REFORML.org

Have you ever shoplifted? Even as a teenager, but over 18? Have you ever vandalized someone’s property in anger, maybe, even as a teenager, but over 18?

Have you ever experimented with drugs as a teenager, but over 18? If you said “no” to those questions and can look back upon your youth and feel excellent about the things you did back then, well, we should give you a gold star! No sarcasm intended, you did things right and society can feel safe and contented.

Many people, however, have a little ghost in their closet from the days of “becoming a man” or just trying to be an adult. We are human and humans are prone to making mistakes. How long should a youthful indiscretion follow a mature adult around? How many years of post event regret should hamper an individual. Should he be accountable for life?

Would a reasonable person feel that a person who committed a non-violent crime once while still a teenager and served their sentence for it (community service – let’s say and let’s say it was 15 years ago) still have to report it in writing so that someone can judge their worthiness as a person?

There will be some die hards reading this that will say, “Yes, that person broke the law no matter what and we all need to know about it!” OK, fair enough, if such a person ever tried for a “high security” job like astronaut? Maybe.

Or perhaps under some special circumstances involving a higher moral fiber – what? minister? public office? article writer? Those positions have had their share of scandal with drugs and other offenses, so no truly effective screening process really exists, then.

What about a tourist? How high should we raise the bar for them?

Imagine you are from an American-friendly country like Great Britain, Estonia, Finland, Japan, New Zealand, etc. You get on the plane to go on vacation to the U.S.A. It’s before ESTA (Electronic System for Travel Authorization), so you can truly claim a bit of cluelessness here. All you know is that you don’t “need a visa” to go to the U.S. from your origination point.

Midway through the flight, you are presented with a card to fill out. It’s called an I-94W form. OK, what’s on this thing?

They want my name…yes, OK… where am I staying? OK, I’m a visitor, and they want to keep tabs on me. Still, at this point, all very reasonable I’d say. Then you get to the questions.

Most people don’t think too much about the questions, but saying “yes” to any of the questions posed to you means that you will not be allowed to enter the U.S. Plane ticket cost is wasted, hotel costs may be lost, car rental, etc.

What type of questions must be answered in the interests of national security?

First question: Are you infirm? ANY physical or mental disorder. Not just contagious diseases, mind you, but ANY physical or mental disorder.

There is a definition of what needs to be reported amounting to harm to your property, self, or others since ESTA came about, but no such luxury prior to January of 2009. However, even under ESTA you technically must report very personal, perhaps painful information about yourself.

For example, if you ever attempted suicide, you are not allowed to fly to the U.S. (while you are flying there, btw) until you contact the American embassy. My question, why is that the business of the U.S. government? Unless you plan to top yourself by jumping from the Empire State Building or the Golden Gate Bridge and add to the taxpayers burden of investigating the incident, why does the government need to concern itself with a person’s unfortunate history?

It also asks if you are a drug abuser or addict. Apparently the government takes a dim view of this, but casual use isn’t addressed…hmmmm …must be OK until you get to the next question.

Looks like they are OK with casual use unless you got arrested for it. Now they are against it! Bit of a tightrope act on that one.

The question is posed: Have you ever been arrested or convicted of an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or have been a controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral activities? Long winded, archaic, draconian, ridiculous.

Marijuana, in a small enough quantity is exempt from “controlled substance” in this case, although it isn’t stated. Funny, I always thought marijuana was illegal too? However, similar low level mediums like speed and hashish are not exempt and are treated equally to cocaine and heroin. The government expects the ordinary traveler to know these things, I imagine.

And why should anyone’s “immoral activities” be anyone’s concern as long as they are not illegal? Who is the judge of what is immoral? Victorian England was less prudish than Homeland Security.

There is no time limit on the drug/moral turpitude confession, so if you were 18 or 85, please put “yes” in the box.

What? You haven’t been arrested since you were 19? Possession of speed you say? Sorry, pal, we don’t want “your kind” spending your tourist dollars in THIS country! Take your “ex-con” hippie ass to Canada!

There are more questions to answer…are you a spy? are you a terrorist? are you a Nazi?, etc. If you are any of those things… we trust you will do the honorable thing and put “yes” in the box.

So, here we are. What is the point, you wonder. The government authors of the I-94W, now ESTA, are screening tourists (in the name of national security) to weed out any but the most purest of the pure. Not only are their methods unenforceable for the majority of tourists that place a “no” in the box when it should have been a “yes,” but the very nature of the questioning is outrageous in itself. If it’s a question of national security and public health, let’s get beyond pointless questioning and do something concrete to protect our citizens from real threats.

Passports from our fellow ESTA countries, for example, should be encoded with pertinent data such as violent crimes or habitual offenses that could put other people at risk. But even these cases should be examined by their merits or lack of merits. Getting in a bar fight once, though perhaps violent, should not be held against a tourist indefinitely, but maybe getting into a bar fight every Friday probably should. It’s common sense.

Why include drug offenses, even small quantity possession of a minor controlled substance? Simple. It’s a fallout of a failed “war on drugs” mentality that the U.S. clings to in its misguided moral crusade.

Most of these tourists will never face the wrath of the USCIS (U.S Citizenship and Immigration Services). They’ll shop, play, gamble and bolster the U.S. economy and then go home with memories of a great vacation (illegal vacation, let’s be clear).

But, there are victims of the “wrong answer in the box.” People who came for vacation, but got married to a U.S. citizen during their 3 months here (not illegal), or got a job offer and started the proper paperwork to be able to stay with another visa. If there is any hint of a drug offense, even once, even 15 years ago, they are doomed in any quest to stay in the U.S. Fathers, husbands, productive members of society…those things are irrelevant because that guy used speed once when he was 19, let’s never forget that.

Author: Judy Collins, www.idpi.us, www.csdp.org

Courtesy: GoArticles

Tags: