Definitely, and that’s why hard/strict laws or rules can be dangerous. Much like the famous “I know it when I see it” judgment on obscenity.

Where’d you get the 70%? Last I saw it was like 52% - https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2025/03/31/donald-trump-approval-ratings-what-the-latest-polls-show/82703049007/

The biggest issue with this line of thinking is, how do you prove it’s CP without a victim. I suppose at a certain threshold it becomes obvious, but that can be a very blurry line (there was a famous case where a porn star had to be flown to a court case to prove the video wasn’t CP, but can’t find the link right now).

So your left with a crime that was committed with no victim and no proof, which can be really easy to abuse.

Edit: This is the case I was thinking of - https://nypost.com/2010/04/24/a-trial-star-is-porn/

If I recall it’s a bit more twisted than that. Musk can’t legally just give money to make someone vote, so they’re actually giving the money to a sponsor, but playing it up like it’s some raffle.

Its just another game to undercut democracy and use his wealth to break the system.

This article and thread are talking about border agents, which operate under different rules/regulations than you local police officer.

While US citizens cannot be denied entry, non-citizens can if they refuse to unlock their phone. Even US citizens can have devices confiscated if you refuse to unlock the phone for them - https://www.theverge.com/policy/634264/customs-border-protection-search-phone-airport-rights. Because at the border, it’s been decided searches don’t require a warrant.

I’ve seen this a lot recently. This isn’t about what police can do, it’s about border crossings. You can be required to unlock your device when entering the country or be denied entry (or possibly worse).

The best route is to have a phone specifically for travel.