|
Hola
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 79,
Visits: 2.7K
|
Answered my ? myself https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2018-Mar/700120%20-%20CBP%20Form%20I-94W%20ENG%20%281216%29%20-%20FINAL%20%28SAMPLE%29.pdfits the same questions as on an ESTA, its the pre ESTA form you had to fill before landing, same question on arrested and causing damage etc
|
|
|
|
|
Hola
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 79,
Visits: 2.7K
|
+x+xref the point on no ESTA for land crossings .. I think that's incorrect I've entered US from Canada via flying to Montreal many years ago and you needed one then, just fyi - I would check that out asthe last thing you'd want is that to be your issue if you;ve got that far ! According to the US CBP website: "If you are a citizen of a country that participates in the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), and you enter the U.S. by land from Mexico or Canada, ESTA is not required. If you do not have ESTA, you will be required to complete the paper I-94W form and proceed through a manual entry process at the land border crossing. If you have an approved ESTA when entering the U.S. at a land border crossing, you will not be required to complete the paper I-94W form and your entry process is expedited. However, if issued, you should return your green I-94W card upon departure from the U.S. If you are arriving by air or sea, you do need to apply for ESTA." This seems to confirm exactly what BenS said about his brother's experience. did he mention the other form you have to fill in ? I wasn't point scoring you giving my experience. Does the i-94W ask about crim record ? if so i'd still get an ESTA
|
|
|
|
|
AB2014
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 7.4K
|
+xref the point on no ESTA for land crossings .. I think that's incorrect I've entered US from Canada via flying to Montreal many years ago and you needed one then, just fyi - I would check that out asthe last thing you'd want is that to be your issue if you;ve got that far ! According to the US CBP website: "If you are a citizen of a country that participates in the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), and you enter the U.S. by land from Mexico or Canada, ESTA is not required. If you do not have ESTA, you will be required to complete the paper I-94W form and proceed through a manual entry process at the land border crossing. If you have an approved ESTA when entering the U.S. at a land border crossing, you will not be required to complete the paper I-94W form and your entry process is expedited. However, if issued, you should return your green I-94W card upon departure from the U.S. If you are arriving by air or sea, you do need to apply for ESTA." This seems to confirm exactly what BenS said about his brother's experience.
=========================================================================================================
If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)
|
|
|
|
|
Hola
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 79,
Visits: 2.7K
|
ref the point on no ESTA for land crossings .. I think that's incorrect I've entered US from Canada via flying to Montreal many years ago and you needed one then, just fyi - I would check that out asthe last thing you'd want is that to be your issue if you;ve got that far !
|
|
|
|
|
AB2014
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 7.4K
|
+x+x+xHmm, so pooling together everything we've learned so far, what's the logical best course of action for an ex-SO like me who is already in the Netherlands wishing to enter the US without : 1) Getting barred\turned around from US 2) Breaking the law (or appearing to) 3) Annoying the PPU due to the fact that I'd be attempting to enter a country which they perhaps would have forewarned (even as a matter of routine) had it been my first port of call, thus averting real consequences (unlike shengen, notifying the US actually makes a difference, and I would have sidestepped this difference )? I've been in the Netherlands a month now on business. I could go back home or I could try doing something else. I could ask the PPU for future "would it annoy you if I wound up in the US"? But then they'd probably just create a mental note to inform the US unconditionally whenever I go abroad. They've made honesty not the best policy. It's a fun puzzle actually I guess. Like that fox\chicken\river crossing thing. Other things to note: I have not yet applied for an ESTA - I can do this in Holland, right? Then there's the alleged pre-clearance advantages of departing from Ireland etc. Also Ireland can be used to test certain principles, e.g. If I went to Ireland tomorrow from here in NL, what systems does that trigger? In so doing I'm leaving Shegen. Ireland has its own SOR? Do I wind up on that if I come in via NL? Hi Nicely synced. One point I do not think we have mentioned - if relevant - are you aiming to return to the UK at some time in the future? Question is asked due to the fact if you are not then you are not going to have the conversation with a PPU on your return. If you are low risk would they put out any alerts? Obviously if you do return then you will be asked questions around your travels, possibly your passport checked for visa stamps so more questions. Remember it only states on the travel notification location for the first 3 nights. However it also ruffly says that - if you return back later than your stated date you are to sign on within 3 days. That will then get the PPU talking to you Your future location plans make the decision but I am now split on (a) if you aim to return just be upfront (b) there must be an important reason for you going to the US, so is that worth the damaging consequences of not being open or is it just the fear of rejection after having all the positiveness of traveling? I honestly wish I knew the answer as I am wanting to relocate somewhere cheaper and warmer than the UK but concerned my past being a hindrance and my not wishing to cause more harm to my family and friends. That's just me though. I do intend to return to the UK. But I gave no specific date of return - I left it deliberately open-ended because I had some notion that I wanted to use the opportunity to test some principle, though not specifically this one. I thought maybe I might go to Ireland from NL to see if the Irish try to register me on their own SOR. As I understand it, I have to sign on upon returning regardless of when I return. I have been abroad before and nobody was interested in examining my passport when I got back (it was within Shengen\Continent). I have both business and personal reasons for wanting to visit the US (I have a lady friend in Maryland looking after her sick father and she gets lonely out in the sticks), but none are so spontaneous as to merit a trip right now. Well it all depends how much the police care. So, do they feel mucked about if you go to the US or do they gleefully wash their hands of 2nd ports of call they don't know about (somebody else's problem, knowledge is responsibility etc). I know spontaneous 2nd ports of call in general are not problematic, not even informally. But leaping halfway round the world makes the first port of call look like a front for the 2nd, and in this case it is the British police who control my access to the 2nd (had it been the 1st), so you're messing with their agenda if you get through by making it a 2nd. But I wonder if they care. While you are outside the UK, you are outside the jurisdiction of the UK, so you aren't subject to the restrictions that apply in the UK. On that basis, I'd say you aren't obliged to notify your plans to the UK police. The SOR in the Republic of Ireland is for residents, just as in the UK, so they won't try to put you on it unless you decide to live there. Even then, they wouldn't know you are on the SOR in the UK unless you told them, or unless you told the UK police and they told the Gardai. I'd say it's unlikely that any alert raised when you leave the Schengen Zone will be passed on to the US.
=========================================================================================================
If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)
|
|
|
|
|
Harmless
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 110,
Visits: 391
|
+x+xHmm, so pooling together everything we've learned so far, what's the logical best course of action for an ex-SO like me who is already in the Netherlands wishing to enter the US without : 1) Getting barred\turned around from US 2) Breaking the law (or appearing to) 3) Annoying the PPU due to the fact that I'd be attempting to enter a country which they perhaps would have forewarned (even as a matter of routine) had it been my first port of call, thus averting real consequences (unlike shengen, notifying the US actually makes a difference, and I would have sidestepped this difference )? I've been in the Netherlands a month now on business. I could go back home or I could try doing something else. I could ask the PPU for future "would it annoy you if I wound up in the US"? But then they'd probably just create a mental note to inform the US unconditionally whenever I go abroad. They've made honesty not the best policy. It's a fun puzzle actually I guess. Like that fox\chicken\river crossing thing. Other things to note: I have not yet applied for an ESTA - I can do this in Holland, right? Then there's the alleged pre-clearance advantages of departing from Ireland etc. Also Ireland can be used to test certain principles, e.g. If I went to Ireland tomorrow from here in NL, what systems does that trigger? In so doing I'm leaving Shegen. Ireland has its own SOR? Do I wind up on that if I come in via NL? Hi Nicely synced. One point I do not think we have mentioned - if relevant - are you aiming to return to the UK at some time in the future? Question is asked due to the fact if you are not then you are not going to have the conversation with a PPU on your return. If you are low risk would they put out any alerts? Obviously if you do return then you will be asked questions around your travels, possibly your passport checked for visa stamps so more questions. Remember it only states on the travel notification location for the first 3 nights. However it also ruffly says that - if you return back later than your stated date you are to sign on within 3 days. That will then get the PPU talking to you Your future location plans make the decision but I am now split on (a) if you aim to return just be upfront (b) there must be an important reason for you going to the US, so is that worth the damaging consequences of not being open or is it just the fear of rejection after having all the positiveness of traveling? I honestly wish I knew the answer as I am wanting to relocate somewhere cheaper and warmer than the UK but concerned my past being a hindrance and my not wishing to cause more harm to my family and friends. That's just me though. I do intend to return to the UK. But I gave no specific date of return - I left it deliberately open-ended because I had some notion that I wanted to use the opportunity to test some principle, though not specifically this one. I thought maybe I might go to Ireland from NL to see if the Irish try to register me on their own SOR. As I understand it, I have to sign on upon returning regardless of when I return. I have been abroad before and nobody was interested in examining my passport when I got back (it was within Shengen\Continent). I have both business and personal reasons for wanting to visit the US (I have a lady friend in Maryland looking after her sick father and she gets lonely out in the sticks), but none are so spontaneous as to merit a trip right now. Well it all depends how much the police care. So, do they feel mucked about if you go to the US or do they gleefully wash their hands of 2nd ports of call they don't know about (somebody else's problem, knowledge is responsibility etc). I know spontaneous 2nd ports of call in general are not problematic, not even informally. But leaping halfway round the world makes the first port of call look like a front for the 2nd, and in this case it is the British police who control my access to the 2nd (had it been the 1st), so you're messing with their agenda if you get through by making it a 2nd. But I wonder if they care.
|
|
|
|
|
JASB
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 1.7K
|
+xHmm, so pooling together everything we've learned so far, what's the logical best course of action for an ex-SO like me who is already in the Netherlands wishing to enter the US without : 1) Getting barred\turned around from US 2) Breaking the law (or appearing to) 3) Annoying the PPU due to the fact that I'd be attempting to enter a country which they perhaps would have forewarned (even as a matter of routine) had it been my first port of call, thus averting real consequences (unlike shengen, notifying the US actually makes a difference, and I would have sidestepped this difference )? I've been in the Netherlands a month now on business. I could go back home or I could try doing something else. I could ask the PPU for future "would it annoy you if I wound up in the US"? But then they'd probably just create a mental note to inform the US unconditionally whenever I go abroad. They've made honesty not the best policy. It's a fun puzzle actually I guess. Like that fox\chicken\river crossing thing. Other things to note: I have not yet applied for an ESTA - I can do this in Holland, right? Then there's the alleged pre-clearance advantages of departing from Ireland etc. Also Ireland can be used to test certain principles, e.g. If I went to Ireland tomorrow from here in NL, what systems does that trigger? In so doing I'm leaving Shegen. Ireland has its own SOR? Do I wind up on that if I come in via NL? Hi Nicely synced. One point I do not think we have mentioned - if relevant - are you aiming to return to the UK at some time in the future? Question is asked due to the fact if you are not then you are not going to have the conversation with a PPU on your return. If you are low risk would they put out any alerts? Obviously if you do return then you will be asked questions around your travels, possibly your passport checked for visa stamps so more questions. Remember it only states on the travel notification location for the first 3 nights. However it also ruffly says that - if you return back later than your stated date you are to sign on within 3 days. That will then get the PPU talking to you Your future location plans make the decision but I am now split on (a) if you aim to return just be upfront (b) there must be an important reason for you going to the US, so is that worth the damaging consequences of not being open or is it just the fear of rejection after having all the positiveness of traveling? I honestly wish I knew the answer as I am wanting to relocate somewhere cheaper and warmer than the UK but concerned my past being a hindrance and my not wishing to cause more harm to my family and friends. That's just me though.
Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------
This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.
|
|
|
|
|
Harmless
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 110,
Visits: 391
|
Hmm, so pooling together everything we've learned so far, what's the logical best course of action for an ex-SO like me who is already in the Netherlands wishing to enter the US without :
1) Getting barred\turned around from US
2) Breaking the law (or appearing to)
3) Annoying the PPU due to the fact that I'd be attempting to enter a country which they perhaps would have forewarned (even as a matter of routine) had it been my first port of call, thus averting real consequences (unlike shengen, notifying the US actually makes a difference, and I would have sidestepped this difference )?
I've been in the Netherlands a month now on business. I could go back home or I could try doing something else. I could ask the PPU for future "would it annoy you if I wound up in the US"? But then they'd probably just create a mental note to inform the US unconditionally whenever I go abroad. They've made honesty not the best policy.
It's a fun puzzle actually I guess. Like that fox\chicken\river crossing thing. Other things to note: I have not yet applied for an ESTA - I can do this in Holland, right? Then there's the alleged pre-clearance advantages of departing from Ireland etc. Also Ireland can be used to test certain principles, e.g. If I went to Ireland tomorrow from here in NL, what systems does that trigger? In so doing I'm leaving Shegen. Ireland has its own SOR? Do I wind up on that if I come in via NL?
|
|
|
|
|
AB2014
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 7.4K
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI would quite like to know the pros and cons, and likelihood of success, of a sex offender travelling to the United States as a second port of call arranged upon the first port. Bearing in mind I'm currently abroad in Europe anyway. There's been lots of comment (including from myself) in other threads that relate to this topic. Bottom line is that the US will know you are coming as you will have either completed an ESTA application or if you have a valid one or visa from before your conviction, submitted Advanced Passenger Information to your airline. Both would have been screened by the US against their watch lists. The open question, therefore, is this : do the UK share information with the US about sex offenders that does not go through formal Interpol channels? For example, does the UK share any of it's own watch lists? If the answer is No, everything should be OK as the US would have no way of knowing about your conviction (you would simply be risking the wrath of your PPU for not notifying the travel in advance). Even though there are no formal legal agreements between the UK and US to share such information outside Interpol channels, it became very clear when our NCA went public with how they warn their counterparts elsewhere and vice versa that informal channels do exist. I am also aware of something known as 'embassy to embassy' communication in this regards. Regardless, you would assume that any informal notifications would relate to high risk people only as there is plenty of evidence on this forum (including myself) of people travelling outside the EU, notifying correctly and no Interpol notices being generated. My PPU made it quite clear that their objective is not to stop anyone from travelling unless they see a significant risk. The other open question for me is: When you declare you're going abroad (anywhere) do the UK police inform your first port of call only, or is it the entire world they inform (in as much as they have the relevant systems in place)? Let me be clear. I do not expect to be able to enter the US from the UK, i.e. as a first port of call. But I do, for reasons of Shengen, expect to be able to go from here in the Netherlands to Germany etc. As I have done. The question on the ESTA pertain only to "causing harm to others" with one's crime, and as mine was a crime of possession I would argue that I never did and the law here was preemptive. So the ESTA questions themselves don't damn me. It would be good to get these questions answered once and for all, given that, as you've said, the peripheral details have been discussed a lot already. There are a lot of related questions. E.g. (I'll invent a jargon here to save time) USSPC = "Undeclared spontaneous second port of call" (so I'm in country 1 legit, and on a whim I decide to enter country 2). - Am I allowed to enter an overseas territory (e.g. Gibraltar) as a USSPC? E.g. Spain to Gibraltar? - If I enter Ireland as a USSPC, would I be identified and asked to register on the Irish SOR? One could test the concept quickly by doing a Netherlands -> Ireland jaunt with Ireland undeclared, although the intent to do so while in the UK would constitute a crime. Unless it's changed recently, you don't need an ESTA for land crossings. So possible to cross from Mexico or Canada without one. Btw, i'd also expect at least Canada and USA to share info. I'd query if it was worth the risk, just by posting means if they check your internet history, they can tell you were considering bypassing notification. Hi Zack, Though I am aware they could go to a Service provider and ask for your search history, that would need a legal reason i.e. offence suspected, and would take a long time. Again if you do not have an internet connection at home how do they check with the ISP? Before you say about a laptop's history then as long as you do not have any conditions on keeping it for inspection, and with all the data hackers about nowadays, it is quite reasonable for you you clear your history etc from the computer. Some software actually go to military security standard on removing data residues. Also so many individuals are ending up with some form of sex offence conviction some thing really serious would need to happen for them to undertake all the legal process. My opinion anyway. What you say makes sense, but by now do you really expect sense to be applied here? In any case, restrictions often specify not deleting information, and not using or installing deletion software. Hi AB2014, Agree with your comments and for clarity I mentioned the point on conditions. I do not have any IT conditions and you will smile when I say they always mention things when they visit to which I just remind them of that fact and in this world of offences on the internet I do protect myself. Not only did I smile when I read that, it also occurred to me that I'd love to see the look on their faces when you remind them. Cue Nickelback song "How you remind me" 
=========================================================================================================
If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)
|
|
|
|
|
JASB
|
|
Group: Awaiting Activation
Posts: 1.1K,
Visits: 1.7K
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xI would quite like to know the pros and cons, and likelihood of success, of a sex offender travelling to the United States as a second port of call arranged upon the first port. Bearing in mind I'm currently abroad in Europe anyway. There's been lots of comment (including from myself) in other threads that relate to this topic. Bottom line is that the US will know you are coming as you will have either completed an ESTA application or if you have a valid one or visa from before your conviction, submitted Advanced Passenger Information to your airline. Both would have been screened by the US against their watch lists. The open question, therefore, is this : do the UK share information with the US about sex offenders that does not go through formal Interpol channels? For example, does the UK share any of it's own watch lists? If the answer is No, everything should be OK as the US would have no way of knowing about your conviction (you would simply be risking the wrath of your PPU for not notifying the travel in advance). Even though there are no formal legal agreements between the UK and US to share such information outside Interpol channels, it became very clear when our NCA went public with how they warn their counterparts elsewhere and vice versa that informal channels do exist. I am also aware of something known as 'embassy to embassy' communication in this regards. Regardless, you would assume that any informal notifications would relate to high risk people only as there is plenty of evidence on this forum (including myself) of people travelling outside the EU, notifying correctly and no Interpol notices being generated. My PPU made it quite clear that their objective is not to stop anyone from travelling unless they see a significant risk. The other open question for me is: When you declare you're going abroad (anywhere) do the UK police inform your first port of call only, or is it the entire world they inform (in as much as they have the relevant systems in place)? Let me be clear. I do not expect to be able to enter the US from the UK, i.e. as a first port of call. But I do, for reasons of Shengen, expect to be able to go from here in the Netherlands to Germany etc. As I have done. The question on the ESTA pertain only to "causing harm to others" with one's crime, and as mine was a crime of possession I would argue that I never did and the law here was preemptive. So the ESTA questions themselves don't damn me. It would be good to get these questions answered once and for all, given that, as you've said, the peripheral details have been discussed a lot already. There are a lot of related questions. E.g. (I'll invent a jargon here to save time) USSPC = "Undeclared spontaneous second port of call" (so I'm in country 1 legit, and on a whim I decide to enter country 2). - Am I allowed to enter an overseas territory (e.g. Gibraltar) as a USSPC? E.g. Spain to Gibraltar? - If I enter Ireland as a USSPC, would I be identified and asked to register on the Irish SOR? One could test the concept quickly by doing a Netherlands -> Ireland jaunt with Ireland undeclared, although the intent to do so while in the UK would constitute a crime. Unless it's changed recently, you don't need an ESTA for land crossings. So possible to cross from Mexico or Canada without one. Btw, i'd also expect at least Canada and USA to share info. I'd query if it was worth the risk, just by posting means if they check your internet history, they can tell you were considering bypassing notification. Hi Zack, Though I am aware they could go to a Service provider and ask for your search history, that would need a legal reason i.e. offence suspected, and would take a long time. Again if you do not have an internet connection at home how do they check with the ISP? Before you say about a laptop's history then as long as you do not have any conditions on keeping it for inspection, and with all the data hackers about nowadays, it is quite reasonable for you you clear your history etc from the computer. Some software actually go to military security standard on removing data residues. Also so many individuals are ending up with some form of sex offence conviction some thing really serious would need to happen for them to undertake all the legal process. My opinion anyway. What you say makes sense, but by now do you really expect sense to be applied here? In any case, restrictions often specify not deleting information, and not using or installing deletion software. Hi AB2014, Agree with your comments and for clarity I mentioned the point on conditions. I do not have any IT conditions and you will smile when I say they always mention things when they visit to which I just remind them of that fact and in this world of offences on the internet I do protect myself.
Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------
This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.
|
|
|
|