Don't Bogart that Joint... Eh!

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by john61ct

It most definitely is **not** legal to the Feds, and they are in charge of national border crossings.

Sorry, I meant to say that medical marijuana is legal IN CANADA. So this leads to the possible situation of a Canadian having LEGALLY consumed marijuana, but still potentially getting barred from entering the US for admitting this.

The "don't lie" advice I would amend with "if there is any objective evidence to the contrary out there that they could ever obtain to contradict your claim"

I suppose that those of us in the CF or yachting demographics could pull that off... but the experienced border guard is pretty good at spotting lies, and most people (outside of advertising and politics ) are lousy liars. And the guards don't need counter-evidence, they just need to do their professional stare long enough to get you to crack.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Sorry, I meant to say that medical marijuana is legal IN CANADA. So this leads to the possible situation of a Canadian having LEGALLY consumed marijuana, but still potentially getting barred from entering the US for admitting this….

It would be like the Canada Border Service asking American citizens if they have ever owned a gun that would be prohibited in Canada. Not whether they are carrying such gun, just whether they’ve ever owned one. And if they said yes, even though it is perfectly legal in the USA, they could be barred from entering Canada.

[john61ct]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Sorry, I meant to say that medical marijuana is legal IN CANADA. So this leads to the possible situation of a Canadian having LEGALLY consumed marijuana, but still potentially getting barred from entering the US for admitting this.
I suppose that those of us in the CF or yachting demographics could pull that off... but the experienced border guard is pretty good at spotting lies, and most people (outside of advertising and politics ) are lousy liars. And the guards don't need counter-evidence, they just need to do their professional stare long enough to get you to crack.

Fact is, the border guard has complete discretion, from a practical POV there is no "right" for foreigners to enter the US.

My advice assumed that, of course you may be turned away.

The point of the strategy I was recommending is to prevent a red flag going against your record that would guarantee your getting turned away in subsequent attempts.

[john61ct]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

It would be like the Canada Border Service asking American citizens if they have ever owned a gun that would be prohibited in Canada. Not whether they are carrying such gun, just whether they’ve ever owned one. And if they said yes, even though it is perfectly legal in the USA, they could be barred from entering Canada.

yes exactly, and such a policy would be good for everyone except the gun nuts

[john61ct]

I'm not saying the situation isn't ridiculous.

But that can be said for so much of "reality" in this god-forsaken timeline we seem to have jumped to.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by john61ct

The point of the strategy I was recommending is to prevent a red flag going against your record that would guarantee your getting turned away in subsequent attempts.

If you respectfully refuse to answer such a question, it's recorded, yes, but it's not a crime, and it's not, in and of itself, grounds for refusing subsequent entries. This was my takeaway from hearing that interview with a US lawyer who specializes in this stuff.


Lying to a border official IS a crime, and being caught lying is sufficient grounds for refusing subsequent attempts... or worse.


Anyway, we're not often hearing about well-heeled Canadian yachties being routinely being asked about their marijuana use.

[john61ct]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Lying to a border official IS a crime, and being caught lying is sufficient grounds for refusing subsequent attempts... or worse.

Exactly. But if there is zero external record of my having had a joint thirty years ago, it would IMO be silly to do anything but deny it.

Like telling health insurance I go to AA meetings, when it is **so much** none of their business ethically, I'm happy to be pragmatic about it.

But that's me, if someone else prefers the "I respectfully decline" approach that's fine for them.

[john61ct]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

grounds for refusing subsequent entries.

no grounds are necessary for such refusals

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by john61ct

Exactly. But if there is zero external record of my having had a joint thirty years ago, it would IMO be silly to do anything but deny it.

Could you maintain that denial through an hour of questioning? Would your travelling partner? They don't need proof of the lie, they just need you to get flustered or crack after a few minutes.

An edge case, certainly.

We live in strange times.

[a64pilot]

I think we are being a little paranoid.
Do you really think your going to be questioned for an hour on whether or not you have ever partaken?
I’d be surprised if your even asked unless you show up reeking and stoned, then it would be to just mess with you.

Now trying to smuggle some in, that is what would get you into trouble.

[thruska]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

I think we are being a little paranoid.
Do you really think your going to be questioned for an hour on whether or not you have ever partaken?
I’d be surprised if your even asked unless you show up reeking and stoned, then it would be to just mess with you.

Now trying to smuggle some in, that is what would get you into trouble.

Paranoia will destroy ya....