Mother and Teen Daughter Caught Smuggling Money!

[pErvinalia]

Because your quote above was talking about "questioning" people.

Exactly. The "declaration" is an answer to a question.

So fucking what if she was lying? That's like lying about whether or not you have peanuts and Coca-Cola in your trunk. No officer, I do not have anything in my trunk. Why, lookie here -- peanuts andCoca Cola....

No it's not, for the reasons given to you so far in this thread.

Of course it is -- having money -- even lots of it -- is perfectly legal, FFS. So, if a cop says to me, "Hey buddy - you have any money on you?" And, I say, "no officer, I have no money on me." Then he frisks me and finds $100,000, my lie is not a crime, so who gives a shit?

He may want to investigate me to figure out if I was covering something up by lying, but if all that he has is me lying about holding $100,000, that would not be reason to seize the money. Similarly, it should not be reason enough to seize the money from this lady.

It's NOT "perfectly legal" to take large sums of cash out of the country. Your argument is getting confused. I do agree, however, about the wrongness of them seizing the money without any legal reason to suspect it was used for criminal purposes.

[JimC]

It's only illegal if you are taking it over a national border, I take it?

The way CES was talking, it was as if they'd been arrested just walking down a street with the money...

[pErvinalia]

Yeah, I think his frothiness at Obama is getting in the way of a coherent argument from him. There's good reasons to limit the flow of undocumented money over national borders. This just doesn't seem like a good issue for him to get frothy about.

[Jason]

Why the hell didn't they roll up $1000 bills into a tight wad, stick it in a condom, and stick it up their twats? Even a full body scan would only turn up what looks like a tampon.

[Cormac]

There're a lot of posts aimed at Coito here that in my opinion contravene our "play nice" rule.

[pErvinalia]

Sometimes you have to play not-nice to get through to some people.

[Cormac]

Sometimes you have to play not-nice to get through to some people.

No. Sorry. That is precisely why we created that rule. It is not ok, for any member of this forum, to deliberately play the man, not the ball.

If you think someone has posted something that is wrong, argue the point. If that person continues to hold their position, and you don't like it, that is your problem. If you begin to feel like making cheap shot attacks at that person, it is time for you to jump into a different thread.

There is no exception to this rule that says "unless he or she annoys you".

You would not like it if it happened to you.

[pErvinalia]

I don't care if it happens to me, as long as it doesn't dominate a discussion.

We do it for Coit's own good.

[Jason]

Didn't actually read the entire thread, but I agree with Cormac in principle.

[Cormac]

I don't care if it happens to me, as long as it doesn't dominate a discussion.

We do it for Coit's own good.

Unacceptable.

And, it is irrelevant whether or not that behaviour dominates a thread. It is against our rules.

"We do it for Coit's own good"? I presume you meant this as a joke. But I don't find it funny. It isn't for you to decide what is in Coit's own good. Even if it were, it is not for you to unilaterally act on such an impulse.

What I saw on this thread so far amounts to bullying. This is why we have a rule against not playing nicely.

[pErvinalia]

[Cormac]

No. Not really.

[Hermit]

Large quantities of conceal cash, undeclared. Nope, can't see any reason to be suspicious there.

The government manufactures the requirement to "declare" it. If the government didn't have the requirement to declare the money, there would be no suspiciousness in her failure to declare.

And, I think it is bullshit for the government to require all these declarations - they amount to forcing us to testify against ourselves. That's unAmerican, and unCanadian.

Pity us Australians. Not only have we similar legal injunctions in regard to exporting cash without declaring its amount, but we also have speed limits we may drive our cars at. No matter how safely we drive, the mere fact that we do so at more than 45 kilometres above arbitrarily imposed limits, we will be arrested and the car will be impounded. If we similarly offend a second time, the car will be seized by the government and crushed. It doesn't matter that we have not killed a wallaby, cane toad or toddler in the middle of nowhere, nor have any intention to do so, that is what happens to us and our cars simply because we have laws regarding speed limits. Worse still, we don't even have to declare the speed we are doing at the time. The police simply tell us at what rate we are travelling.

[FBM]

Every time I get on an international flight, I have to fill out a Customs form testifying that I'm not carrying over USD10,000. My understanding is that this is to prevent tax evasion. It's not illegal to carry that much or more cash or valuables; it's illegal not to declare it to Customs.

[JimC]

Every time I get on an international flight, I have to fill out a Customs form testifying that I'm not carrying over USD10,000. My understanding is that this is to prevent tax evasion. It's not illegal to carry that much or more cash or valuables; it's illegal not to declare it to Customs.

I wish I had that much to declare...

It'd buy a fucking big lot of gin...