Canadian pilot posts ILLEGAL flight into US on OLC

Dickhead. Are you waiting for a response from the FSDO so you can tattle? At least he went back to where he came from, and by choice. Different situation down here on the southern border of the US.

Welllll.....Â* I think it was a pretty decent flight.Â* Congrats!

And, as to landing at a port of entry to clear customs, I'd bet that's
only required if you intend to land in the country, not fly over it.

On 7/25/2019 7:17 PM, wrote:
Dickhead. Are you waiting for a response from the FSDO so you can tattle? At least he went back to where he came from, and by choice. Different situation down here on the southern border of the US.

--
Dan, 5J

Dan, 5J

And, as to landing at a port of entry to clear customs, I'd bet that's
only required if you intend to land in the country, not fly over it.

My understanding is the same; there is a difference between 'entering the U..S.' and 'flying in U.S. airspace'.
International airports are good examples to represent these two concepts: "The international zone in an international airport is the area where arriving international passengers have not formally entered the country by clearing arrival customs and immigration controls" - but they flew through the airspace, for sure.

On Thursday, July 25, 2019 at 6:17:50 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Dickhead. Are you waiting for a response from the FSDO so you can tattle? At least he went back to where he came from, and by choice. Different situation down here on the southern border of the US.

Hello Fellow Dickhead,

I don't need to "tattle" on anyone: Chester did that all by himself by posting his flight on a public forum. Furthermore, my objective is to learn the nuances of the law, not to "tattle." And a quick search turned up the following US Code:

8 U.S. Code § 1287. Alien crewmen brought into the United States with intent to evade immigration laws; penalties

Any person, including the owner, agent, consignee, master, or commanding officer of any vessel or aircraft arriving in the United States from any place outside thereof, who shall knowingly sign on the vessel’s articles, or bring to the United States as one of the crew of such vessel or aircraft, any alien, with intent to permit or assist such alien to enter or land in the United States in violation of law, or who shall falsely and knowingly represent to a consular officer at the time of application for visa, or to the immigration officer at the port of arrival in the United States, that such alien is a bona fide member of the crew employed in any capacity regularly required for normal operation and services aboard such vessel or aircraft, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding $10,000 for each such violation, for which sum such vessel or aircraft shall be liable and may be seized and proceeded against by way of libel in any district court of the United States having jurisdiction of the offense.

=================

Remember, if you get into a dispute with these folks, THEY will be deciding what "intent" means, NOT YOU! Chester, IMO, is skating on thin ice with these flights. He said he was vague about his flight plan, which will be potentially viewed by authorities as being evasive. And if he were forced to land in the US for ANY reason he would clearly be in violation of the law, and be at a very real risk of having his glider seized and a stiff fine imposed. You knuckleheads seem to think that you can violate the law and, if caught, you can talk your way out of it with something ridiculous like "declaring an emergency." Well, THINK AGAIN! These officers hear this crap every day from real criminals and are well versed in the law. Eric had a very close call on this, and only a comment by his wife to a customs officer at the border saved him running afoul with authorities. This is SERIOUS BUSINESS! Unlike most of the rest of you, I actually have Chester's best interests at heart.

I read of no intent to land in the US in the original post.Â* I'd say
that 8 U.S. Code § 1287 is irrelevant.

On 7/26/2019 1:57 PM, 2G wrote:
On Thursday, July 25, 2019 at 6:17:50 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Dickhead. Are you waiting for a response from the FSDO so you can tattle? At least he went back to where he came from, and by choice. Different situation down here on the southern border of the US.
Hello Fellow Dickhead,

I don't need to "tattle" on anyone: Chester did that all by himself by posting his flight on a public forum. Furthermore, my objective is to learn the nuances of the law, not to "tattle." And a quick search turned up the following US Code:

8 U.S. Code § 1287. Alien crewmen brought into the United States with intent to evade immigration laws; penalties

Any person, including the owner, agent, consignee, master, or commanding officer of any vessel or aircraft arriving in the United States from any place outside thereof, who shall knowingly sign on the vessel’s articles, or bring to the United States as one of the crew of such vessel or aircraft, any alien, with intent to permit or assist such alien to enter or land in the United States in violation of law, or who shall falsely and knowingly represent to a consular officer at the time of application for visa, or to the immigration officer at the port of arrival in the United States, that such alien is a bona fide member of the crew employed in any capacity regularly required for normal operation and services aboard such vessel or aircraft, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding $10,000 for each such violation, for which sum such vessel or aircraft shall be liable and may be seized and proceeded against by way of libel in any district court of the United States having jurisdiction of the offense.

=================

Remember, if you get into a dispute with these folks, THEY will be deciding what "intent" means, NOT YOU! Chester, IMO, is skating on thin ice with these flights. He said he was vague about his flight plan, which will be potentially viewed by authorities as being evasive. And if he were forced to land in the US for ANY reason he would clearly be in violation of the law, and be at a very real risk of having his glider seized and a stiff fine imposed. You knuckleheads seem to think that you can violate the law and, if caught, you can talk your way out of it with something ridiculous like "declaring an emergency." Well, THINK AGAIN! These officers hear this crap every day from real criminals and are well versed in the law. Eric had a very close call on this, and only a comment by his wife to a customs officer at the border saved him running afoul with authorities. This is SERIOUS BUSINESS! Unlike most of the rest of you, I actually have Chester's best interests at heart.

--
Dan, 5J

2G wrote on 7/26/2019 12:57 PM:

Remember, if you get into a dispute with these folks, THEY will be deciding what "intent" means, NOT YOU! Chester, IMO, is skating on thin ice with these flights. He said he was vague about his flight plan, which will be potentially viewed by authorities as being evasive. And if he were forced to land in the US for ANY reason he would clearly be in violation of the law, and be at a very real risk of having his glider seized and a stiff fine imposed. You knuckleheads seem to think that you can violate the law and, if caught, you can talk your way out of it with something ridiculous like "declaring an emergency." Well, THINK AGAIN! These officers hear this crap every day from real criminals and are well versed in the law. Eric had a very close call on this, and only a comment by his wife to a customs officer at the border saved him running afoul with authorities. This is SERIOUS BUSINESS! Unlike most of the rest of you, I actually have Chester's best interests at heart.

Tom remembers my incident correctly, but I don't think it's relevant to Chester's
flight. My situation was very different, because I contacted no one before or
after flying across the border (my bad - ignorance over 35 years ago), nor did I
contact anyone after I landed. Had I contacted the FSS at any time while flying
(and perhaps even after landing), customs would have been notified by the FSS, and
all would have been well.

Chester made sure everyone knew his intent before and during the flight, and
conducted it with the cooperation of ATC. He was flying a motorglider (I wasn't),
and could reasonably expect to return to Canada without landing. If ATC believed
he was operating illegally, they could've requested he land, but they didn't.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Dec 2014a" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm

http://soaringsafety.org/prevention/...anes-2014A.pdf

On Friday, July 26, 2019 at 2:28:57 PM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
2G wrote on 7/26/2019 12:57 PM:

Remember, if you get into a dispute with these folks, THEY will be deciding what "intent" means, NOT YOU! Chester, IMO, is skating on thin ice with these flights. He said he was vague about his flight plan, which will be potentially viewed by authorities as being evasive. And if he were forced to land in the US for ANY reason he would clearly be in violation of the law, and be at a very real risk of having his glider seized and a stiff fine imposed. You knuckleheads seem to think that you can violate the law and, if caught, you can talk your way out of it with something ridiculous like "declaring an emergency." Well, THINK AGAIN! These officers hear this crap every day from real criminals and are well versed in the law. Eric had a very close call on this, and only a comment by his wife to a customs officer at the border saved him running afoul with authorities. This is SERIOUS BUSINESS! Unlike most of the rest of you, I actually have Chester's best interests at heart.

Tom remembers my incident correctly, but I don't think it's relevant to Chester's
flight. My situation was very different, because I contacted no one before or
after flying across the border (my bad - ignorance over 35 years ago), nor did I
contact anyone after I landed. Had I contacted the FSS at any time while flying
(and perhaps even after landing), customs would have been notified by the FSS, and
all would have been well.

Chester made sure everyone knew his intent before and during the flight, and
conducted it with the cooperation of ATC. He was flying a motorglider (I wasn't),
and could reasonably expect to return to Canada without landing. If ATC believed
he was operating illegally, they could've requested he land, but they didn't.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Dec 2014a" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm

http://soaringsafety.org/prevention/...anes-2014A.pdf

The only problem here is that you are dealing with two separate agencies, the FAA and the CBP. ATC's objectives (FAA) and duties are very much different from CBP, and it will be CBP that you will have to deal with (as you did), not the FAA. What it gets down to is: are you willing to throw the dice about how a CBP officer is going to react to a possible illegal landing (and something they never encountered before and have no understanding of)?

Tom

2G wrote on 7/26/2019 5:45 PM:
On Friday, July 26, 2019 at 2:28:57 PM UTC-7, Eric Greenwell wrote:
2G wrote on 7/26/2019 12:57 PM:

Remember, if you get into a dispute with these folks, THEY will be deciding what "intent" means, NOT YOU! Chester, IMO, is skating on thin ice with these flights. He said he was vague about his flight plan, which will be potentially viewed by authorities as being evasive. And if he were forced to land in the US for ANY reason he would clearly be in violation of the law, and be at a very real risk of having his glider seized and a stiff fine imposed. You knuckleheads seem to think that you can violate the law and, if caught, you can talk your way out of it with something ridiculous like "declaring an emergency." Well, THINK AGAIN! These officers hear this crap every day from real criminals and are well versed in the law. Eric had a very close call on this, and only a comment by his wife to a customs officer at the border saved him running afoul with authorities. This is SERIOUS BUSINESS! Unlike most of the rest of you, I actually have Chester's best interests at heart.

Tom remembers my incident correctly, but I don't think it's relevant to Chester's
flight. My situation was very different, because I contacted no one before or
after flying across the border (my bad - ignorance over 35 years ago), nor did I
contact anyone after I landed. Had I contacted the FSS at any time while flying
(and perhaps even after landing), customs would have been notified by the FSS, and
all would have been well.

Chester made sure everyone knew his intent before and during the flight, and
conducted it with the cooperation of ATC. He was flying a motorglider (I wasn't),
and could reasonably expect to return to Canada without landing. If ATC believed
he was operating illegally, they could've requested he land, but they didn't.


The only problem here is that you are dealing with two separate agencies, the FAA and the CBP. ATC's objectives (FAA) and duties are very much different from CBP, and it will be CBP that you will have to deal with (as you did), not the FAA. What it gets down to is: are you willing to throw the dice about how a CBP officer is going to react to a possible illegal landing (and something they never encountered before and have no understanding of)?

In my case, I dealt with neither the CBP or the FAA. It was US Customs that was
upset I had entered the USA and landed without permission or clearing Customs.


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Dec 2014a" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm

http://soaringsafety.org/prevention/...anes-2014A.pdf

On Friday, July 26, 2019 at 2:57:46 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
On Thursday, July 25, 2019 at 6:17:50 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Dickhead. Are you waiting for a response from the FSDO so you can tattle? At least he went back to where he came from, and by choice. Different situation down here on the southern border of the US.

Hello Fellow Dickhead,

I don't need to "tattle" on anyone: Chester did that all by himself by posting his flight on a public forum. Furthermore, my objective is to learn the nuances of the law, not to "tattle." And a quick search turned up the following US Code:

8 U.S. Code § 1287. Alien crewmen brought into the United States with intent to evade immigration laws; penalties

Any person, including the owner, agent, consignee, master, or commanding officer of any vessel or aircraft arriving in the United States from any place outside thereof, who shall knowingly sign on the vessel’s articles, or bring to the United States as one of the crew of such vessel or aircraft, any alien, with intent to permit or assist such alien to enter or land in the United States in violation of law, or who shall falsely and knowingly represent to a consular officer at the time of application for visa, or to the immigration officer at the port of arrival in the United States, that such alien is a bona fide member of the crew employed in any capacity regularly required for normal operation and services aboard such vessel or aircraft, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding $10,000 for each such violation, for which sum such vessel or aircraft shall be liable and may be seized and proceeded against by way of libel in any district court of the United States having jurisdiction of the offense.

=================

Remember, if you get into a dispute with these folks, THEY will be deciding what "intent" means, NOT YOU! Chester, IMO, is skating on thin ice with these flights. He said he was vague about his flight plan, which will be potentially viewed by authorities as being evasive. And if he were forced to land in the US for ANY reason he would clearly be in violation of the law, and be at a very real risk of having his glider seized and a stiff fine imposed. You knuckleheads seem to think that you can violate the law and, if caught, you can talk your way out of it with something ridiculous like "declaring an emergency." Well, THINK AGAIN! These officers hear this crap every day from real criminals and are well versed in the law. Eric had a very close call on this, and only a comment by his wife to a customs officer at the border saved him running afoul with authorities. This is SERIOUS BUSINESS! Unlike most of the rest of you, I actually have Chester's best interests at heart.


Jeez Tom - If you find yourself in a hole the generally accepted advice is to stop digging rather than breaking out the backhoe.

Here’s a tip: Not a single person reading this thread thinks any of the defenses or deflections you’ve posted since have in any way justified the mistake of the original post. Quite the opposite. Blaming Chester for not preventing you from jumping to a wrong conclusion was just icing on the incredulity cake. Bringing in irrelevant customs or immigration regulations as defense for being wrong on an FAR topic is pure deflection.

You’ve expended an immense amount of energy trying to convince only yourself that you weren’t mistaken in your original post. Each additional post antagonizes more people but convinces no one. It’s a rare personality that elects to twist reality that far for self-rationalization - in this case seemingly without any recognition that everyone else sees through it. Go back and read my link to the psychology article, then have a private sit-down for some self-reflection.

Here’s a cut and paste reply for your next post:

“Chester - My bad, I had no idea you’d filed a flight plan. Congrats on such a great flight and the foresight to deal with ATC ahead of time. I’m curious if you’ve given much thought to what you’d do if you were forced to land before re-entering Canadian airspace. It seems like that might open up and entirely different can of worms with a different government agency�.

Just a suggestion. Or you can keep digging.

Happy soaring.

Andy Blackburn
9B

On Friday, July 26, 2019 at 4:14:03 PM UTC-7, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Friday, July 26, 2019 at 2:57:46 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
On Thursday, July 25, 2019 at 6:17:50 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Dickhead. Are you waiting for a response from the FSDO so you can tattle? At least he went back to where he came from, and by choice. Different situation down here on the southern border of the US.

Hello Fellow Dickhead,

I don't need to "tattle" on anyone: Chester did that all by himself by posting his flight on a public forum. Furthermore, my objective is to learn the nuances of the law, not to "tattle." And a quick search turned up the following US Code:

8 U.S. Code § 1287. Alien crewmen brought into the United States with intent to evade immigration laws; penalties

Any person, including the owner, agent, consignee, master, or commanding officer of any vessel or aircraft arriving in the United States from any place outside thereof, who shall knowingly sign on the vessel’s articles, or bring to the United States as one of the crew of such vessel or aircraft, any alien, with intent to permit or assist such alien to enter or land in the United States in violation of law, or who shall falsely and knowingly represent to a consular officer at the time of application for visa, or to the immigration officer at the port of arrival in the United States, that such alien is a bona fide member of the crew employed in any capacity regularly required for normal operation and services aboard such vessel or aircraft, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding $10,000 for each such violation, for which sum such vessel or aircraft shall be liable and may be seized and proceeded against by way of libel in any district court of the United States having jurisdiction of the offense.

=================

Remember, if you get into a dispute with these folks, THEY will be deciding what "intent" means, NOT YOU! Chester, IMO, is skating on thin ice with these flights. He said he was vague about his flight plan, which will be potentially viewed by authorities as being evasive. And if he were forced to land in the US for ANY reason he would clearly be in violation of the law, and be at a very real risk of having his glider seized and a stiff fine imposed. You knuckleheads seem to think that you can violate the law and, if caught, you can talk your way out of it with something ridiculous like "declaring an emergency." Well, THINK AGAIN! These officers hear this crap every day from real criminals and are well versed in the law. Eric had a very close call on this, and only a comment by his wife to a customs officer at the border saved him running afoul with authorities. This is SERIOUS BUSINESS! Unlike most of the rest of you, I actually have Chester's best interests at heart.


Jeez Tom - If you find yourself in a hole the generally accepted advice is to stop digging rather than breaking out the backhoe.

Here’s a tip: Not a single person reading this thread thinks any of the defenses or deflections you’ve posted since have in any way justified the mistake of the original post. Quite the opposite. Blaming Chester for not preventing you from jumping to a wrong conclusion was just icing on the incredulity cake. Bringing in irrelevant customs or immigration regulations as defense for being wrong on an FAR topic is pure deflection.

You’ve expended an immense amount of energy trying to convince only yourself that you weren’t mistaken in your original post. Each additional post antagonizes more people but convinces no one. It’s a rare personality that elects to twist reality that far for self-rationalization - in this case seemingly without any recognition that everyone else sees through it. Go back and read my link to the psychology article, then have a private sit-down for some self-reflection.

Here’s a cut and paste reply for your next post:

“Chester - My bad, I had no idea you’d filed a flight plan. Congrats on such a great flight and the foresight to deal with ATC ahead of time. I’m curious if you’ve given much thought to what you’d do if you were forced to land before re-entering Canadian airspace. It seems like that might open up and entirely different can of worms with a different government agency�.

Just a suggestion. Or you can keep digging.

Happy soaring.

Andy Blackburn
9B

Andy,

At this point nothing that I say will please you, so I won't try.

Tom