when the cops are in the right is likewise anathema to the rule of law.

No one is telling them not to enforce the law. Just not to beat the suspect.

Moreover, I have never said that cops should escape punishment for their actions, only that the proper venue for resolving the dispute about whether the cops were in the right or the wrong is most certainly not on the street. Wrongful arrest, excessive force and deprivation of rights (S1983) are all actions you can take in a court to vindicate any (putative) wrong.

Dream on. Unless someone unrelated to the cops got it on videotape or you're some sort of VIP, you'll never get YOUR day in court. Oh, you'll be in court all right, for all the charges they pile on you. You might get out of them. But "take it to court" translates to "STFU" when it comes to cops.

Re:Wow,

[MagusSlurpy]

That's a pretty dumb comparison. Get back to me when Americans are being hauled away for expressing anti-Government views. Get back to me when Joe Biden assassinates Barack Obama so he can seize power.

You mean get back to you when it's too late? Like the Germans in the winter of 1945?

Re:Wow,

[Mr. Slippery]

Allowing people to "defend" themselves against the police because they think they are in the right is not one compatible with the rule of law.

SCOTUS disagreed, in the Bad Elk case, stating "If the officer had no right to arrest, the other party might resist the illegal attempt to arrest him, using no more force than was absolutely necessary to repel the assault constituting the attempt to arrest."

Expecting people to submit to kidnapping because the kidnappers have badges is not compatible with a free society.

I wouldn't expect courts to follow this precedent in our modern police state, but to my knowledge SCOTUS has not overturned it.

Re:Wow,

[kklein]

Thank you. I live outside the US and will vilify the US government (and people) with the best of them, but that often makes people think they can then start on the "they're taking over the world and making everybody follow their laws and enslaving people in Kafoonistan blah blah blah" and have me play along. No. The US is taking over exactly nobody, not even Iraq and Afghanistan, which they have actually been trying to take over for the last few years. The US government or US-based companies make cases to their counterparts in other countries, and those parties agree to them. If the people in the other countries don't like it, they need to raise a stink about it to their local governments. It is not the US government's responsibility to ensure that everything is rainbows and unicorns around the world; it is the US government's responsibility to do their best to get those rainbows and unicorns in the US.

People always act like US diplomats come in and hold the heads of the heads of other states' heads down to the bargaining table with a Glock as they put a pen in their hands. It's preposterous.

Complain about wars all you want. The local people didn't ask for them. But when you start saying something like "The US is forcing us all to..." just stop and ask yourself if you know what the word "force" means.

The US drives me nuts. But I also would like people to be a little more fair about things. If the whole world just decided to ignore the US with their ridiculous ideas, those ideas would change almost over night.

Re:Wow,

[MikeBabcock]

Except when your crappy government starts tramping all over trade tariffs despite being ruled in non-compliance by international courts and holds their wealth over our heads as a way of influencing policy ...

America does indeed buy influence in the form of highly unfair trade arrangements, or ignoring the stipulations of less unfair ones.

Re:Wow,

[MikeBabcock]

I often wonder if foresight wouldn't have lead to constitutional amendments preventing the restrictions since imposed, as I'm quite sure the right to bear arms explicitly disavows any future police state.

Its too bad really, when I look at America now and count off all the things they used to mock the Soviet Union for, all the freedoms those poor "commies" didn't have that Americans no longer have either. I specifically recall many political discourses and writers commenting on how evil it was for their governments to encourage snitching on your neighbours and how the KGB would make you disappear without access to representation.

Welcome to the era of the FBI snitch 800 numbers, and the ability to throw people in jail without access to a lawyer for security reasons, without an open hearing, with no public record. Sounds like something America fought against to me.

Re:Wow,

[mjwx]

I think you citizens of other countries need to take responsibility for your own governments' actions and stop blaming ours.

The problem is not as clear cut as you think. I know it's a popular and misguided philosophy in the US to think that you can live and not affect the environment around you but this is not the case.

Now, the US simply doesn't ask for these laws to be put in place, they shoe horn, back door and in some cases force it. Most of the bad US laws entered onto Australian books came attached to trade deals (pretty one sided trade deals at that), the unenforceable DMCA came in on the free trade deal made by Howard in the early 2000's. In the case of many Asian 3rd world nations the introduction of these laws came attached to aid packages which is why the drug laws in Thailand became so draconian. In many cases the US has threatened sanctions and even military action for not adopting laws stipulated by the US, a lot of this happened in South America which is why much of Latin America is Europe friendly but not US friendly.

Honestly, if I make a choice and do something stupid, it's my own fault. If Bob tells me I should do something stupid, and I do it, whose fault is that? It's not Bob's fault primarily, it's mine for being stupid enough to listen to him.

Honestly, let me fix this for you. If bob sells widgets and you need a widget for your douvalacky but Bob wont sell you a widget until you do something stupid and you do, who's fault is that? It is Bob's fault primarily, it's called coercion and in many cases does absolve the person who commits the stupid act as it was not their intent and the coercive party was the one with the motivation.

Re:Wow,

[KefabiMe]

Being homeless on public property may be a crime, but have you ever been homeless? I have. It sucks getting cops come up to you, handcuff you, search through all your shit for crack or whatever, then tell you you're not legally allowed to exist there for the night. This has happened to me on multiple occasions. When I asked the cop where I could spend the nigh, I was told not within the county border. Do you understand how shitty this is? Just because being homeless is a crime doesn't mean you can have zero compassion for "law breakers." Seriously, do you know how much it sucks to be homeless???

Re:Wow,

[Midnight Thunder]

In Canada we had a case which was captured on video of RCMP officers tazering a man to death. While legally it had been recommended to prosecute these officers, this is not going to happen without the cooperation of the RCMP. This is seriously fucked up.

 

Re:Wow,

[tacocat]

I like the comment about how it's ok to take away rights at the request of the public.

Take a democratic society where everyone is supposed to have one vote representation. If there are enough people who are convinced that they should have something, then you can legally vote in a process to take away from one segment of society and hand it over to another, larger group. The easiest and most prominent example of this is the taxation of everyone who actually has money to give it to people who do not work or make as much money. Used to be banks would fail, not live on life support from our income.

You might say that there is some argument that these people who have money are stealing it from the poor and down trodden. You might find a few who are not ethical about it. But most are just smarter and more productive. Doesn't the guy who invented mutella deserve something? Did Google actually create something of value? Do you have a right to take it away? Based on what? You have done nothing to earn it.

The same thinking allows a room of 10 men and 2 women to democratically vote to gang rape the women. The only thing holding them back is moral fiber. But that can always change. It used to be that we were expected to be responsible for our own lives and not expect handouts or a Right to everything.

Ancient Greece had Democracy. They collapsed because the had mob-rule through democratic voting and the entire upper half of the society was destroyed. And at every election, the upper half was a lower standard than the last cycle. Divide by two and repeat until you hit a point where you can no longer sustain the civilization.

Re:Wow,

[Smegly]

Now, the US simply doesn't ask for these laws to be put in place, they shoe horn, back door and in some cases force it.

Well said! Here is a recent example of US "coercing" of Spain into adopting IIPA's world view (i.e. police the internet for the US) - basically not inviting the worlds eighth largest economy to the world crisis summit(s), unless they bent over for IIPA. Same old same old, but at least more Americans at least appear to be becoming aware of why this kind of extremely arrogant foreign policy makes them so unpopular around the world.

Re:Wow,

[jo_ham]

There is a reason that you guys have 10 or more carrier fleets spread around the world and it's not for self-defence.

No, it's to protect all of our Allies whom have the luxury of investing in massive social safety nets because they don't have to pay the true cost of their own national defense.

Whoa, wait a minute. You think that the reason your allies can run more inclusive welfare programs and universal healthcare is because the US is taking it on the chin for the rest of the world with defence spending?

Perhaps that might be so if the US didn't spend nearly twice as much (percentage wise) on the crippled, hopeless and grossly unfair healthcare system it has currently compared to a country like the UK. We spend about 9% of our GDP on our healthcare system, you spend 16% of yours - your ineffective social systems are not in any way connected to your defence spending.

Yes, it is extremely useful to have the projected force of a US carrier group if you are involved in a war where it is required, but to state that those same carrier groups also provide sovereign defence for their allies... well. Not since WW2. The Royal Navy could defend the UK from a foreign power (with the exception of the US if it became hostile) and we still manage to run a welfare state. We are missing a force projection carrier like the Nimitz class, but that is being addressed. In terms of defence of the nation though, we do not need to rely on the US.

Re:Wow,

[Shakrai]

The Royal Navy could defend the UK from a foreign power (with the exception of the US if it became hostile) and we still manage to run a welfare state.

It couldn't have defended you against the Soviet Union during the height of the Cold War. You chaps watered down the Royal Navy to the point that your ability to reclaim islands from a Third World nation was in serious doubt. One or two more Exocet hits or a little less stupidity on the part of the Argentinians and 1982 would have ended very differently. As it was you couldn't even mount the operation without logistical support from the United States.

Don't get me wrong, the Royal Navy is a fine force and is even a step or two ahead of the US Navy in certain areas, but you are kidding yourself if you think it alone could have defended the UK after WW2 without outside support or the use of the nuclear option.

Re:Wow,

[Hurricane78]

The thing is, that of course in reality, cops, military, and other murderers only think they are in the highest ranks, while in reality being just above gulag torturers. In Germany we call that “Kleiner Mann ganz groß” (Little man (is) really big.).

Authority only exists, because people believe in it. If they stop, it’s gone.

Re:Wow,

[mjwx]

I think you are missing something else there

Quite a bit, but I don't have the time or inclination to explain international politics to you in it's entirety. You'll have to make do with the abridged version.

If Bob won't sell you a widget until you do something stupid then,

But Bob is the only supplier, sure others have attempted to make a widget but Bob attacks anyone who attempts to compete, Bob essentially has a monopoly, he also has many agents who are quite willing to do his dirty work for him.

if you had any balls

/Analogy mode off.

Do you mean like North Korea, Myanmar, Venezuela. These nations by your definition have balls, they've stood up to the US and have said no and we see the kind of treatment they get.

Like I said, the situation is not so clear cut as you imagine. International politics is not black and white. You imagine a binary position, either a nation accepts it 100% or not at all. This is not the case, international treaty/deal negotiation is a game of give and take which means it is rarely as black and white as you would imagine.

And this also means you, as a sovereign nation, can decide that following some lame IP law preventing someone else from making it without coercion can and should be ignored.

Can you?

Really, can you?

Do you honestly believe that the US wouldn't threaten to cancel all it's trade deal, turn your other more "loyal" trading partners against you. The US has been doing this for the last 50 years in Asia and South America. Those who defied the US quickly found themselves with few friends.

Up to this point in history, no nation has yet been regime changed for ignoring something like DMCA or IP laws. The only reason any nation follows these is by choice.

Ahhh, so naive. So by this logic you are in 100% accordance with all current and future IP and DMCA type laws, after all if you are following, if you are not violently resisting then it is all by choice.

IP is actually one of the most damaging things anyone has come up with since the pointed stick.

OH SNAP, but it was your choice yes?

Charges...

[mobby_6kl]

So, did they just forget about the other mandatory bullshit charge, resisting arrest?

Re:Charges...

[schmidt349]

I love it (sarcastically) when I hear a guy's only crime was resisting arrest. On what basis was the arrest being made in the first place? Resisting arrest, of course!

Re:Charges...

[ddegirmenci]

That actually gave me the idea that I might, somehow, be able to cause a stack overflow in the police. I guess I'll be trying that the next time I'm arrested...

Re:Charges...

[lena_10326]

Other forms of "resisting arrest":

• Not falling down fast enough after being struck or tasered.
• Being pushed by an officer into another officer.
• Placing or tapping your index finger ever so gently on the officer's shoulder.
• Cursing at the officer so that the officer's feelings are hurt.
• Having an epileptic seizure or heart attack during arrest.
• Not bending like a blade of grass when the officer attempts to wrap your limbs into a pretzel shape.
• Not knowing the language or not understanding the officers commands.
• Failing to produce a state issued ID card.
• Uttering the phrase "I won't answer your questions; I want to speak to a lawyer".

Re:Charges...

[betterunixthanunix]

"I'm not saying that tapping an officer on the shoulder is assault,"

Good, because legally it is battery.

"it probably isn't a good ideal to initiate physical contact by surprising them with a tap on the shoulder from behind when they might have a (quite reasonable) expectation of being attacked."

Sure, I can agree with that. Do not touch police officers, ever.

"Also, cursing at an officer isn't assault but why be a jerk?"

We have the right to be jerks, that's why. Failing to exercise our rights means that we will eventually lose them.

"Cops have a difficult job"

So do plenty of other people. What makes police officers special is that they can legally hold a person against that person's will; this is a dangerous right to grant anyone, of course, so we have all kinds of laws protecting innocent people from cops.

"in my experience are pretty friendly even under adverse conditions."

Some cops are friendly and firmly believe in protecting the public, whom they serve. However, we no longer live in a world where the police only arrest dangerous people. There are too many laws on the books, and it is now difficult to be a law abiding citizen. Police officers are paid overtime regardless of whether or not they were clocking those extra hours interrogating a real criminal. DAs and other public, political figures want to look "tough on crime," and put pressure on the police to be more aggressive; and of course, appearing to be "part of the war on terror" is all to appealing to police departments.

Again, we grant the police the right to do things that would be illegal for the rest of us. We must be extremely careful about giving out such a right, and remain on the alert for any possible abuses.

Re:Charges...

[adaviel]

http://www.lrwc.org/documents/Civil.Disobedience.Guide.November.20.2009.F.pdf This "protesters guide to civil disobedience" was discussed recently on CBC Radio. Interesting tidbits about assaulting a police officer. I suspect career criminals don't have this trouble - they figured out at 14 how to deal with law enforcement :-7

Re:Charges...

[Rob the Bold]

Fuck the Police!

I FTP every day.

Your private life is your own business.

Re:Charges...

[Rob the Bold]

I'm not saying that tapping an officer on the shoulder is assault, but it probably isn't a good ideal to initiate physical contact by surprising them with a tap on the shoulder from behind when they might have a (quite reasonable) expectation of being attacked.

So you're saying treat them like vicious feral dogs.

Re:Charges...

[horza]

Everybody in the services industry has a difficult job, and we all have bad days or come across obnoxious people we have to deal with. However I don't expect a waitress to spit in somebody's food, for a computer technician to hide kiddie porn on a drive whilst 'fixing' it, or a policeman to abuse and torture civilians by tasers or in this case pepper spray and fists.

Phillip.

Re:Charges...

[Whomp-Ass]

It seems the citizenry, officers, and/or agents of the U.S. gov't have forgotten a few, really pertinent, things...

Title 18 U.S.C. Section 241 : Conspiracy against rights; If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;...

e.g. A police officer and his partner (and/or dispatch)

My Favorite:

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Re:Put him away...

[MightyMartian]

I think I'd like to hear both sides of the story before I decide. Everyone who gets into an altercation with any sort of law enforcement officer always claims "I was like so totalllly innocent, dude!"

Re:Put him away...

[Zibri]

If you consider the border patrols trustworthy, sure. I don't. I'd bet the only "crime" Peter Watts committed was of arguing back.

first reports are often wrong

[Presto Vivace]

on the other hand, this may be another victory in the war on tourism.

Assault on an Agent...

[brainboyz]

What most people don't realize is ANY "unwanted" contact with any officer or agent of a government entity is assault. Tapping them on the shoulder when they're yelling at your friend would constitute assault on an officer. Something as innocent as brushing the agent's hand away would provoke that charge, which I suspect is the case here.

Wake up people, our laws are broken.

Re:Assault on an Agent...

[canajin56]

Actually, you're thinking battery of an Agent, which is unwanted contact of any form, including brushing their hand away when they're punching you. Assault is anything that makes them think you might batter them, such as shaking your fist or raising your voice.

Re:Assault on an Agent...

[Dun Malg]

Assault is anything that makes them think you might batter them, such as shaking your fist or raising your voice.

Don't forget fending off punches, baton strikes, or kicks. That's definitely assault.

Let's not leap to conclusions.

[Garrett Fox]

It sounds like the facts aren't all in yet, so let's not leap to conclusions. We're hearing the account of Cory Doctorow -- who in his novel "Little Brother" had an obvious axe to grind against Homeland Security and law enforcement, to the point of suggesting "9/11 was an inside job". (Says one of the leaflets dropped by the novel's heroic protesters.) We're also hearing second-hand from Watts and the other people in the car. We're not yet hearing the guards' account. Maybe Doctorow et. al. are completely right, but let's not assume so right off the bat, eh?

The Doctorow account quotes Watts saying that he got out of his car when questioned (mistake #1), then refused the order to get back in (mistake #2). No, of course that doesn't justify a beating. It just suggests we don't have the whole story.

Re:Let's not leap to conclusions.

[IICV]

The Doctorow account quotes Watts saying that he got out of his car when questioned (mistake #1), then refused the order to get back in (mistake #2). No, of course that doesn't justify a beating. It just suggests we don't have the whole story.

Sorry, absolutely nothing justifies a beating. The only two options are either A. Arrest the man or B. Let him go. "Beat him" is not acceptable under any circumstances whatsoever.

Re:Let's not leap to conclusions.

[interkin3tic]

who in his novel "Little Brother" had an obvious axe to grind against Homeland Security and law enforcement

Him and millions of other people who realize that a posted sign saying "Don't hijack the plane" would be about as effective and far less annoying than homeland security.

Re:Let's not leap to conclusions.

[TubeSteak]

Sorry, absolutely nothing justifies a beating. The only two options are either A. Arrest the man or B. Let him go. "Beat him" is not acceptable under any circumstances whatsoever.

Not to mention that once the cops have pepper sprayed someone, the last thing on that person's mind will be "let's fight."

Re:Let's not leap to conclusions.

[dbcad7]

Well contrary to modern day practices, beating is not necessary to arrest someone. Even people that physically resist arrest should not be beaten. The amount of force required to arrest someone is what is required. Beating someone because your pissed off that they resisted means your in the wrong job. Everyone gets pissed off when someone doesn't do what you tell them to, that does not mean that beating them as punishment is ok. Cops are not, and should not be, in the punishment business. (that's a different department)

Re:Put him away...

[whoever57]

Everyone who gets into an altercation with any
              sort of law enforcement officer always claims
              "I was like so totalllly innocent, dude!"

apparently you haven't seen the video of a bart police officer shooting in the back a man who was being held face down on the ground by other officers, or the more recent case where a bart police officer grabbed someone [who did need to be taken off the train], walked the poor guy across the platform and smashed a glass barrier with the guy's face.

it is incidents like these that make me less likely to believe the law enforcement officer's side of the story.

I'm entirely inclined to believe Watts

[Anonymous Coward]

We visited Canada this summer and our experience with the US border patrol when we were returning home leads me to entirely believe the story as told by Watts. I've honestly had better and more pleasant experiences with the East German border patrol in the mid-80s.

Re:I'm entirely inclined to believe Watts

[HBI]

I agree. I found the US-Canada border in particular to be the home of the most unimpressive border guards I have seen, though to be honest, Homeland Security personnel in general are unimpressive. Rude, nasty, undereducated and morally/ethically small people abound in those uniforms. Not a fucking 'welcome home' to be heard from this bunch.

I come from a family full of cops, I work daily with actual combatant US soldiers and have immense respect for them, but seeing these Homeland Security pricks from their various ill-run agencies acting as officers of the United States makes me want to vomit. The whole organization needs to be deconstructed and re-imagined in some kind of intelligent form.

Re:I'm entirely inclined to believe Watts

[lahvak]

That's exactly my impression. Crossing from US to Canada was fine, crossing back very strongly reminded me of crossing from Poland to East Germany in mid 80's.

Re:I'm entirely inclined to believe Watts

[NitroWolf]

That's exactly my impression. Crossing from US to Canada was fine, crossing back very strongly reminded me of crossing from Poland to East Germany in mid 80's.

Hmm... couple summers ago I had the exact opposite experience. Going to Canada was a nightmare. The Candadian border patrol were complete assholes and/or a giant pack of morons. Coming back the US border patrol were nice, courteous and friendly. The Canadian side reminded me of a bunch of TSA idiots standing around wondering what to do about a suitcase. Lots of interaction with the Canadian side, not so much with the US side... just kind of cruised on through.

Re:I'm entirely inclined to believe Watts

[cortesoft]

Strange... this would almost lead someone to conclude that these border patrol agents are some sort of collection of individuals whose behavior might vary.

Nah, that is just silly.

Re:Put him away...

[phantomfive]

It seems he didn't. Looks like he was being delayed at the checkpoint, got out of the car to ask what was going on, the officer told him to get back in the car, and instead asked a question. Now, when a police officer is in a situation like that, he usually likes to have complete control of the situation (understandable, since sometimes they end up dead when things get out of control). If he feels like you are trying to take control, things can escalate quickly. It would have been better for our author friend to instead get back in the car.

Now, from what I've read, it seems the border patrol escalated quickly and unnecessarily. In tense situations that can happen. It basically sucked to be Peter Watts at that moment.

Also it's worth noting that in some jurisdictions, assault doesn't have to be physical, it can be verbal. So if you do end up in a similar situation, the best thing is to be calm and acquiescent in the moment, and then sue the hell out of them later.

He dared....

[Yo_mama]

In a mature society, "civil servant" is semantically equal to "civil master." - Robert Heinlein

Always the same story...

[vvaduva]

Look guys, this is the same story we hear over and over again. First we need to hear the side of the border guards; secondly, always assume that government officials are assholes. Do what they ask, obey their orders, don't be a smartass - as a result, you will generally speaking be OK.

If you talk back, disobey orders and give them a hard time, crap like this will most likely happen to you because you escalate the situation and make the lives of people who already have miserable jobs more miserable. That's not an excuse, but don't be surprised when stuff like this happens.

Re:Always the same story...

[nathan.fulton]

I find it sort of ironic that the people who are most convinced that cops are corrupt power-mongering jerks tend to be the most likely to put themselves into a contentious position with police.

Most of the time, if you see a person who you this is Bad and Has A Gun, you would tend to stay out of their way.

Re:Always the same story...

[Daniel_Staal]

Because they only way to make the cops become something other than corrupt power-mongering jerks is to stand up, make a fuss, get noticed, and have someone above those cops do something about it. Which takes public outcry and attention.

If everyone rolls over, it no longer matters if what they are doing is wrong: They got away with it. With a cop, you have the chance you might be able to make a change by standing up to them. (At least in a country where the government is still concerned with public opinion.)

Re:Always the same story...

[betterunixthanunix]

So, you are pretty much admitting that we now live in tyranny? Honestly, how is it acceptable for the police to lock someone in jail simply for refusing to obey a command?

I'm glad /. finally got this

[MickyTheIdiot]

I got a tweet about this earlier today.

I can't wait to hear what really happened here. It's wouldn't be so outlandish if Watts' version of the story is entirely true, especially with the number of police beatings that get online where the exact same thing has happened (i.e. someone not resisting at all, getting beaten up, and then charged with resisting arrest).

Over 10 years ago now, Indianapolis had the infamous "police street brawl" incident where a group of off duty drunk policemen went around picking fights with guys and harassing women in down town Indianapolis. Everyone that tried to protect women in that situation ended up in jail with a bunch of bruises on resisting arrest charges. I don't believe even one of the cases ever made it to court. Still the police union backed their boys to the very end. I believe they even called the mayor a commie at one point...

Re:Searching for 'Watt, charged' pun

[Ginger Unicorn]

watt charged with resistance

Re:Searching for 'Watt, charged' pun

[DurendalMac]

Maybe they thought that he'd stolen some precious joules.

Boarder Security

[inhuman_4]

As a Canadian I will never understand why the US is so eager about its boarder security with Canada.

Take a look at a map of North America, we share a huge boarder. If some one wanted to get across undetected, they would go to Calgary, Edmonton, etc. Buy/Rent a off-road vehicle and just drive in across some open fields. It's not hard to figure out.

Boarder security at major ports of entry just pisses everyone off and hurts trade. The most they are going to catch are some teenagers buying pot and Canadian beer. The only real threat at the CAN/US boarder is people bringing handguns into Canada (where they are illegal) and selling them to Toronto street gangs.

Now they are giving a middle aged white guy a hard time? Please, this security theatre has gone too far.

Re:Boarder Security

[phantomfive]

You know, I would totally agree with you, but time and again bad guys have been caught trying to sneak through the security gates. Why they go that way instead of following your advice, I will never know. However, as long as they are going that way, we might as well try to catch them.

Re:Boarder Security

[Mashiki]

The only real threat at the CAN/US boarder is people bringing handguns into Canada (where they are illegal) and selling them to Toronto street gangs.

Hand guns aren't illegal in Canada. I have my restricted FAS and own a handgun. It just means that there are more hoops for me to jump through to own it up here. I goto the local range about 40mins from my hometown to go shooting. Toronto is a half liberal pissing hole that things that handguns are the doom and gloom of everyone. It was to the point where the Toronto Police Service was going to march on City Hall because of the gun ban until the mayor and city council saw common sense. Where do the police go for firearms practice in the city when they want to ban their indoor range?

You know what the big problem is? Is that 5 years ago there was half the problem with travelling into the US as there is now. I really don't want to go. I live within 1.5hr give or take a few of 4 major border checkpoints. Why do I want to put myself through that hassle, when I can travel to other countries in the world that have easier travel and access. Well if you want to erect the fortress and piss off your northern neighbour, that's a good way of doing it.

It's funny however, the biggest problem that Canada deals with from Americans is teenagers. Little bastards who come over here to drink, cause havoc, smash shit up, or cause criminal offences then run back across the border. Goto any border city and they'll tell you what kind of pissing match it is to even try to get US border guards to stop them.

Re:Put him away...

[h4rm0ny]

When an unarmed man alone gets into a fight with multiple armed people, it's a rare case where the unarmed man is the aggressor.

Re:an alert border patrol officer

[phantomfive]

Let's have some intellectual honesty, shall we? GP is obviously not implying that Watts was going to bomb the US. Why would you even say that? It ruins the conversation.

What he is saying is that not all border patrol people are untrustworthy. He is saying you can't just assume the agent is wrong because he is an agent. He is saying it IS a good idea to hear both sides of the story before coming to judgement. Now, I am sure if you had thought about his comment for a while, you would have understood this and wouldn't have resorted to weird tangents.

Now, your underlying point seems to be that Watts is a nice guy, so we should trust him. I don't actually know anything about him other than he is an author, and I've known enough dick-head authors to say that doesn't guarantee that he was on the right side of this situation. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. But if you have a reason to assume that he is, for example if you have personal knowledge of the character of Watts, you should say it instead of coming up with some weird distraction from the conversation.

Re:Put him away...

[node 3]

Now, when a police officer is in a situation like that, he usually likes to have complete control of the situation (understandable, since sometimes they end up dead when things get out of control).

This is a common myth. Police officers are *rarely* killed on the job. And border guards? I'm sure it must happen, but it seems it must be exceptionally rare in their case. But somehow that's given as an excuse when they beat the shit out of someone for *daring* to ask a question.

If he feels like you are trying to take control, things can escalate quickly.

"Take control"? The border guards have fucking guns. More to the point, they beat and imprisoned the guy. Even further, they can press charges against him. What did he do? Asked a question? HOW DARE HE!

It would have been better for our author friend to instead get back in the car.

No, it would have been much, much worse. The worst thing one can do in the face of fascism is to acquiesce. Worst thing for society, specifically. Whether backing down or not was something he should do personally depends on how much he cares about personal liberty and what exactly he did. If all he did was ask a question, I can't see any way in which he should have known better.

Also it's worth noting that in some jurisdictions, assault doesn't have to be physical, it can be verbal. So if you do end up in a similar situation, the best thing is to be calm and acquiescent in the moment, and then sue the hell out of them later.

Shit, in some cases, assault can be a dirty look. But you're right, the best thing to do is be a good little slave and bow to your masters...

Re:Open Letter

[Shakrai]

But I fail to see what Obama has done to earn a Nobel peace prize.

He made the Norwegian leftists on the Nobel committee wet with the anticipation of what he might do?

Re:Put him away...

[AHuxley]

Being a "sci-fi author" gives him the ability heard in a public forum about entering the US.
As for past issues listen to : Steve Bierfeldt of Ron Paul Campaign for Liberty been confronted by TSA 3/27/09 in at the St. Louis airport.
He was carrying Ron Paul bumper stickers and cash.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3394970594491846292

Re:Reason for Charge

[Obfuscant]

According to an update in the Boing Boing article, ...

So now you've read one side of the story.

but -- assuming the accuracy of Watts' story --

And that's why finding out the other side of the story is important. It keeps you from making assumptions.

Re:Put him away...

[maxume]

And make sure Neal Stephenson wrote it.

Re:Put him away...

[phantomfive]

No, it would have been much, much worse. The worst thing one can do in the face of fascism is to acquiesce. Worst thing for society, specifically

Dude, if you want to fight for your civil liberties by putting yourself in front of a police baton, where it makes little difference, go ahead. As for me, I'll fight for what I care about in the courts and at the ballot box, where it can actually make a difference. You may consider that being a slave, but that's ok because I consider your method just dumb.

From the police report

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.thetimesherald.com/article/20091211/NEWS01/91211010/1002/Science+fiction+writer+charged+after+bridge+struggle

"Jones said Watts was crossing into Michigan from Point Edward when he was selected at random for a secondary Customs inspection. Watts exited his vehicle "angrily" and border officers began checking the black sport utility vehicle he was driving, Jones said.

Border officers ordered Watts back into the vehicle, and when he refused, officers attempted to handcuff him, Jones said. At that point, Watts began to resist and pull away from the officers "and became aggressive toward officers," Jones said.

Jones said a border officer used pepper spray to subdue Watts. Jones said Watts "choked" an officer during the struggle. "

Re:Put him away...

[harmonise]

the more recent case where a bart police officer grabbed someone [who did need to be taken off the train], walked the poor guy across the platform and smashed a glass barrier with the guy's face.

I saw the video of that. The guy being arrested was drunk and belligerent and was holding his hand out when it hit the glass. It wasn't his head but his hand that hit the glass. Did you see the video someone recorded of it and put online? The guy was picking fights with people on the train. When the officer pulled him off the train, you could hear everyone in the train car clapping. It was pretty clear that the officer didn't do anything wrong.

.. and this is why tourism is down...

[kwandar]

Overly officious US border agents, the "Guantanamo halo effect" (ie. there is no rule of law)and the general unfriendliness at the border have caused me to cease visiting the US. I can say that I am far from the only Canadian I know that now refuses to cross the border.

I don't buy there, travel there, spend there, or .... even do business there.

I'm hoping that with the Obama administration I (and others) will become a little more comfortable and eventually travel through/to the US, but I'm far from the only Canadian that feels this way. Pity .... the US in general are great neighbors and great people.

Not worth it.

[mauriceh]

I am a Canadian citizen living in Canada.
I have been entering and leaving the USA for pretty much my whole life.
I am 53.
A few years ago I stopped going to the USA, except when absolutely necessary.

One of the most dangerous places I can think of is a US border crossing.

Re:Not worth it.

[mauriceh]

I remember when it was civilized, polite and courteous. That gradually changed.
It soon became openly hostile.
Several people I know well had incidents, and, I trust when they tell me it was without provocation.
I have seen several conflicts at US border crossings, and many were without cause.

Please bear in mind I am a white, balding, 53 year old guy who is about as "white" and grandfatherly looking as you may find.
This is not some paranoid fantasy on my part.

Re:Not worth it.

[kwandar]

I regularly crossed the border. (Regular as in once every couple of weeks) for a number of years). At first there was no issue, but then .... worse and worse.

Border guards are not the most intelligent creatures on this planet (I'm well employed, with professional designations that get me through any border) and US border guards in particular seem to love the power of it ..... and they have a LOT of power. You don't have constitutional rights at the border.

Hassle level just kept increasing, and I didn't have to experience more to believe the stories. Why take the risk? Really? We've seen stories of illegal rendition of Canadians to 3rd world countries, torture, detention, quasi-illegal wiretapping. We've been astounded to see our neighbour throw out the rule of law, and export some of that culture of paranoia to Canada.

I just stopped doing business there. Simpler and safer.

Re:Not worth it.

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a US American, but I live in Japan with my wife, who is Japanese. We have severely reduced the number of trips back to see the US family due in no small part to our unpleasant experiences with immigration and the TSA.

One time the immigration goon almost wasn't going to let my wife in because she only had $5 (oh, and a joint US savings account with almost $100k in it, and a checking account in her name only with a few thousand more--ATM cards in her wallet), and they didn't believe that she was married to an American. She started jumping up and down and waving to me, where I was waiting, which was a long way away, since the armed thug in the hall told me I couldn't wait for my wife by the booths, and that we should just meet up in baggage (good thing I kept just standing out of his sight, but where I could still see my wife, who was taking forever). I then started walking to her booth, panicking that they might detain her and we didn't have phones or anything, and were not even in the right state yet (connecting flight), so I would have nowhere to go and no one to help me. Of course, the goon put his blue-rubber-gloved hand in my chest and started regurgitating his training, but evidently this was enough for the moron dealing with my wife to believe that the panicked guy getting in an altercation for this woman actually was her husband.

Then there is the string of presents for Japanese relatives that have been destroyed by the TSA in their vigilant "dump the suitcase on the floor, rummage around in the contents, open any toiletry bottles, and then scoop the pile up and throw it back into the suitcase" searches. They scratched an otherwise spotless guitar that I was transporting for sale, and broke a brand new one that I had put in an expensive flight case because I thought I'd learned my lesson the first time. How they managed that, I don't even know. They've done hundreds of dollars of damage to our stuff over the last few years, so now when we go, we just mail everything home. Our highly-suspect garlic salt seems to slip through the postal service unabated.

And then there's this "even if you are from a visa-waiver country, you need to tell us 3 weeks in advance that you are coming so we can get the detention cage ready for you" bullshit. Gee, guys, going online and giving you all the details of my wife's stay in the US, almost a month before... That really kinda sounds like what most people in the world would call a "visa." In fact, the only country I've had to do that for, aside from the US (for my wife), is China. And then you only have to do it a few days before!

It breaks my heart to see what utter pussies my countrymen are. Nineteen assholes knock down a couple buildings, and we blame our freedoms and beg for them to be taken away. And what absolutely slays me is that the Tea Party morons--the very people who would support these actual intrusions on our freedoms--scream about their freedoms when the government is trying to bring their health bills down to something that doesn't send them into bankruptcy.

The US is a wasteland. Avoid.

Re:Put him away...

[gilbert644]

I see you have never dealt with addicts.

Re:Put him away...

[Timothy Brownawell]

As for me, I'll fight for what I care about in the courts and at the ballot box, where it can actually make a difference.

Those make almost no difference. The courts don't matter because it would be your word against the word of a couple sworn upholders of the law (who of course would have erased any recordings that you might try to have subpoenaed). The ballot box doesn't matter because don't blame me I voted for Kodos.

What does make a difference is getting people in general to actually give a damn. So you get things like the organized civil disobedience of the civil rights movement, where demonstrations of what's wrong are forced into the public's awareness. This in turn leads to a chance that someone decent (at least with regard to that one item) might appear on the ballot and actually have a chance of getting elected, and that those running for reelection will have to at least act like they care so they have less risk of getting kicked out.

Re:an alert border patrol officer

[TapeCutter]

Yes! Innocent until proven guilty applies to the cop as much as it does to Watts. Good and bad cops exist because good and bad people exist.

BS

[HBI]

The day that we do pull out of there - which will be with our tails between our legs - will subject the peoples of Afghanistan and nearby states with the same dangers and indignities they'd face if that day were today. The only difference between now and then will be the body count.

I say this in the following capacity:

1. I deployed to a remote Sunni area of Iraq in 2007-08 with lots of rocket, mortar and small-arms fire.
2. I know dozens of people who have deployed to Afghanistan, including close friends.
3. I am at risk of deploying there myself shortly.

That said, I was against this intervention from the start. I am against it now. We should pull out yesterday. We cannot win. Afghanistan has proven intractable to central governance even with 105,000 Soviets there and the will to use armaments that we blanch at. There is no reason to expect that a lesser number of US troops will have any more luck. Only more death lies along that route.

Obama is playing LBJ's game of placating the public to the hilt, but he will understand failure soon enough.

Re:Put him away...

[phantomfive]

OK, what I hear you saying is roughly that if no one cares about a subject enough to get it on the ballot, then it won't be on a ballot. So you use civil disobedience to raise people's attention. Civil disobedience becomes a kind of advertising technique.

The problem is most of the time it doesn't work that well, and it hurts. If you want to get your voice out, there are other ways to do it that work a lot better and don't hurt as much. A well organized ad campaign, for example, will be much more effective than trying to get in a confrontation with police officers.

As someone who crosses the US border frequently

[puppetman]

To visit the family cabin on the US side of the border, I can say that about 50 percent of the US Customs agents are assholes on a power trip, pure and simple. Some at our border crossing have had sexual harassment charges leveled against them.

I've run into a few jerk-off Canadian Customs agents as well.

I hate putting myself in the power of these individuals - it seems the sky is the limit with regards to outcomes.

Re:Open Letter

[Ethanol-fueled]

He got the prize just for not being Bush It's how he was elected, and now it got him another win.

If the committee were sane, they should have waited until Obama actually ended the wars, unless the New World Order is going all 1984 on us and telling us that "War is Peace".

p.s. I'm diggin' your +1 troll, man.

Re:learn the law, son

[zach_the_lizard]

Given that everything there is legal, if you resist it, yes, you are committing a criminal act.

In most states there is no right to resist unlawful arrest. I happen to live in one of the states that recognize this right.

Re:Don't Be a Douche Bag

[node 3]

Police officers are *rarely* killed on the job.

Don't be a douche bag, know something about what you are talking about.

This year, 115 police officers have died in the line of duty. Half of those deaths were accidental or medical.

In terms of deaths on the job, police officer doesn't even make the top ten.

I stand by my statement. Police officers *are* rarely killed on the job. 50 people died as a result of tazering this year, and that's just *tazering*. Police kill more people that don't need killing than they themselves are killed. From a strictly numerical point of view, an innocent citizen being confronted by the police is more likely to be killed than a police officer is to be deliberately killed by an assailant.

Yet, in spite of this, we are supposed to bow down to the police who have chosen such a "dangerous" occupation, but when they attack an innocent citizen, no big whoop, they probably had it coming because they asked a question or something.

Re:Put him away...

[westlake]

When an unarmed man alone gets into a fight with multiple armed people, it's a rare case where the unarmed man is the aggressor.

I'm not so sure about that:

EL MIRAGE, Ariz. -- Three firefighters were assaulted while responding to a late-night medical call on Dec. 5, according to The Arizona Republic.
The crew found a teen -- reportedly suffering from an overdose -- running around. They were able to calm him down to check his vital signs and insert an intravenous needle, but officials told the newspaper that the patient become violent when firefighters tried to place him on a gurney.
The 16-year-old began punching, kicking and scratching the first responders.
Police were called for assistance and were able to subdue the teen, who was on probation and wore an ankle bracelet monitor.
The firefighters suffered only minor injuries.
According to the report, a recent survey conducted for the Arizona Fire Chiefs Association show that 55 percent of responders in the state said they had been assaulted at least once while on the job. Ariz. Firefighters Assaulted by Patient

____

Daniel A. Noble, of Moscow, Wash., was allegedly driving erratically Monday morning on the Washington State University campus and struck two pedestrians - one in a crosswalk, the other on a sidewalk. The victims were taken to the hospital.
At the scene police said that Noble was uncooperative. "He was combative at the start, when we tried to take him into custody," Lt. Steve Hansen of the WSU police told The Spokesman-Review. Police used a Taser to subdue Noble.
Mark Moorer, Noble's lawyer, said Tuesday that his client was known to consume large amounts of energy drinks and Starbucks coffee. Moorer said in court that the caffeine could have accounted for Noble's strange behavior.
Noble's wife told investigators that he started acting strangely about three days earlier, was not sleeping at night and seemed confused. During Tuesday's hearing, Noble got up and tried to walk away from the defense table, but his lawyer pulled him back to his seat.
Following in the footsteps of the "Twinkie defense" , The Oregonian has dubbed this the "The Starbucks Defense." Lawyer: Driver Had 'Caffeine Psychosis'

Re:Searching for 'Watt, charged' pun

[colinrichardday]

Is that the current state of the charges, or is there potential for more?

maybe you have a chip on your shoulder

[SuperBanana]

Given that customs officers are trained to get a vibe off people (by asking questions about your stay etc- they don't give a rat's ass what you say, it's HOW you say it.) Given out righteous some slashdotters get, I can imagine them giving a customs agent a real bad vibe. Just look at any of the threads about laptop confiscations (I agree, those are very evil and I feel they should be illegal.) There's some serious hatred here for customs folks.

I crossed the border several times to go to track driving schools. First border crossing, I was nervous. The Canadian officer was curt, and mostly concerned about the fact that I was unemployed at the time. Probably picked up on my being nervous. I just didn't want the hassle of being searched or giving the "wrong" answer.

Second border crossing, the Canadian officer was friendly and while they are trained to engage you in banter to judge how shady you are (which clearly Mr. Watts failed, want to guess why?), he seemed genuinely amused that I was taking MY car to drive on a racetrack. Have fun, he said, and handed me my paperwork.

Both times back, the US crossing was completely unmemorable. Drove up, handed over my license, answered some quick questions about when I came into Canada, what I'd done, and whether I had anything to declare. 2-3 minutes, tops- long enough to run my plates and license in the computer and see how fidgety I was. Nobody at any of the events I went to (all of them American) had anything bad to say, and some of them had been coming to the track for years.

I lost my license right before a trip to Canada, and called around trying to figure out if a temporary replacement license was sufficient. I eventually got put through to one of the actual border officers, who was audibly in the middle of his lunch break, munching on his sandwich. For a cop on his lunchbreak being pestered by some dumb shmuck, he was not only helpful but...chipper. He wouldn't make any solid promises, but he did ask me when I was coming, my name, and a few other things, and said if he was on shift when I came back into the US, he'd help if he could and take the fact that I called ahead etc under consideration, but he said I definitely needed to make sure I'd be OK getting IN to Canada. So he gave me the number for his Canadian counterparts, and cheerfully wished me a good afternoon and best of luck trying to get a 'real' license or some other government ID out of my state government (didn't.)

HOLY FUCKING SHIT. A very curt, annoyed, angry Canadian customs agent answered the phone, and read me the fucking riot act and demanded to know how I got the number for their office, why was I calling them, who was I, what the hell did I want. When I explained what I wanted (mainly to know if I'd be permitted into Canada with my temporary license, and was there anything I could do to smooth the wheels, like bringing extra documentation of some sort, anything to help), point-black refused to answer or discuss anything with me, and hung up after angrily saying "NEUO!" to several questions.

Its all the new folks

[dj245]

My father has been on the Maine border for the past 20 years.

From my memories as crossing 10 years ago, things have definitely changed- and there are many reasons why. One of the biggest is that since 2001, the number of border gaurds has increased by a factor of 4. There used to be high standards, with lengthy training. You had to learn spanish, and generally become reasonably educated in detecting lies, noticing suspicious people, etc. The handgun training weeded out a lot of people, and my father had to practice every 3 weeks, because if he didn't, he might not pass the handgun qualification test, which seemed to be at least 4 times a year. A lot of that went away when some politicians decided they needed to stack the border in the name of "Homeland Security". Immigration and Customs (2 separate groups 10 years ago) were rolled into Homeland Security after 2001. Instead of ambitious folk who didn't mind learning spanish, passing rigorous handgun tests, remaining current in their education, etc, you got the bottom of the barrel uneducated Joe. The kind who saw a cushy government job for little effort and took it.

Joe is not a fun guy. Joe does the bare minimum and nothing extra, collects his paycheck, and sits in the booth following his script.

Yes.

[SuperBanana]

Are you so sure that they have video cameras covering the exit area? One weird thing about this is that the incident happened as he was leaving the US, where you normally don't stop at all.

Yes, because you're entering Canada, and they've got all sorts of cameras too. I seriously doubt there is a single square inch of a border crossing that isn't under 24x7, recorded surveillance.

Actually, that's an excellent point, one I didn't think of. At least the last time I hit one of the VT crossings, the into-Canada side, you only talk to a Canadian border agent. You talk only to a US agent on the way in.

I'm now really, really curious as to why he ended up talking to any US customs agents on his way out of the country. If you're leaving, the US doesn't give a rat's ass what you've got in your car or anything- you're literally someone else's problem. I know a number of people with restricted academic visas who didn't have problems leaving the US- they had problems getting back in, because their visa said they were not supposed to leave the US, and the US customs agent wanted to know why they were coming back in...

Re:Put him away...

[westlake]

apparently you haven't seen the video of a bart police officer shooting in the back a man who was being held face down on the ground by other officers

In 1999 1.5 million vehicles crossed the Blue Water Bridge at Port Huron Michigan. Blue Water Bridge Canada

The US has a population of 300 million people and employs about 700,000 police officers. Q: How many police officers are employed in the United States

It is easy to find an incident but it is much harder to prove a pattern.

Fail: Dealing with Police 101

[cmholm]

First up, I've witnessed and had described by retired police officers occasions when an officer elected to go medieval on a citizen who was being only mildly disagreeable, or didn't immediately understand what the officer wanted, so I can well imagine Mr. Watts was unreasonably roughed up, and hit with trumped up charges.

That said, based on the information in TFA's links, as a practical, like-to-avoid-getting-my-ass-handed-to-me matter, I might question Mr. Watts' evident lack of "street smarts". I'm just a mid-aged, college-educated white boy who for the most part stayed out of trouble. But, even I have heard and read enough to know that:

• In a police-controlled traffic stop or checkpoint, I should stay in my car until asked to exit.
• I should not act to touch an officer.
• I should not give an officer lip.
• I shouldn't get into small talk with an officer. Answers to questions, if I say anything at all, should be short. Admit nothing, deny nothing.
• I shouldn't give permission for an officer to search me or my car. If he does it anyway, save my complaints for later.
• If assaulted/battered by an officer, I should passively act to shield my face, jewels, etc, but take the lumps.
• I have few, if any, rights at an international border crossing (besides the intra-EU borders), and should be mentally prepared for BS.

Unfortunately, Mr. Watts may not have had any previous experiences that would prep him for the possibility that getting out of the queue at a border crossing wasn't the best plan. I hope his only lasting consequences are a bruised body and ego.

Re:Fail: Dealing with Police 101

[cmholm]

You're correct. You have rights, and a cop shouldn't beat you without due cause. However, rights are adjudicated in a court of law, and you've gotta survive long enough to make it there.

Re:Fail: Dealing with Police 101

[jschrod]

Do you realize that your list is the perfect example why people from more civilized countries think that the US society gives its police too much power to harrass their citizens?

Your list with recommended behaviour itself is almost identical to the list we got 20+ years ago when we visited former socialistic Eastern Germany or other USSR-related countries. That's not ironic, that's sad.

Re:learn the law, son

[Pig Hogger]

Every police officer I have asked has said that I *am* required to possess (and show upon request) state-issued identification.

Every fox I have asked has said that you are required to give him the key to your henhouse, too.
Just because a cop says so doesn't make it correct.

Re:Put him away...

[sodul]

And why would you need to tase someone who is face down on the ground and under control ? Tasing is the new way to beat-up without leaving massive bruises. Really it does relieve the itch of trigger happy cops. When taser showed up they where supposed to be the last line of defense so you would not kill a suspect where you would have shot him before.

I'm very sad to see that you're excusing murder because tasing someone on the ground is considered 'normal' and 'OK'.

Re:My head reels from the spin.

[Artifakt]

What about your right to be judged by ethical standards? The government hasn't just made Pot illegal, the government has directed its employees to lie, classing the drug as a narcotic, claiming it is chemically related to the opiates, and falsifying scientific reports on its effects. They've done the same in claiming that crack is somehow worse than regular Cocaine, claiming that various herbs and designer drugs have caused overdoses, suicides and murders where the statistical evidence shows no correlation at all, and in many, many other ways. The crack laws are essentially "Possession of Cocaine while Black" charges. Most of the others are set up as "Possession of a drug while too poor to afford a 'treatment program' which won't cure you but will get the charge suppressed".
      If speeding laws resulted in a tremendous percentage of selective convictions against people on their way to vote in certain districts, or noise ordinances were being applied chiefly to some political rallies in the inner cities and were ignoring suburban 2 am parties, then they would be political and violate basic rights as well. As you put it, context matters, and part of that context is that certain groups have a much higher chance of being convicted once charged, or of getting much harsher sentences.

Re:My head reels from the spin.

[dryeo]

You do realize that you do have the right to speed don't you? Turn on the TV to the racing channel and you'll see lots of people speeding on private property and sometimes on public property. You just don't have the right to endanger others unless they agree.
I'm not arguing that you have the right to blow smoke in someones face or operate heavy equipment while under the influence of anything that can screw up your judgment/reflexes.
You also have a right to loud music. Try it sometime, go somewhere where people don't mind and turn up the music as loud as you want. As long as you are not interfering with other peoples right to quiet it is perfectly legal.
Just like you have a right to swing your fist. Just not to make contact with my face.
The drug laws are one of the few things where if you are not a danger to others and doing it in complete privacy the law can and if they don't like you will arrest you and convict you.

Watts' new post-- replying to a few rumors

[geekotourist]

Peter Watts has put up a new post on the event. All emphasis mine:

"I'm at the point now where I can't talk a whole lot about ongoing proceedings. I am seeing a few common misrepresentations making the rounds, though, that I'd like to set straight:

1. Some are concluding that, when I was "dumped across the border in shirtsleeves", I had to walk across the Blue Water Bridge in a snowstorm without my coat. No. The bridge is on the US side of the border, which they had to drive me across to dump me on the other side of; and Canadian Customs was on that other side. This was no Starlight Cruise; I was not exposed to the weather unprotected for an inordinately long time. Still. It's winter. And they have my coat.
2. Others have warned me to delete my previous post, lest the bad guys seize upon it and twist it to their own dark purposes. Having had erroneous quotes attributed to me in the past, I know this is good advice (which is why I won't be commenting in too much detail upon some of the arcane blow-by-blows of the case in question). But my lawyer vetted that post before I put it up; I stand behind it.
3. Thanks to whoever posted the link to the Times-Herald story. I have three comments about the allegations therein. Firstly, the story claims that I was entering the US, not leaving it: this is empirically false. Secondly, I find it interesting that these guys characterise "pulling away" as "aggressive" behavior; I myself would regard it as a retreat. And thirdly, I did not "choke" anyone. I state this categorically. And having been told that cameras were in fact on site, I look forward to seeing the footage they provide.

That's it for the technical items. I have only two more things to say. Firstly, I am absolutely flabbergasted by the online reaction to this story, and by the support (both moral and financial) that's inundated me over the past few hours. I don't have a hope in hell of answering even a fraction of the incoming traffic at this point, so for the moment let me just say I'm humbled and a little bit scared. I did not start this campaign; it actually started when I was still in jail, and had absolutely no idea what was going on. But to the catalytic folks who orchestrated it, know that I am looking into having my vasectomy reversed so that I can sire a firstborn son and sacrifice him to you.
Secondly, I'm going to bed.

Re:If he's smart...

[russotto]

The best thing that could happen to him would be the footage being "lost". Since I'm sure they have clear retention and chain of custody policies, it would indicate that it was "lost" for a reason and be a *very* strong indicator to a jury that something is amiss.

You might think so, but it's not so. The jury will believe the cop unless evidence is presented beyond a shadow of doubt that the cop is lying. And sometimes even then. And if the judge will slant the instructions so the jury pretty much has to convict, e.g. "If he put up his arm to block a blow from a police officer, that's resisting arrest". The loss of the footage probably won't even be revealed to the jury.

Google: Jingoism

[Anonymous Coward]

Then ask why the USA spends more on 'defense' than the next 5 countries on the list combined.

The USA projects its power well. That tends to have an effect on decisions made elsewhere.

Re:Google: Jingoism

[FireFury03]

and the last 8 years of the War on Terror have not helped.

The silly thing about the War on Terror is that I'm currently more terrified about what my own government is doing than what the terrorists are doing. And I feel equally helpless to stop it.

Re:Don't Be a Douche Bag

[Stoutlimb]

Here are the facts to back up your statement. Police or border agents don't even make the list.

Top 10 most dangerous jobs in the USA (Fatalities per 100,000)

Timber cutters 117.8
Fishers 71.1
Pilots and navigators 69.8
Structural metal workers 58.2
Drivers-sales workers 37.9
Roofers 37
Electrical power installers 32.5
Farm occupations 28
Construction laborers 27.7
Truck drivers 25
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics; survey of occupations with minimum 30 fatalities and 45,000 workers in 2002