The government is a bunch of clowns. What gives them the right to tell him what he can or can’t do with his own personal device?
What gives them the right
The monopoly on violence.
To be clear I don’t agree with this statement, but the steelman counterargument would be something like: if the president of the United States were to destroy evidence of a crime, shouldn’t that also be a crime?
Have to be accused of a crime first for this to apply. The victim here was purely the target of extra customs search due to his support of a politically unfavored cause
deleted by creator
Can’t bother to read the article?
He has, and as far as I know he hasn’t been held accountable, so I guess this guy’s fine, right?
If this goes through it sets a precedent for the government declaring someone a criminal for being in a political organisation simply unfavorable to them. He couldn’t destroy evidence if he wasn’t a criminal could be the take-home-message between the lines they intend to propagate.
Story has already changed. Originally it was him giving border agents the kill code which they entered.
