I dunno...passports or something
-
This Travel.Stackexchange post....wow. Especially the answers that suggest committing outright fraud and felonies (to cover up a forged visa):
Will replacing a fake visa with a different fake visa cause me problems when applying for a legal study permit?
I have a problem, 4 years ago my passport was stamped with a fake visa. I want to apply for a legal study permit now so my mother sought counsel from this immigration services agents and she took my
-
@Benjamin-Hall maybe it's because I'm Polish, but I don't see anything wrong with not-accidentally destroying your passport and getting replacement. As for why they won't just come clean with the relevant authorities and submit to whatever punishment they're due... What person in their right mind would do that?
-
@Benjamin-Hall maybe it's because I'm Polish, but I don't see anything wrong with not-accidentally destroying your passport and getting replacement. As for why they won't just come clean with the relevant authorities and submit to whatever punishment they're due... What person in their right mind would do that?
While that might be the pragmatic thing to do, it's still a felony (on top of two separate felonies for forging visas). Suggesting such a thing on a public site (with your identity attached to it)? That's special.
I'll avoid Garage content, but....really. The proper response to not being allowed into a country isn't to forge visas (or accept such), it's to not go there. There's no right of entry that can justify the law-breaking here.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
@Benjamin-Hall maybe it's because I'm Polish, but I don't see anything wrong with not-accidentally destroying your passport and getting replacement. As for why they won't just come clean with the relevant authorities and submit to whatever punishment they're due... What person in their right mind would do that?
While that might be the pragmatic thing to do, it's still a felony (on top of two separate felonies for forging visas). Suggesting such a thing on a public site (with your identity attached to it)? That's special.
Chances are they live in a country where they cannot be prosecuted by it (like USA).
I'll avoid Garage content, but....really. The proper response to not being allowed into a country isn't to forge visas (or accept such), it's to not go there. There's no right of entry that can justify the law-breaking here.
In principle, I agree... But not that they didn't do it themselves - it was their mother that went to the corrupt agent to cover it up (and presumably also to get the fake visa in the first place). Sure, it is illegal. But circumstances suggests that up to this point, they might've not done anything morally wrong themselves. So I don't really see why they should pay for the wrongdoings of other people.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
@Benjamin-Hall maybe it's because I'm Polish, but I don't see anything wrong with not-accidentally destroying your passport and getting replacement. As for why they won't just come clean with the relevant authorities and submit to whatever punishment they're due... What person in their right mind would do that?
While that might be the pragmatic thing to do, it's still a felony (on top of two separate felonies for forging visas). Suggesting such a thing on a public site (with your identity attached to it)? That's special.
Chances are they live in a country where they cannot be prosecuted by it (like USA).
Doesn't matter, it's still remarkably stupid. And looks horrible.
I'll avoid Garage content, but....really. The proper response to not being allowed into a country isn't to forge visas (or accept such), it's to not go there. There's no right of entry that can justify the law-breaking here.
In principle, I agree... But not that they didn't do it themselves - it was their mother that went to the corrupt agent to cover it up (and presumably also to get the fake visa in the first place). Sure, it is illegal. But circumstances suggests that up to this point, they might've not done anything morally wrong themselves. So I don't really see why they should pay for the wrongdoings of other people.
Did they knowingly take advantage of someone else's felony? Then they're a felon (conspiracy to commit immigration fraud). And committing another felony to cover it up isn't exactly a moral feat.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
I'll avoid Garage content, but....really. The proper response to not being allowed into a country isn't to forge visas (or accept such), it's to not go there. There's no right of entry that can justify the law-breaking here.
In principle, I agree... But not that they didn't do it themselves - it was their mother that went to the corrupt agent to cover it up (and presumably also to get the fake visa in the first place). Sure, it is illegal. But circumstances suggests that up to this point, they might've not done anything morally wrong themselves. So I don't really see why they should pay for the wrongdoings of other people.
Did they knowingly take advantage of someone else's felony?
My guess? Probably not. And even if they did, they were a minor at the time - it's not like they've had any choice.
Then they're a felon (conspiracy to commit immigration fraud).
And committing another felony to cover it up isn't exactly a moral feat.
But it isn't exactly immoral either, if it's not their fault.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
I'll avoid Garage content, but....really. The proper response to not being allowed into a country isn't to forge visas (or accept such), it's to not go there. There's no right of entry that can justify the law-breaking here.
In principle, I agree... But not that they didn't do it themselves - it was their mother that went to the corrupt agent to cover it up (and presumably also to get the fake visa in the first place). Sure, it is illegal. But circumstances suggests that up to this point, they might've not done anything morally wrong themselves. So I don't really see why they should pay for the wrongdoings of other people.
Did they knowingly take advantage of someone else's felony?
My guess? Probably not. And even if they did, they were a minor at the time - it's not like they've had any choice.
Then they're a felon (conspiracy to commit immigration fraud).
And committing another felony to cover it up isn't exactly a moral feat.
But it isn't exactly immoral either, if it's not their fault.
Committing another felony is their fault. They could accept the fact that they're ineligible for a visa and not attempt to get one. That's the moral choice. Two wrongs don't make a right--just because the first may not have been your fault doesn't mean you are justified in committing another to cover it up.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
I'll avoid Garage content, but....really. The proper response to not being allowed into a country isn't to forge visas (or accept such), it's to not go there. There's no right of entry that can justify the law-breaking here.
In principle, I agree... But not that they didn't do it themselves - it was their mother that went to the corrupt agent to cover it up (and presumably also to get the fake visa in the first place). Sure, it is illegal. But circumstances suggests that up to this point, they might've not done anything morally wrong themselves. So I don't really see why they should pay for the wrongdoings of other people.
Did they knowingly take advantage of someone else's felony?
My guess? Probably not. And even if they did, they were a minor at the time - it's not like they've had any choice.
Then they're a felon (conspiracy to commit immigration fraud).
And committing another felony to cover it up isn't exactly a moral feat.
But it isn't exactly immoral either, if it's not their fault.
Committing another felony is their fault.
Take a step back for a second. Why is what they're doing a felony? What is the purpose of the law that says their action is a felony? Should they - an unwilling victim of immigration fraud - even be in crosshairs of this law? Are they the kind of person it's targeted for? I think they aren't.
USA should have a safe way for people like them - minors forced to take part in immigration fraud - to legally clear their prior immigration record and start with a blank slate. Until then, I fully approve of taking superficially legal actions (requesting new passport is legal) to do what they'd be allowed to do if not for their abusive parents.
At the same time, I believe in strong borders, and think USA should deport everyone who entered the country illegally, regardless of circumstances.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
I'll avoid Garage content, but....really. The proper response to not being allowed into a country isn't to forge visas (or accept such), it's to not go there. There's no right of entry that can justify the law-breaking here.
In principle, I agree... But not that they didn't do it themselves - it was their mother that went to the corrupt agent to cover it up (and presumably also to get the fake visa in the first place). Sure, it is illegal. But circumstances suggests that up to this point, they might've not done anything morally wrong themselves. So I don't really see why they should pay for the wrongdoings of other people.
Did they knowingly take advantage of someone else's felony?
My guess? Probably not. And even if they did, they were a minor at the time - it's not like they've had any choice.
Then they're a felon (conspiracy to commit immigration fraud).
And committing another felony to cover it up isn't exactly a moral feat.
But it isn't exactly immoral either, if it's not their fault.
Committing another felony is their fault.
Take a step back for a second. Why is what they're doing a felony? What is the purpose of the law that says their action is a felony? Should they - an unwilling victim of immigration fraud - even be in crosshairs of this law? Are they the kind of person it's targeted for? I think they aren't.
USA should have a safe way for people like them - minors forced to take part in immigration fraud - to legally clear their prior immigration record and start with a blank slate. Until then, I fully approve of taking superficially legal actions (requesting new passport is legal) to do what they'd be allowed to do if not for their abusive parents.
At the same time, I believe in strong borders, and think USA should deport everyone who entered the country illegally, regardless of circumstances.
He can clear his name just fine (as long as the prior fraud was not detected) by letting the current passport expire naturally and then reapplying properly (with a non-fraudulent passport). That's the safe-harbor. Heck, if he went in to the embassy and could prove that he was a minor at the time of the fraud (and was still a minor when he left the country for the last time under that visa), they'd likely just let it go completely. They have that discretion.
What he shouldn't do is commit fraud. Which submitting a fake destruction report is (it's specifically covered). And yes, it's exactly to prevent people from covering up other fraud or manipulating the system. That's the whole point of that particular provision.
And giving minors a free pass would undermine the entire system--it would encourage people to come here illegally and dump their kids....oh wait. That's exactly what happens because people give kids a free pass. It's a horrible incentive that puts kids at extreme risk. Bad idea.
Immigration laws are entirely malum prohibidum. Violations of the process are all there are. That doesn't make them bad laws.
-
I fully approve of taking superficially legal actions (requesting new passport is legal)
Not if he still has the old one.
Pertinent quotes from DS-64:
False statements made knowingly and willfully on this form, in U.S. passport applications, or in affidavits or other supporting documents submitted therewith are punishable by fine and/or imprisonment under U.S. law, including the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 1001 and/or 18 U.S.C. 1542. Alteration or mutilation of a U.S. passport is punishable by fine and/or imprisonment under the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 1543
A U.S. national may not normally bear more than one valid or potentially valid U.S. passport book and/or card at a time. Therefore, a statement is required when applying for a new U.S. passport if the previously valid or potentially valid passport is not submitted. Your statement must detail why the previous U.S. passport cannot be presented.
I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury all of the following: 1) that I have read and understood the warning on page one of this form; 2) the information provided herein is correct and complete; 3) I have not given my U.S. passport book and/or passport card to another person or disposed of it in an unauthorized manner; [...]
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
I'll avoid Garage content, but....really. The proper response to not being allowed into a country isn't to forge visas (or accept such), it's to not go there. There's no right of entry that can justify the law-breaking here.
In principle, I agree... But not that they didn't do it themselves - it was their mother that went to the corrupt agent to cover it up (and presumably also to get the fake visa in the first place). Sure, it is illegal. But circumstances suggests that up to this point, they might've not done anything morally wrong themselves. So I don't really see why they should pay for the wrongdoings of other people.
Did they knowingly take advantage of someone else's felony?
My guess? Probably not. And even if they did, they were a minor at the time - it's not like they've had any choice.
Then they're a felon (conspiracy to commit immigration fraud).
And committing another felony to cover it up isn't exactly a moral feat.
But it isn't exactly immoral either, if it's not their fault.
Committing another felony is their fault.
Take a step back for a second. Why is what they're doing a felony? What is the purpose of the law that says their action is a felony? Should they - an unwilling victim of immigration fraud - even be in crosshairs of this law? Are they the kind of person it's targeted for? I think they aren't.
USA should have a safe way for people like them - minors forced to take part in immigration fraud - to legally clear their prior immigration record and start with a blank slate. Until then, I fully approve of taking superficially legal actions (requesting new passport is legal) to do what they'd be allowed to do if not for their abusive parents.
At the same time, I believe in strong borders, and think USA should deport everyone who entered the country illegally, regardless of circumstances.
He can clear his name just fine (as long as the prior fraud was not detected) by letting the current passport expire naturally and then reapplying properly (with a non-fraudulent passport). That's the safe-harbor.
That's not clearing anything; that's just covering the tracks in another way, one that takes longer and isn't in any way better. All his previous entries, if any (and there's probably been at least one), still count against him.
Heck, if he went in to the embassy and could prove that he was a minor at the time of the fraud (and was still a minor when he left the country for the last time under that visa), they'd likely just let it go completely. They have that discretion.
"Likely". "Discretion". I don't think you've understood my point.
And yes, it's exactly to prevent people from covering up other fraud or manipulating the system. That's the whole point of that particular provision.
No. It's to prevent people who are likely to have other reasons to be denied entry from hiding those reasons. Fraud would be dead law if presenting real information didn't have any negative consequences.
And giving minors a free pass would undermine the entire system--it would encourage people to come here illegally and dump their kids
Have you missed the part where I said they should be deported if they entered illegally? Not banning minors from applying for entry the legal way if they fulfill all the criteria they'd normally have to fulfill is a completely different thing from not deporting minors.
@heterodox said in WTF Bites:
Not if he still has the old one.
Pertinent quotes from DS-64:He's not a US national. And there are ways to make it so it's not technically a lie that they've lost/accidentally destroyed the old one.
-
He's not a US national. And there are ways to make it so it's not technically a lie that they've lost/accidentally destroyed the old one.
Bad faith actions count as lies. You disposed of it illegally (or "lost" it). That's exactly what the statute covers and what you swear to not have done. Hence, you're liable.
And shoulds don't matter. Right now, the choice is either
a) accept that you're not eligible for a visa and don't try
b) commit felonies (thus validating that you're not a good candidate for a visa).only one of those is a morally valid choice in my mind. And the very existence of people willing to lie about such things and cut corners validates the fears of people who want stronger controls on immigration.
As a note, I strongly believe that the US should accept more immigrants and have an easier process. Like double to start. But it doesn't. The law is the law, and the law is not unjust (in this case)--there is no right to visit the US. It's a privilege, and this person does not qualify. Lying about that just makes things worse.
-
And there are ways to make it so it's not technically a lie that they've lost/accidentally destroyed the old one. [emphasis added to this amazing display of cognitive dissonance -@heterodox]
Okay. Cool. Let me tell you from my own experience, judges love those kinds of arguments. I would imagine immigration judges especially love them.
Yes, as soon as you say "technically" you are of course free to do what you wanted to do in the first place and it's not at all a sign that you're doing something wrong.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in WTF Bites:
Committing another felony is their fault. They could accept the fact that they're ineligible for a visa and not attempt to get one. That's the moral choice. Two wrongs don't make a right--just because the first may not have been your fault doesn't mean you are justified in committing another to cover it up.
So they should value their government's property rights to the passport (that said government probably made them pay for but considers its property anyway) higher than their education and hence future chances to have a prosperous family? Sounds like a legalistic but not very moral stance to me.
-
Should I request a Jeffing? I'm pretty good at invoking the wraith of the moderators...
-
So they should value their government's property rights to the passport
Irrelevant, a passport is just a paper representation of the status information. A government can unilateral change your status even if the paper itself can't be changed immediately. One could also argument that you are not strictly paying for the paper itself but for the services rendered of creating and validating the paper into a passport. You can own the paper allright, but you don't own what it represents. Just like a bank can invalidate your card without your consent and you pay for that too.
-
So they should value their government's property rights to the passport
Irrelevant, a passport is just a paper representation of the status information. A government can unilateral change your status even if the paper itself can't be changed immediately. One could also argument that you are not strictly paying for the paper itself but for the services rendered of creating and validating the paper into a passport. You can own the paper allright, but you don't own what it represents. Just like a bank can invalidate your card without your consent and you pay for that too.
Wasn't the fact that the passport says "Property of the Moron Republic of Kerbleckistan" the only thing that would supposedly make it wrong to simply throw it in the shredder and get a new one? @Benjamin-Hall ?
-
All this talk about passports kinda makes me want to renew mine. Or is it apply for a new one, since it's been a few years since it expired?
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in WTF Bites:
All this talk about passports kinda makes me want to renew mine. Or is it apply for a new one, since it's been a few years since it expired?
Suspected robots don't need passports. They go in the hold.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in WTF Bites:
All this talk about passports kinda makes me want to renew mine. Or is it apply for a new one, since it's been a few years since it expired?
Suspected robots don't need passports. They go in the hold.
Tried. Got denied. Apparently there are limits on what amount of wattage battery you contain. Stupid stupid dumb rules...
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in I dunno...passports or something:
All this talk about passports kinda makes me want to renew mine. Or is it apply for a new one, since it's been a few years since it expired?
Hmm. There's an interesting observation lurking in my mind...
called me this morning to tell me that my naturalisation application had been accepted and approved and all and if I would kindly come to the préfecture they would give me the documentary proof of the same. So I did and they did and now I can have two passports. Legally.(1)Er, in part because it costs nearly 400 quid to renounce your British citizenship, but mostly because I see no reason to renounce it anyway.
Er, yes, that means that my long strange journey to Frenchness is done. I went to the mairie to do the paperwork for a carte d'identité this afternoon after having (a) gone home from work due to an inability to concentrate on pretty much anything except getting my hands on the décret, and also after having consumed a tasty steak and a half-size bottle of tasty (French) red wine.
I'm in a good mood.
(1) Don't forget that I'm also the person who, in 1981, entered the
on a 90-day tourist visa and stayed for nine years. But I did it legally, thanks.
-
@heterodox said in I dunno...passports or something:
And there are ways to make it so it's not technically a lie that they've lost/accidentally destroyed the old one. [emphasis added to this amazing display of cognitive dissonance -@heterodox]
Okay. Cool. Let me tell you from my own experience, judges love those kinds of arguments. I would imagine immigration judges especially love them.
Judges? What judges? We're talking about an administrative procedure of replacing your passport.
In Poland, people routinely claim their ID was lost to avoid the fee for replacing it on demand. I've yet to hear of anyone getting in trouble for it.
Yes, as soon as you say "technically"
You think I'm an idiot? Of course I'd never say the word "technically" when dealing with the government! I used it here because nobody here is the government and so we can have honest conversation.
Personally, I believe everyone should be allowed to freely do on purpose everything they are allowed to do by accident.
-
@Steve_The_Cynic
Congratulations!
-
@Steve_The_Cynic said in I dunno...passports or something:
a tasty steak
no snails or smelly cheese?
poser
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in I dunno...passports or something:
Should I request a Jeffing? I'm pretty good at invoking the wraith of the moderators...
what the fuck did you expect other than an argument about the thread topic?
-
@pie_flavor Um, this thread you are seeing is already Jeffed.
-
@topspin exactly!
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in I dunno...passports or something:
invoking the wraith of the moderators
The mods are
s, not 
s. Although being dead might also explain their usual lack of activity.
-
@HardwareGeek said in I dunno...passports or something:
@Tsaukpaetra said in I dunno...passports or something:
invoking the wraith of the moderators
The mods are
s, not s. Although being dead might also explain their usual lack of activity.Sounds like an infusion of blood may be necessary. I'll prepare the needles!
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in I dunno...passports or something:
As a note, I strongly believe that the US should [...] have an easier process.
Legal immigration into the US is a clusterfuck. It shouldn't fucking take that long and cost the applicant that much money for a bureaucrat to decide whether someone is eligible for a visa.
-
@Luhmann said in I dunno...passports or something:
no snails or smelly cheese?
No frog legs either. I'm disappointed.
-
@topspin said in I dunno...passports or something:
@pie_flavor Um, this thread you are seeing is already Jeffed.
Do you mean to indicate that mean it can never be jeffed any further?
-
@PleegWat said in I dunno...passports or something:
Do you mean to indicate that mean it can never be jeffed any further?
-
@heterodox E.g. in Germany, it is legal to have 2 passports at the same time. Imagine you went to Israel for holidays, and got an Israeli visa stamped into your passport. Next, your boss sends you to Saudi-Arabia for business - they won't let you enter the country because of that Israeli visa.
Solution: ask for a second passport, and know where to use which one.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in I dunno...passports or something:
by letting the current passport expire naturally
Some countries still issue passports with 25-year expiry date. Mostly these are the same countries where you have to tip/grease every official associated with the process separately, so your application in not ... misplaced.
-
@dfdub said in I dunno...passports or something:
It shouldn't fucking take that long and cost the applicant that much money
Definitely on the latter; on the former, I haven't seen anything that doesn't just take a ton of time on the government side and don't think the immigration process is necessarily unique in this respect. Not to say that government couldn't improve, obviously, but it has about a hundred areas in which it really needs to improve.
@BernieTheBernie said in I dunno...passports or something:
@heterodox E.g. in Germany, it is legal to have 2 passports at the same time.
The only case in which this is really possible in the U.S. is when you're a U.S. government employee and you travel abroad for your job, in which case you have an official passport in addition to your regular one.
Imagine you went to Israel for holidays, and got an Israeli visa stamped into your passport. Next, your boss sends you to Saudi-Arabia for business - they won't let you enter the country because of that Israeli visa.
Huh. I didn't know that but really probably should have. In the example you give, you might indeed have two passports in the U.S. if you work for the government, but I wonder how it's handled if both trips were on official business.
-
@dfdub said in I dunno...passports or something:
@Benjamin-Hall said in I dunno...passports or something:
As a note, I strongly believe that the US should [...] have an easier process.
Legal immigration into the US is a clusterfuck. It shouldn't fucking take that long and cost the applicant that much money for a bureaucrat to decide whether someone is eligible for a visa.
A significant part of the processing time isn't bureaucracy, but rate-limiting. And it makes perfect sense to rate-limit immigration. The problem is the queues have grown to absurd sizes by now (AFAIK average waiting time for Mexico is now 20 years?)
-
@PleegWat said in I dunno...passports or something:
@topspin said in I dunno...passports or something:
@pie_flavor Um, this thread you are seeing is already Jeffed.
Do you mean to indicate that mean it can never be jeffed any further?
I mean to indicate that @Tsaukpaetra was complaining because it was in another thread, so @pie_flavor's remark that the content exactly fits the title is meaningless.
You can, of course, try to move it to the garage if you're so inclined.
-
@heterodox said in I dunno...passports or something:
Huh. I didn't know that but really probably should have. In the example you give, you might indeed have two passports in the U.S. if you work for the government, but I wonder how it's handled if both trips were on official business.
I believe it works similarly. I've definitely heard this before, and while I don't remember exactly I think it was from an American friend who went to Kuwait first and Israel some time later.
-
@topspin said in I dunno...passports or something:
I believe it works similarly. I've definitely heard this before, and while I don't remember exactly I think it was from an American friend who went to Kuwait first and Israel some time later.
Well, you couldn't have two personal passports. And while maybe there's a process to ditch the first official passport and get a new one, I haven't heard of one; they're stingy even with renewal of them. Maybe countries with those sorts of entry restrictions just exempt official passports.
-
@levicki right. There is a possibility you're a full-time Russian troll.
-
@heterodox said in I dunno...passports or something:
Well, you couldn't have two personal passports.
You might be able to get a 2nd US passport — here's how - The Points Guy
You may be eligible for two U.S. passports if you can prove that your circumstances require needing both. Here's what you need to know to request a second passport.
-
@TheCPUWizard Ah, cool, that does include the "denied entry" scenario right there. Didn't know that.
