Of course Telco's can choose to be involved, perhaps accept payment to lookup and snitch, etc. but for the most part a number of ISPs in Au just wash their hands of devoting resources to play connect the dots for others.
In Germany, this was the case, too. So this happened:
1. Copyright holder files bullshit charges against the IP holder.
2. Police investigates and for this purpose gets the personal data for the given IP address.
3. Copyright holder gets personal data of the subscriber from the police.
4. Copyright holder aborts charges so police stops investigation and is no longer involved.
5. Copyright holder contacts the subscriber to extort money.
Police complained about the many bullshit charges, so of course a law was made so ISPs had to give out personal data directly to the copyright holders.
Flight Attendant in Netherlands Tested for Hantavirus
Stewardess who was briefly on Johannesburg-Amsterdam flight admitted to Amsterdam UMC on May 7. Tests expected today.
It's possible this might have a significant (not small, not necessarily large) impact on the smaller subset of delinquent parents that might currently have a larger double digit percentage (30% say) skipping to Canada, Mexico, or elsewhere to avoid being chased down.
Or not.
The main point here is that it's not the entire population of regular US citizens that should be looked at here, more the specific behaviour of the subset in question.
The constitution (article 11) of Mexico provides an explicit right of every person to enter Mexico without a passport (that doesn't mean every person in general -- you can be barred -- but not because you don't have a passport). You can witness this at land border crossings -- I routinely watch them let in foreigners without them (they're not following whatever uncited nonsense you read at the consulate wrongly claiming a passport is 'required' without citing any law). It is subject to immigration enforcement, but they're legally barred from requiring a passport. It won't do dick to stop delinquent people from leaving and anywhere that actually thoroughly checks passports also is a member of international child support enforcement treaties.
As an aside I've been in and out of Mexico a bunch of times (formerly entered, 5 or 6 times; crossed the border, literally a hundred+ times) - but as an Australian geophysical exploration surveyor on the job it's always been via other people dealing with all the paperwork.
You never knew that because most of it is false. The constitutional point they mentioned has a big exception for the needs of administration, and Mexico’s immigration law uses that to require passports from all foreign nationals entering Mexico. This has been upheld by Mexico’s Supreme Court.
I did my best to avoid all customs issues as I worked with a crew in and out of a lot countries for mapping and exploration and a lot of special exceptional visa work for the professional lawyer and government minister whisperer class.
Air geophysical survey grids 80m above ground level with 200m line spacing can have aircraft running lines backwards and forwards over a border for a couple of days.
The constitutional challenge they speak of was a constitutional challenge by indigenous persons challenging internal immigration checkpoints. And the indigenous won, actually loosening immigration checks, so it's baffling they cited that. The ABA international even did a review of that case and the only relevant portions they mentioned were the loosening of internal immigration checkpoints.
>and Mexico’s immigration law uses that to require passports from all foreign nationals entering Mexico.
LMAO, this person must have never entered Mexico by land. You literally walk right in, 9 of 10 times. The last time I went even the X-ray machine guy was asleep. They're clearly following the constitution and not whatever hallucinated conclusion there was about the challenge by indigenous that loosened restrictions.
One time I showed my passport card, and they thought it was a driver license, lmao. Not that they gave a shit either way.
Tenuous at best in many school systems where it's typically not teachers that apply corporal punishment but headmasters.
The notion that people train to be teachers followed by spending ~10 years in the system holding out for the chance to be a headmaster just so that they can beat people is a stretch.
Bound to be one or two, but there are surely better paths for a sadist - prison guard, et al.
Those who go through the official migration paths - in the U.S.A. or elsewhere, doesn't matter - are not "illegal aliens" so that word play with "as yet undocumented immigrants" doesn't hold. People who are waiting for their paperwork to go through the official channels will have some form of proof of their application status. If they were told they could await the results while in the U.S.A they're not illegal aliens, if they were told to await permission outside of the U.S.A they are. Those who cross the border with the intent to stay without legal permission are "illegal aliens" and are in violation of whatever laws cover migration - 8 US code § 1325 in the U.S.A, artikel 197 Wetboek van Strafrecht (for those declared unwanted) and artikel 61-67 Vreemdelingenwet in the Netherlands, etc. Some of these illegal aliens violate other (criminal) laws which makes them "criminal illegal aliens" but everyone who stays in a country - any country - without legal permission has violated whatever laws cover migration into that country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadshow_Films_Pty_Ltd_v_iiNet...
Of course Telco's can choose to be involved, perhaps accept payment to lookup and snitch, etc. but for the most part a number of ISPs in Au just wash their hands of devoting resources to play connect the dots for others.
reply