Carrying Cash in the airport

[poker_dummy101]

I would so I could get some free cash to gamble with

thats all my point is.. he knew what he was doing and was hoping for this to happen

[Indecent]

no its not suspicious at all you have a carry on.. but you also carry a tin box instead of just putting it in your bag..give me a fukkin break

In your pocket it is with you at all times, in your bag it might not be. It's not his money to lose, I would be concerned about it too.

Would it be suspicious if he wasn't in the Campaign for Liberty?

.. if the majority of people got detained by police they would be thinking i did nothing wrong, i want out of this situation, and its no big deal.... not, let me grap my IPHONE to turn on the voice recorder

There's a great George Carlin quote that is relevant when you talk about what the majority of people would do.. "Think of how dumb the average American is. Then realize half of them are dumber that that guy." Even if the majority wouldn't do it doesn't make them right. Besides, given the outcome, if the majority of people wouldn't do this, it just means they aren't as smart as he is.

Your only points are his affiliations with Campaign for Liberty, the fact that he had it on him rather than in his bag, and having a recorder on his iphone, none of which proves anything.

Isn't it just as likely he knew his rights because of his affiliations with Campaign for Liberty, and similarly would be more likely to realize the potential for his rights to be abused and realize way to prevent that from happening. If liberty and abuse of rights is a passion of his, it's not a stretch to think he has read/heard of similar accounts and spent time analyzing the legal intricacies. Do we have to assume he's completely out for money? Maybe it's about pointing out the injustices that happen all the time with rent-a-cops on a power trip? By regular cops on a power trip?

Obviously I have no proof, but neither do you. The difference is I'm not claiming my opinion to be fact. I see both sides and I'm open to your opinion being true, but to claim it as fact is ridiculous.

[20Four7]

when flying, entering the country (USA)

I keep the cash separate no need for it to ever leave your person, it won't set off metal detectors etc. I NEVER declare anything unless directly asked about it. Years ago in the 1980's I was flying Toronto to Atlantic City and was asked how much cash I had..... I had 10K in one bundle and 4K in the other pocket..... I pulled out the 10K bundle, they counted it and said good luck.... how times have changed.

[Indecent]

This is like someone mopping a floor in a store. The person watches them do it (is an advocate for only sweeping floors not mopping) and then walks down the wet aisle to fall. Sure give him the settlement because there wasn't a sign but the guy knew what he was doing.

This is a terrible example, but I'll try to play ball..

Following your logic, this guy saw these people violate someone else's rights previously and had the money in place because he knew this would happen. Or, he knew with a high degree of certainty that he would be stopped and could make money off of it. Right.....

I still don't understand how it's a foregone conclusion that he was going to be harassed to the point of needing a settlement? Even if he wants to make money in some way using this technique, how does he assume he's going to be harassed? Does he just leave it there and constantly travel hoping to be stopped?

[byronbb]

Friend of mine's brother is a pilot and he was doing flights from SA to Antarctica in the name of science and was paid 30k in USD and had some troubles on the way home. >5k is nothing ****.

[beach nut]

I can't believe this guy was harassed for carrying less than 5K on a plane. I've carried more than that many times and have never even been questioned.

[bombCanada]

The TSA is a joke.

And what part of the Federal government isn't, or will eventually become one?

[ghn999]

I guess that one way to make alot of money.

[KingCrimson21]

thats all my point is.. he knew what he was doing and was hoping for this to happen

Poker, not trying to break your balls, but there is NO WAY you can KNOW that. If this happened to me, I can see myself being detained, getting pissed off knowing I have done nothing illegal, having the presense of mind to record the violation of my rights and standing up for myself.

You make that statement with authority as if you know it to be true, and that I find bothersome, cuz the fact remains, you do not KNOW that.

[garlic pie]

Actually if he was flying a domestic flight he can carry as much as he wants. $10,000 rule only applies to inbound international flights and not outbound.

Maybe you should tell that to this OUTBOUND traveler.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/27/immigrant.money/index.html

[pavyracer]

Maybe you should tell that to this OUTBOUND traveler.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/27/imm...ney/index.html

http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/travel/vacation/kbyg/kbyg_regulations.ctt/kbyg_regulations.pdf

Read the bottom of page 51.

[username474]

I saw this case on the CNN like a year ago they had adio footage of the whole debacle, the kid worked for Ron Paul's campaign or somthing. He was asked nicely ten deferent times before they turned into Nazi's. To be honest the kid was being a snotty little prick and got everything he had coming to him.

[garlic pie]

http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/...egulations.pdf

Read the bottom of page 51.

He was an outbound traveler, they took his money, and as far as I know, still have it, and they know he earned the money through honest work. He was an illegal alien, so I don't know how much that changes the equation.

[pavyracer]

He was an outbound traveler, they took his money, and as far as I know, still have it, and they know he earned the money through honest work. He was an illegal alien, so I don't know how much that changes the equation.

I am not defending them. I'm just showing you what is premitted to do. If they violated the law he can sue them and his lawyers will go after them. This law is for US citizens or legal residents and I don't know what happens with illegal aliens. By virtue of being illegal he probably violated many other federal lawas while earning the money in the US.

[Scorpion]

Actually if he was flying a domestic flight he can carry as much as he wants. $10,000 rule only applies to inbound international flights and not outbound.

are you sure?

[poker_dummy101]

He was an outbound traveler, they took his money, and as far as I know, still have it, and they know he earned the money through honest work. He was an illegal alien, so I don't know how much that changes the equation.

You don't know how that changes the situation?

[poker_dummy101]

I saw this case on the CNN like a year ago they had adio footage of the whole debacle, the kid worked for Ron Paul's campaign or somthing. He was asked nicely ten deferent times before they turned into Nazi's. To be honest the kid was being a snotty little prick and got everything he had coming to him.

He knew he was going to get a settlement.

It is amazing how many people here do not have deductive reasoning

[pavyracer]

are you sure?

Read the link on post #46. You can bring or take out as match as you want. You need to declare on a customs form anything above $10,000. If you get caught with more than $10,000 without declaring it in customs form and it is found you are in trouble. I know many people who work overseas and get paid in cash. As long as you declare anything above $10,000 you are good to go.

[poker_dummy101]

Poker, not trying to break your balls, but there is NO WAY you can KNOW that. If this happened to me, I can see myself being detained, getting pissed off knowing I have done nothing illegal, having the presense of mind to record the violation of my rights and standing up for myself.

You make that statement with authority as if you know it to be true, and that I find bothersome, cuz the fact remains, you do not KNOW that.

[poker_dummy101]

with rent-a-cops on a power trip? By regular cops on a power trip?

Obviously I have no proof, but neither do you. The difference is I'm not claiming my opinion to be fact. I see both sides and I'm open to your opinion being true, but to claim it as fact is ridiculous.

Until you get a reading comprehension level above 3rd grade, please do not respond to me anymore.

I have said the guy should get the money, REPEATEDLY in this thread.

What I believe to be true I need a greater than 50% because that is +EV for me, I do not need beyond a reasonable doubt. Given everything involved with this particular case my stance is pretty clear.

Even if he was setting out for this to happen, it shouldn't have. But it still doesn't make his actions right (in my opinion----I will say that once again for you)

[tltaylor89]

In my opinion its none of the TSAs business

[garlic pie]

You don't know how that changes the situation?

He was on his way out of the Country with money he earned and it was essentially stolen from him. There is the issue of taxes (for which apparently he had not filed returns), but if he was working for minimum wage as he claimed, he not only probably wouldn't have owed any taxes, he probably could have gotten an EITC.

[poker_dummy101]

He was on his way out of the Country with money he earned and it was essentially stolen from him. There is the issue of taxes (for which apparently he had not filed returns), but if he was working for minimum wage as he claimed, he not only probably wouldn't have owed any taxes, he probably could have gotten an EITC.

So he legally made money when he was illegally here?

[paco]

Thank god he had an iPhone guys!

[pavyracer]

So he legally made money when he was illegally here?

This is very important. The law only applies to US citizens or legal residents.

[garlic pie]

So he legally made money when he was illegally here?

Yes. In fact he would have been allowed to keep the money if he had declared it.

[Indecent]

Until you get a reading comprehension level above 3rd grade, please do not respond to me anymore.

I have said the guy should get the money, REPEATEDLY in this thread.

What I believe to be true I need a greater than 50% because that is +EV for me, I do not need beyond a reasonable doubt. Given everything involved with this particular case my stance is pretty clear.

Even if he was setting out for this to happen, it shouldn't have. But it still doesn't make his actions right (in my opinion----I will say that once again for you)

You're insulting my reading comprehension..... too funny. To be clear, I know what you are trying to say, I just think you are ridiculous for stating it as a fact.

How is what you are saying at all relevant to what I posted? I never said anything about you thinking the guy shouldn't get his money.. I never said his actions were right... I barely even mentioned the money, and was more interested in hearing you explain how you can know with certainty.... Seriously, are you even reading at this point?

More to the point, why not even address any of the points I made? If you are willing to throw out 50%+ true statements as facts without addressing any legitimate criticisms, what's to prevent the rest of us from doing so?

I think its as likely if not more likely he was more prepared than the average person for the incident due to his affiliations with the Campaign for Liberty. Any lawyer might act similarly, and wouldn't necessarily be accused of trying to do it on purpose. Am I more than 50% sure? Probably. Is that good enough for me to state my opinion as fact? No, and it shouldn't be for anyone.

If you are in court as a juror would you follow your 50% gut instinct and convict people? Hopefully you aren't that dumb to apply your bullshit metric system to a situation where people's lives are affected, but given what we've seen from you I (sadly) wouldn't be surprised.

If 50% is good enough for you, great. Don't expect everyone to be used to meeting such low standards...

[poker_dummy101]

This is my last fukkin response to your dumbass bs saying the same things over and over again.

You're insulting my reading comprehension..... too funny. To be clear, I know what you are trying to say, I just think you are ridiculous for stating it as a fact.

When did I say FACT? I said what I believed and thats it. Hell I even included IN MY OPINION TWICE during this fkin discussion.

How is what you are saying at all relevant to what I posted? I never said anything about you thinking the guy shouldn't get his money.. I never said his actions were right.... Seriously, are you even reading at this point?

Hey genius... this is my whole point, are you seriously reading?

More to the point, why not even address any of the points I made? If you are willing to throw out statements as facts, what's to prevent the rest of us from doing so?

I love how you turned it into I am throwing out facts again. I told you it is deductive reasoning in which I made my opinion. If you believe or don't believe in God is it a fact? No, its because you lean one way more than the other so you deem it to be true.

I think its as likely if not more likely he was more prepared than the average person for the incident due to his affiliations with the Campaign for Liberty. Any lawyer might act similarly, and wouldn't necessarily be accused of trying to do it on purpose. But why be careful to preface my statement as an opinion, when I could follow your lead and state my opinions as fact? If I throw in a few insults and never actually bothering reading what people say, and I'm well on my way to be you.

Here you are again claiming I was throwing FACTS. get a fukkin clue

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/deductive+reasoning

What makes him more than 50% guilty? You can't possibly read his mind and have no idea what he was thinking. If the money was in his suitcase would he be guilty? If he wasn't in the Campaign for Liberty? If he didn't record the interrogation? If we remove one of these factors does that change your opinion? Are you even smart enough to decide this on your own?

I've told you over and over the combination of everything has let me to that belief

If you are in court as a juror would you follow your 50% gut instinct and convict people? Hopefully you aren't that dumb to apply your bullshit metric system to a situation where people's lives are affected, but given what we've seen from you I (sadly) wouldn't be surprised.

You are really that stupid aren't you? I have said atleast 4 times in this thread I would give him the money in a court of law and now you are asking me this question? It just goes to show your level of reading comprehension is far below any normal human being.

Pathetic.

[poker_dummy101]

If 50% is good enough for you, great. Don't expect everyone to be used to meeting such low standards...

Are you kidding me right now? At what point do you need to have an opinion? 70%, 80%? I need 50.00001%

[Indecent]

guy was just tryin to make a name for himself.. unreal

all the guy had to do was say why he had it.. wouldve taken 20 seconds.. but no he wanted all this bs attention so everyone could make a big deal about it

the guy knew a quick way to make money and take advantage of the system

1. Steve Bierfeldt had a little tin box
2. He often carried the little box
3. Mr. Bierfeldt was carrying an audio recorder.
4. Mr. Bierfeldt, it turns out, was carrying the money because he was returning home from a regional conference of Campaign for Liberty, a group that supports Ron Paul

The guy was waiting for someone to take advantage

I am not saying to give up all your rights. Anybody could easily carry cash with them though and never be suspected of it. This guy went above and beyond his way to find something.

In which of the above posts are you not stating your opinion as fact?

[poker_dummy101]

Yes. In fact he would have been allowed to keep the money if he had declared it.

Could you point me somewhere to read about this (and its not asking in a smartass way but a curious way)

[poker_dummy101]

In which of the above posts are you not stating your opinion as fact?

Are you religious or not?

[Indecent]

Are you religious or not?

Not at all relevant. Keep it on task and I would consider addressing other questions.

Do you at least see how I am under the impression you are stating your opinion as fact? Using "in my opinion" later is great and all, but that's not what you started with. The quoted posts above make no mention of 50% or even a degree of uncertainty.

[poker_dummy101]

Not at all relevant. Keep it on task and I would consider addressing other questions.

It is completely relevant because now you want to argue how to determine if statements are fact or opinions.

[poker_dummy101]

And if this went to court, obviously I would have to side with the guy..but in my opinion I think what he did was shady

And this was my post before you even entered the fukkin thread