Because I Want To

I rarely have trouble with Canada customs. Whenever I head over, it's almost universally a rubber stamp. Show my identification, answer a couple perfunctory questions, and they let me on my way. 

But yesterday heading to Windsor for an end of season curling dinner, wow. I had to draw a deep breath to keep my cool. 

After derisively commenting on the size of my newer older van, the 1996 Chevy conversion van which I bought off my brother-in-law, the little snot in the booth asked with no small amount of disdain, "Why aren't you driving a regular car?"

I tell you, and I mean this quite seriously, I was instantly enraged. It was a burning, deep anger right to the core of my being. What? Did I miss the memo that Marty can't drive his van to Canada? Has Parliament passed a law that henceforth and in perpetuity Charles Martin Cosgriff shalt ne'er again pilot the motor car of his choice into these Canadian Dominions? 

What's it to you what I drive, ya little punk? Different country or not, I don't have to justify this to you. I wanted to smack that sneer right off his face. I wanted to yell, "Because I %$@!!&! want to drive my van!" That's why I don't drive a regular car, whatever the hell you mean by that.

Instead I took a deep, deep breath and answered, trying not to grit my teeth, "I just like driving my van."

That's crap, folks. Just crap.

Detained at the Canadian border

Something happened to me last night that has never happened before. After curling in Canada for about 21 seasons now, I was subjected to a vehicular search as I entered that great nation. And I was not in the least bit perturbed by it.

Nations have the right to secure their borders. Part of that is ensuring that those who cross those borders pose no threat to the nation they are entering. And as I am not a Canadian citizen with a moral right to be in Canada, I have no trouble with even random searches of my vehicle when entering Canada. Canada has the right to know that those who are attempting to cross her boundaries are no threat.

I am not one of those who think that borders are artificial or arbitrary. They exist de facto (by the force of fact) or de jure (by the force of law) and as such have rightful moral existence. I would go so far as to argue that it is absurd, even comical, to believe otherwise.

Yes, I have gotten upset about border delays coming into my own country. That is because, as a citizen of the United States, I have the moral right to be in my own nation. I have no such right to be in Canada. There may well be solid philosophic arguments as to why Canada should let me enter, or even for relatively open borders generally. But I see no imperative that Canada or any other nation should allow me within their borders no questions asked.

I am happy that I was let in. Curling season is drawing to a close, and I want to finish it with my curling friends. Still, it is imperative upon me to recognize and accept the right of Canada to make sure I'm an okay guy who can be safely allowed in. I am at Her mercy in that regard, and that is how it should be.

Coming home from curling

Well. I'm returning from Windsor last night after my Monday night curling league. And I cleared customs more easily than I cleared the toll booth, which is where you pay the Ambassador Bridge toll between Detroit and Windsor after the Department of Homeland Security has graciously allowed you to return to your own country. I should be scott free by then, right?

I offer the toll to the toll taker. She doesn't take it. Instead she asks, "You're the curling guy, aren't you?"

"Uh, I curl, yes", I respond uncertainly.

"You're the coach. You're Mike" she says, with a certain triumph in her voice. I did not correct her that I am the skip.

"Um, Marty", I corrected her instead. I did not mention that I had lost to a curler named Mike last night, though her words fanned the flames of defeat and I burned inwardly at her mistake.

"What? No. I have you down as Mike." She began then to look over some papers in front of her.

"Uhhh, you take notes on the people who pay you tolls?"

"Sure. I like to know who they are, so I can talk to them friendly".

That's okay, I guess. I in truth remembered her, and as gregarious and friendly. I really believe her to be innocent enough. Only not enough to take notes about. "You're not Mike?" she asks.

"No, honestly."

"Then you have a twin you can frame for a crime."

So all I have to say is, Mike, who and where are you? Just in case I have to pull off grand larceny and need a fall guy.

Heroic Border Patrol saves America from Scouting Menace

There are things which simply seem to good to be true. Then there are things simply too interesting to not be true. Then there are things which are so outlandish and bizarre that everyone should hope that they can't possibly be true. This is one of those incidents.

Apparently a Boy Scout troop from central Iowa was detailed, and one young scout held at gunpoint (a point which the Border Patrol disputes), when returning to the good old U S of A from a trip to Alaska through Canada after a troop member snapped a picture of a border guard as their caravan passed. You can see more here: http://www.kcci.com/news/boy-scout-from-iowa-is-subject-of-alaska-border-dispute/27102496#!bmVQR6 You can't take a picture of a government agent or government building? Really?

So if the White House is in the background of your holiday picture of Mom and Dad and Sis, you face prison and fines? If a federal agent happens to inadvertently photobomb you in a restaurant when you and a friend take a selfie, you might have your camera taken away?

Seriously, we hope that such incidents aren't as bad as they seem, although it is difficult to imagine how it could be worse even assuming (as we should; we must play fair to all involved) that no gun was actually drawn. We should remember too that one bizarre incident does not indict an entire system. Still, have the absurdities involved in Americans merely returning to their home country gotten so bad that a group so apple pie as the Boy Scouts are suspected of treasonable behavior over something which was surely innocent, which was surely meant only for a photographic montage? We suppose that they might be terrorists in disguise smuggling in a dirty bomb.

No, we suppose not. That the trip of a young lifetime should end so ingloriously is nothing short of insane. We're still hoping that it did not actually happen.

Why Can't Maroun Build the New Bridge?

So it appears that a new bridge to Canada will be built downriver from the Ambassador Bridge. Matty Maroun, who owns the Ambassador, will protest, and likely stall the project through the courts. Michigan citizens meanwhile are told they won't pay a dime for the new span; Canada is apparently putting up the bulk of the cash, other than what the US Federal Government will put into a new customs clearinghouse. It all sounds good.

But what of a private investor's willingness to pay for something such as this? Why are people so fired up against Maroun? Why can't we allow him to build a new bridge himself?

One objection is that an international crossing ought to be built internationally. But if that's the case, why did we allow the original bridge? To be sure, such projects require international cooperation. Further, it appears as though the Canadians are the most concerned with a government ownership of the new span. Otherwise, they wouldn't be putting up so much of the cost, or opposing Maroun so virulently.

Considering too the venom with which even Michiganders are employing against him, and it almost looks as though the real problem with a private bridge is that it would be financed by the likes of Maroun; he doesn't seem very well liked.

At the end of the day, we don't particularly care who covers the cost of a new bridge. If our Canadian friends are hellbent for leather to spend their taxpayers' dollars, okay by us. But as the only real objections to Maroun building it is that he's arrogant, well, isn't government insisting that it, government, is best suited to build the thing also rather arrogant itself?

Open the Longest International Border in the World

We live next to a neighbor who cannot be seen as anything less than the greatest friend and ally that a nation such as the United States can have. Canada as a nation and Canadians as a people have been very good to us for the better part of our joint history. We trade more between the two of us than with anyone else. Yet how do we treat our friends in return?

By making them wait unduly long in coming over to say hello, and maybe spend a few bucks while here.

This is an issue which is generally not seen or understood by most of the US. But there is a very real question of courtesy and common sense at stake, both with regard to individuals and businesses. It simply makes sense that we expedite travel between our countries. It is time that we seriously considered a complete opening of the longest border in the world.

Why shouldn't US and Canadian citizens pass freely between each other? We are surely as close as any given European Union country, and likely as not more friendly than a good number of them. Such an idea would free up resources on both sides for better use (we surely have more grief coming from our southern border) while allowing an easier flow of goods, both personal and commercial. An initiative such as this would surely aid free trade, particularly between major crossings such as we have here in Detroit. More than that, it would serve as a powerful sign that we trust each other in the manner which close friends ought.

The terrorism question will certainly come in up in any discussion about this problem. Yet how many suspected terrorists have been caught moving between or border? Or do we, and we should admit this only shamefully if it is true, believe that we don't really trust that Canada's other points of entry are not secure enough for the both of us? All that we really accomplish in thickening the border looking for sneaky evildoers is cause unwarranted trouble for ourselves and our neighbours.

That's hardly a welcome signal. If we are to be at all true to our deepest principles, then we need to show our Canadian brethren that we understand friendship and invite it. At some point, we simply must quit worrying about cloak and dagger threats and live up to our highest callings. Anything less than that and we are but quivering beneath the sheets.

Open the International Border. Let's begin living up to our principles rather than down to the despotism of the world's lowest thugs.

US Investigates Border Hassles

The US Government has launched an investigation into whether Muslims and other minorities are being systematically harassed at Michigan international border crossings. We would like to add to that list an admittedly rather general, seemingly all encompassing, yet equally harassed group: any and all law abiding American citizens.

This is not to exclude Muslims and other minorities, or anyone else for that matter, from that class of people. A law abiding American citizen is a law abiding American citizen, period. To the degree to which they have been or are subjected to a more intense scrutiny, then they have indeed been more deeply offended. Still, one doesn't have to be part of a more offended group in order to be properly offended.

People at the border, returning to their own country at either one the crossings right here in Detroit, are routinely asked what can only be seen as provocative and insulting questions. Say what you will, to be asked where have you been, what were you doing, and how much money do you have on you (US and Canadian) are ultimately none of the government's business. We understand the reasons for the questions: to try to trip a person up in the search for wrongdoing or ill intent. We simply question whether that justifies the inquiries.

Particularly when we are asked, 'When was the last time you were in prison?'. Does that matter, when you are a US citizen who has presented to the border guard your proper and true credentials? Do you have no less right to re-enter your own country even after you may have paid the price of an indiscretion to it?

If and where Muslim Americans and other loyal yet minority Americans have been unduly and wrongly hassled, then that must be addressed and properly handled, to insure the future respect of all our people. Indeed, the right tone of respect must be addressed to all Americans of any stripe.

It has been said many times and in many ways that when we change our way of doing things solely because of the war on terror, the terrorists have won anyway. We must not allow that to happen. For if we do, we will find ourselves engaging in our own little petty acts of terrorism anyway. We will have made ourselves little different from them.