travel warning: TSA took my allen wrenches

In article , C J Campbell
wrote:

The list contains disclaimers which allow local examiners to make up their
own rules. If, in the sole opinion of the checker, you are carrying
something that could be used as a weapon, then they can confiscate it, fine
you, or even have you arrested. If you complain, that is a bad attitude,
which automatically doubles your fine and tacks time on your sentence. Read
the guidelines for civil actions. It actually says that.

I would like to see that tested in court. I don't see it standing up to
the cold light of day. There are ways to appropriately complain, and if
treated incorrectly then there will be large succesful law suits.

--
--Chip
remove dots in prefix to fix email address

As I recall, US law requires all US citizens to enter the country on
a
US passport.

When a passport is required for entry then yes,
it must be a US passport. There's an exception
for young children who can enter the US if listed
in a parent's foreign passport and if other proof
of US citizenship is provided, but it's not used
frequently, especially since many countries
require everyone to have their own individual
passport.

It doesn't matter that you are a dual national. They must
have made an administrative exception in your case.

More than likely they just didn't realize that
the person in question was also a US citizen.
A person born abroad whose US citizenship is
via parentage would have nothing listed
in his non-US passport to indicate that
he might be a US citizen.

The State Department doesn't really care if you are a dual national

- their rules allow it - but Homeland Security sure DOES take an
interest...

State department rules only tolerate dual nationality.

If you mean that there's no law saying that dual
nationality is allowed, that's true. But that's
the way it is in most countries. Most countries
don't legislate to specifically allow dual
nationality. Dual nationality results when
there are no laws prohibiting dual nationality.

It used to be against the law but the supreme court
ruled that people could have dual nationality.

More precisely, they ruled that performing certain
actions could not automatically cause loss of
US nationality. This nullified the laws that
caused automatic loss of citizenship.

Now the state department simply considers dual
nationals as US citizens, and ignores any other
nationality claim.

That's what most other countries do also. They
consider dual nationals as being one of their
citizens and they ignore any other nationality
claim. They apply their laws that same way
as they do to a person who only holds
that country's nationality. I hold US, Canadian,
and British citizenship. US considers me as a
US citizen, Canada considers me as a Canadian
citizen, and Britain considers me as a British
citizen. None of these countries will treat
me as a foreigner.

Special Agent Fulla Bluster would like to ask you a few
questions..."
YUP!...and especially about that old Cuban immigration stamp in my
(other
country)passport, I bet)

That's a violation of US law. Everyone who is subject to US
jurisdiction, like dual nationals living in another country, are
prohibited from travelling to Cuba. (Actually, the prohibition is
against spending money) Of course the functionaries will be
interested.
Surprised you didn't get reported to the department that oversees the
"trading with the enemy act". You might have, actually.

ROTFLMAO The closest I intend to get to the US in future (or will
probably
even be allowed to) is Canada, Mexico...

Simply renounce US citizenship to reduce your grief with passports,
etc. It's a simple process that you can do at any consulate.

It used to be easy. Now they give you a bit of a hard
time about it.

Stephen Gallagher

As I recall, US law requires all US citizens to enter the country on
a
US passport.

When a passport is required for entry then yes,
it must be a US passport. There's an exception
for young children who can enter the US if listed
in a parent's foreign passport and if other proof
of US citizenship is provided, but it's not used
frequently, especially since many countries
require everyone to have their own individual
passport.

It doesn't matter that you are a dual national. They must
have made an administrative exception in your case.

More than likely they just didn't realize that
the person in question was also a US citizen.
A person born abroad whose US citizenship is
via parentage would have nothing listed
in his non-US passport to indicate that
he might be a US citizen.

The State Department doesn't really care if you are a dual national

- their rules allow it - but Homeland Security sure DOES take an
interest...

State department rules only tolerate dual nationality.

If you mean that there's no law saying that dual
nationality is allowed, that's true. But that's
the way it is in most countries. Most countries
don't legislate to specifically allow dual
nationality. Dual nationality results when
there are no laws prohibiting dual nationality.

It used to be against the law but the supreme court
ruled that people could have dual nationality.

More precisely, they ruled that performing certain
actions could not automatically cause loss of
US nationality. This nullified the laws that
caused automatic loss of citizenship.

Now the state department simply considers dual
nationals as US citizens, and ignores any other
nationality claim.

That's what most other countries do also. They
consider dual nationals as being one of their
citizens and they ignore any other nationality
claim. They apply their laws that same way
as they do to a person who only holds
that country's nationality. I hold US, Canadian,
and British citizenship. US considers me as a
US citizen, Canada considers me as a Canadian
citizen, and Britain considers me as a British
citizen. None of these countries will treat
me as a foreigner.

Special Agent Fulla Bluster would like to ask you a few
questions..."
YUP!...and especially about that old Cuban immigration stamp in my
(other
country)passport, I bet)

That's a violation of US law. Everyone who is subject to US
jurisdiction, like dual nationals living in another country, are
prohibited from travelling to Cuba. (Actually, the prohibition is
against spending money) Of course the functionaries will be
interested.
Surprised you didn't get reported to the department that oversees the
"trading with the enemy act". You might have, actually.

ROTFLMAO The closest I intend to get to the US in future (or will
probably
even be allowed to) is Canada, Mexico...

Simply renounce US citizenship to reduce your grief with passports,
etc. It's a simple process that you can do at any consulate.

It used to be easy. Now they give you a bit of a hard
time about it.

Stephen Gallagher

wrote:


As I recall, US law requires all US citizens to enter the country
on a US passport.

When a passport is required for entry then yes,
it must be a US passport.

Thank you for pointing that out.

US regulations do not require US citizens to have a passport if they are
entering from a country in the Americas, only proof of citizenship and a
photo ID. Since most countries other than Canada, Mexico, and a couple
of Caribbean countries require US citizens to have passports, the
concept is somewhat moot for anyone traveling elsewhere.

wrote:


As I recall, US law requires all US citizens to enter the country
on a US passport.

When a passport is required for entry then yes,
it must be a US passport.

Thank you for pointing that out.

US regulations do not require US citizens to have a passport if they are
entering from a country in the Americas, only proof of citizenship and a
photo ID. Since most countries other than Canada, Mexico, and a couple
of Caribbean countries require US citizens to have passports, the
concept is somewhat moot for anyone traveling elsewhere.

C J Campbell wrote:

Seriously, I find flying to be very convenient, fast and comfortable. If I
want to visit the grandchildren I can be there in 3 1/2 hours, instead of 11
hours of driving over two major mountain passes in winter. And I get some
great photos out of the trip, too. Sigh Even so I still have trouble
finding time to get away.

I find it far more convenient to drive anywhere that's 12 hours or less
in driving time. I saves almost no time to fly and is far from
convenient or comfortable. Let's say I want to go somewhere that's 3
hours flight time vs. 12 hours driving time. If I fly, the closest major
airport is Salt Lake City. I could fly out of Rock Springs, if I didn't
mind paying an extra $500-$800 more for the ticket. I mind. So I drive
to Salt Lake City, 3 hours drive time from my door to actually getting
inside the airport. But, you've now got to be at the airport a minimum
of one hour prior to flight departure, we're at 4 hours. This also means
that I'll probably have to drag my ass out of bed well before the crack
of dawn. Let's assume the flight is actually on time, this has never
actually happened to me, but we'll assume it. Get on the plane, fly for
3 hours, 7 hours elapsed. Get to the destination airport. Wait around in
baggage claim for who knows how long, let's say it's a good day and it's
only .5 hours, 7.5 elapsed. Of course, I now have to rent a car. Screw
around there for at least another half hour, 8 hours elapsed. Now, if
the destination airport was my final destination, all that's left is to
sit in traffic for however long it takes to find the hotel in a car that
I'm unfamiliar with and probably don't like. If not, I've still got
driving ahead of me. At absolute best, I've saved all of four hours.
I've been spending that 8 hours getting there in a crappy seat that
doesn't have enough leg room. My back is killing me an hour into the
flight. Odds are, somewhere on that plane is some moron with a two year
old that's screaming its head off the entire flight, preventing anybody
on that plane from just sleeping through it. I'm vegan and if there's a
meal involved, they've undoubtedly screwed that up, so I'm starving.
Actually, I've given up on the airlines actually getting *that* right at
all and when I do have to fly, bring my own lunch with me. To be fair,
America West got it right and was the only one to ever do so. The food
also looked about a hundred times better than what the m-eaters were
eating. I'm also in an extremely crappy mood because I've been in a tube
with wings for three hours where smoking is not allowed. Crappy mood is
putting in mildly, I'm ready to pound the crap out of the first person
that gives me any sh*t at all. When I finally get to wherever I'm going,
I'm ****ed off, I'm dead tired, my back hurts, and I'm hungry. Yeah,
that sounds like a fun way to spend an entire day.

If I drive the same trip, it takes a little longer to get there. Might
take a lot longer because who knows what cool things I'll find along the
way that I might want to stop and photograph. I can stop at Visitor's
Centers and pick up brochures that tout the area's attractions, maybe
even finding a spot that I'd like to return to some day to spend more
time on. I can pack an entire cooler full of food I can actually eat if
I want. I can smoke 'til I choke if I want. I can take along any tools
that I think I might need for my gear. I don't have to worry about
leaving high speed film at home. I don't have to worry about some
low-life stealing my stuff. My baggage doesn't get lost or take a better
trip than I did. I don't have to put up with snotty flight attendants or
screeners. I'm not going to get searched. I don't have to pay for a
rental car when I get where I'm going. The worst that'll happen is that
I might get a speeding ticket somewhere along the way.

As for Hawaii or any other island, screw it, I'd take a boat long before
I'd consider getting on a plane to get there.


--
Angela M. Cable
Paint Shop Pro 9 Private Beta Tester
Neocognition, digital scrapbooking source:
http://www.neocognition.com/

PSP Tutorial Links:
http://www.psplinks.com/

5th Street Studio, free graphics, websets and mo
http://www.fortunecity.com/westwood/alaia/354/

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:53:12 GMT, "Gene Palmiter"
wrote:


"Dave Fouchey" wrote in message
.. .
I drive, saves an awful lot of trouble and I get to carry anything I
want...

Dave


I want to take photos in Hawaii...and I too would rather drive. I know
Hawaii has an interstate highway...but I can't find where it joins any other
interstate highway....please help!

Buy your own boat; it's just like driving!

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 00:53:12 GMT, "Gene Palmiter"
wrote:


"Dave Fouchey" wrote in message
.. .
I drive, saves an awful lot of trouble and I get to carry anything I
want...

Dave


I want to take photos in Hawaii...and I too would rather drive. I know
Hawaii has an interstate highway...but I can't find where it joins any other
interstate highway....please help!

Buy your own boat; it's just like driving!

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

Gene Palmiter wrote:
"Dave Fouchey" wrote in message
...

I drive, saves an awful lot of trouble and I get to carry anything I
want...

Dave



I want to take photos in Hawaii...and I too would rather drive. I know
Hawaii has an interstate highway...but I can't find where it joins any other
interstate highway....please help!



Well, the H1, H2 and H3 are all connected, but none leave Oahu,
and none of the other islands have "interstate highways".
Because they are labeled "H" they are Hawaii state highways,
not interstate. Interstates are labeled with "I."

I suppose you could visit via the information superhighway ;-)
If you want to physically follow the information superhighway,
it leaves Oahu at Hunama Bay: divers use it to guide them
beyond the reef (I've done that many times, snorkeling).
But to make it all the way to California, you would need
a very large air tank! ;^)

Roger

Gene Palmiter wrote:
"Dave Fouchey" wrote in message
...

I drive, saves an awful lot of trouble and I get to carry anything I
want...

Dave



I want to take photos in Hawaii...and I too would rather drive. I know
Hawaii has an interstate highway...but I can't find where it joins any other
interstate highway....please help!



Well, the H1, H2 and H3 are all connected, but none leave Oahu,
and none of the other islands have "interstate highways".
Because they are labeled "H" they are Hawaii state highways,
not interstate. Interstates are labeled with "I."

I suppose you could visit via the information superhighway ;-)
If you want to physically follow the information superhighway,
it leaves Oahu at Hunama Bay: divers use it to guide them
beyond the reef (I've done that many times, snorkeling).
But to make it all the way to California, you would need
a very large air tank! ;^)

Roger