Comment by outworlder
10 years ago
We interpreted it differently, then.
The point to take home is not how this person would perform so much better than the OP. Is which variables we can control to decrease the chance of such escalations. We can control some, but ultimately it's up to the immigration officers and host country laws.
As for the trick. It is not a trick, it is something you need to do. The actual trick is not volunteering more information than necessary.
"Hi officer. I'm mostly here for a vacation, but there will be a day where I'll speak at a conference, and another where I'll distribute resumés and meet employees from several companies to expand my network, in the hopes of getting a job with one that will sponsor a visa in the future, even though I know most will be there for the free labor. It's called a hackaton. Also, I think you'd look better without those glasses."
Not telling the truth can get you a trip back at a port of entry. Or handcuffs at a consulate or embassy. Doesn't mean you need to tell them everything going through your mind at the time.
Ignoring my other answer: This is how I feel in "I need to sleep soon" simple bullet point statements.
1) "She didn't have the right visa and therefor wasn't allowed to enter/had to leave"
Fine. Bad for her. Her fault. Figure this out in 30-60min and help her to figure out a way to head back home.
2) "You should say … and not …" suggestions.
Awful. Especially combined with all the "Just state the truth. But try to avoid saying …" ideas. I really feel that these are out of place. Just look at this thread. You're trained to answer according to the protocol, instead of stating the truth.
3) _Anyone_ suggesting that the "detention" for hours at a time in a grimy place without any contact to the outside world and decent legal counsel is a valid reaction, whatever the potential immigrant failed to explain?
In that case, you are quite messed up in my world. I wonder what's wrong with you.
(the you in this case isn't addressed at the parent - it's the general "if the shoe fits" kind of thing)
> _Anyone_ suggesting that the "detention" for hours at a time in a grimy place without any contact to the outside world and decent legal counsel is a valid reaction, whatever the potential immigrant failed to explain?
That's just terrible and should be a human rights violation. AT THE VERY LEAST the emergency contact that you are required to provide should be informed of your whereabouts.
You're kind, I'm grumpy.
You're the better person.
The thing is: When you're in front of someone that is (my experience, matching the article) somewhere between unfriendly, annoyed and power-hungry and you KNOW that this person decides about your next couple of hours (or departure), rational advise by other people probably isn't the first thing to consider.
I know that I start to react differently in a car as soon as a police car is driving in my vincinity. I know that I personally felt like shit at most airport/border controls.
Yes, I could totally write a bot to answer with 'attend' vs 'speak' and 'vacation' vs 'work' for various answers. The rules of the game (it's a game. A terrible game) are easy enough. That doesn't change the fact that humans might get stuck, feel out of place, get anxious etc. etc..
The GP (and you in this kinder version) are flying across the sky here. Is it a plane? No, it's Captain Obvious.
You (both) are right. But the advise doesn't matter. The damage was done (for what benefit? Protecting the UK against .. what?) and I'd bet that the OP knows these guidelines as well.
Here's another thing: What good is a border control if all guidelines state that you should say basically nothing and fall back to "I'm on vacation" / "I'm visiting a conference" if pressed? If the .. helpful posts online try to explain how you might game the system or at least avoid suspicion? Look at all the threads here and you'll find people saying that you should just state this or that. That you shouldn't communicate something or another. Basically the tenor is that you should withhold information or (well, basically the same thing) lie to have it easy. It's messed up.
(Again: I think that you expressed the idea quite a bit less aggressive / accusatorily (if that's even a real word) though)
Frankly, it may be that today is a better than expected day for me. Any other day and my responses could have been less kind.
> The thing is: When you're in front of someone that is (my experience, matching the article) somewhere between unfriendly, annoyed and power-hungry and you KNOW that this person decides about your next couple of hours (or departure), rational advise by other people probably isn't the first thing to consider.
This is true. I avoided visiting my sister in the US for YEARS after my first contact with immigration authorities. And I wasn't even detained, just delayed for a couple of hours and had to wait in this room with other people. I've yet to visit Japan again, though. And it's been 16 years now.
> I know that I start to react differently in a car as soon as a police car is driving in my vincinity.
Yeap. The first time (and to this date, only) I was stopped by CHP, I was shaking. Not because I had done anything wrong, but it was precisely for the reason you describe. And I was treated in a very polite way, documentation checked, good to go have a nice day. I can imagine a less polite encounter wouldn't have gone so well.
It is all about power and how easily these people can screw up with you if they so desire. Thankfully, most people are just there for their jobs and have no intention of doing so.
In a sane system, we shouldn't have to rely on what someone's mood is in a specific day.