- This topic has 1 reply, 14 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
[quote=”DavidCMurray”][quote=”Camby”]that said, cannot a CR national with a CR passport come to the USA and spend a week or two without a visa? I spent a week not along ago in 2 EU nations, all I needed was my USA passport and one time, a pic ID too….[/quote]
In words of one syllable or less, “No”.
That’s the point of this entire thread.[/quote]
well, thats why I am here [u]to learn[/u]……soooo, CR natives, do they not get passports or, are they only good for travel in C/S America? Europe?Each country, regardless of its geographic location, sets its own standards for the entry of foreign nationals. Some countries (Canada, for example) do not require visas for U.S. citizens or citizens of some, but not all, other countries. Other countries (the U.S., for example) are much stricter.
While the U.S. may admit Canadians with few restrictions, it applies much more stringent restrictions to citizens of some, but not all, other countries. Admission of one country’s citizens to another country is controlled by the country which someone wishes to enter.
You may be interested to know that a Costa Rican citizen, traveling on a legitimate Costa Rican passport, must obtain a U.S. visa (not a simple matter, as we have learned) in order to fly to Europe via an American airport. Yup, if a Costa Rican wishes to fly to Spain via Miami, s/he has to jump through the same hoops as if s/he wished to travel as a tourist in the U.S.
Costa Ricans can obtain Costa Rican passports which are recognized globally, but visas to enter particular countries are an entirely different matter.
gotcha, what a pain in the neck, esp since you are merely going from one airport to another…
Goign through Heathrow, getting baggage, re-checking it in while fighting my way through subway and 1000’s of people was a hassle and then some, plus lines for customs….but the Ticos, geesh, they have it worse trying to fly, as your example, from CR to Spain via Miami…..a real hassle……you would think with tourism, expats,etc, USA would be a bit more flexible,esp when we are with people from countries far less hospitable and less stable…..I’ve been researching this for a while, have talked to lots of people, heard lots of stories, and I have a pretty good idea how it works, what they look at, and how they make the decision. They look at quite a few things, and they look it up themselves, they really don’t even want to look at “what you bring them” such as letters, etc.
First they look at previous travel history, where has this Tico been before. Trips to Europe, or anywhere out of central America really, is a big plus. They want to know you will be a tourist, so having been a tourist before in other countries prior to the US probably helps.
Second, prior to the interview they have already looked at your financial information. If you have been working and have been making (and saving) money, etc. A bank account with $4,000-$5000 is helpful. People have been asked, by the interviewer “how are you going to use the money?”. The correct answer would be to buy clothes, pay for the hotel, rent a car, etc. They want to know you have money, and intend to use it on your trip.
Third, they look at your assets and occupation. If your a Engineer who has been working in CR for years, has a office, etc. your probably going to be allowed in (plus the things above, good sized bank account and previous travel history).
If you have just one of the three I mentioned above, your probably not going to be given a Visa. If you can convince them, with at least 2 of the things I mentioned, and the Interviewer is in a good mood that day, you will probably get a visa. This is not so much inside knowledge, but it is what they normally look at. And it all has to do with assets/money/and travel history. A letter from some Gringo’s holds no weight what so ever. Having a Mom/Dad who own land doesn’t help much either.
This is a bit dated but an interesting read.
http://ccla.org/2011/02/15/us-no-fly-list-at-work-in-canada/
A Canadian family flying direct to Puerto Vallarta from Toronto can now be denied boarding the plane if not pre-approved by the US because they are entering their airspace.
I know a flight attendant that once mentioned that as soon as a flight enters US airspace, some of the rules change on board, like the number of people that can stand in line at the washrooms for example.Hmmm . . . Well, just which country’s rules should apply in U.S. airspace, if not those of the U.S? Suppose, for example, that the family from Toronto was flying over the U.S. on Virgin Airways (based in Great Britain) or on El Al (based in Israel) or on Holland’s KLM. Which country’s rules should apply?
And would you leave it to the vagaries of Canada’s or Mexico’s (or Great Britain’s or Israel’s or Holland’s) rules to govern not only how many passengers are allowed to stand in line for the restrooms but also the weapons they can carry? Do you really (really) want a bunch of wild-eyed Canadians (you know how they are) wearing their explosive vests while flying over [u]your[/u] city?
I’d suggest that the sovereignty of any country’s airspace is not materially different from the sovereignty of its land surface in terms of the rules which apply.
Would you propose to permit a Mexican trucking company to follow Mexico’s truck safety and driver licensure and other rules when driving in the U.S? Do you really want to share U.S. roads with fourteen year-old Mexican drivers who’ve been behind the wheel for thirty straight hours?
And should U.S. occupational safety rules not apply once the drug cartel’s tunnelers cross the border from Mexico?
[quote=”Ronny”]This is a bit dated but an interesting read.
http://ccla.org/2011/02/15/us-no-fly-list-at-work-in-canada/
A Canadian family flying direct to Puerto Vallarta from Toronto can now be denied boarding the plane if not pre-approved by the US because they are entering their airspace.
I know a flight attendant that once mentioned that as soon as a flight enters US airspace, some of the rules change on board, like the number of people that can stand in line at the washrooms for example.[/quote]Given what has happened in US airspace I’m glad to comply by their rules. They are in place to protect the passengers.
Agreed, but it does affect last minute travel. I know someone who had a minor offense when younger so could not go into the US. He would fly to CR landing in Mexico instead of the states because of this so I’m assuming that he can no longer go to central america?
I guess I’m confused. We know at least a couple of Canadian couples who have flown from Canada to points south of the U.S., on their way to Costa Rica, without difficulty and without passing through a U.S. airport. In at least one instance, they were sufficiently offended by the prospect of their treatment by U.S. authorities that they specifically planned their trip to avoid a U.S. changeover. So your acquaintance with the minor offense on his record can still visit Central America. He just cannot (apparently) travel through a U.S. airport. But there are other routes.
I’m not defending the rules, you understand. I’m just saying that the U.S. has every right to govern air travel in its own airspace just like every other sovereign country does.
I’m not disagreeing with you, but am wondering if someone not being able to enter the US by land is also put on a no fly list over US airspace.
Interesting post. I work for a federal agency, dealing with U.S. Immigration. In terms of visas for Costa Ricans, visas are not difficult to obtain from U.S. Consulates, if he or she has completed a satisfactory INTERPOL check, FBI NCIC check, no fly list check, has a round trip ticket, and enters on tourist or business visa statis. I have interviewed and processed Ticos and Ticas for deportation, based on a visa overstay; and believe it or not, for FILING AN UNTRUE POLITICAL ASYLUM APPLICATION.
Before 9/11, it wasn’t necessary for a Costa Rican to have a visa to enter Canada.
And I know many Canadians who will not fly in US air space, but some do it, because it is often cheaper. This is from the West Coast.The US no-fly list contains only 8,000 to 10,000 names. Right or wrong profiling does exist, but mostly with those associated with Islam. After 9/11 a lot of things changed forever.
As for Canadians the law was changed last year. Read the following:
Monday, May 9, 2011 The U.S. – The New No-Fly Zone for Record Holders
On March 23, 2011, “Bill C-42: An Act to Amend the Aeronautics Act” received Royal assent and became law in Canada. Prior to passage of the amendment, the Aeronautics Act already permitted airline operators to share passenger data with foreign agencies that govern an international flight’s destination. This new amendment extends this information sharing by allowing the airlines to share passenger data with US transportation authorities for any flight that enters US airspace, even if that flight never touches down on US soil.So what does this mean for the traveling public in Canada? Practically speaking, it means carriers must comply with the US Secure Flight Program by providing Passenger Name Records (PNRs) to US authorities for passengers ticketed on flights originating in Canada that either enters US airspace or that have an emergency alternate landing site in the US. The PNRs are provided to US authorities 72 hours in advance of departure for the purpose of screening against the Terrorism Screening Center’s No Fly List prior to boarding. If US authorities deem that a passenger represents a security risk, that passenger will be subject to additional screening and may be denied boarding.
There have already been documented instances of travelers being denied boarding in Canada as a result of this new legislation. Unfortunately there is little that the traveling public can do in advance of departure to ensure they do not run afoul of the new policies. If a passenger has an existing redress number issued by the Department of Homeland Security then providing that information at the time of booking should prevent problems on the day of departure, but for travelers who have never had problems before (and who would therefore not have a redress number), there now exists this additional source of concern that their ability to travel
domestically or internationally is ultimately at the discretion of the US Government.[quote=”DavidCMurray”]Hmmm . . . Well, just which country’s rules should apply in U.S. airspace, if not those of the U.S? Suppose, for example, that the family from Toronto was flying over the U.S. on Virgin Airways (based in Great Britain) or on El Al (based in Israel) or on Holland’s KLM. Which country’s rules should apply?
And would you leave it to the vagaries of Canada’s or Mexico’s (or Great Britain’s or Israel’s or Holland’s) rules to govern not only how many passengers are allowed to stand in line for the restrooms but also the weapons they can carry? Do you really (really) want a bunch of wild-eyed Canadians (you know how they are) wearing their explosive vests while flying over [u]your[/u] city?
I’d suggest that the sovereignty of any country’s airspace is not materially different from the sovereignty of its land surface in terms of the rules which apply.
Would you propose to permit a Mexican trucking company to follow Mexico’s truck safety and driver licensure and other rules when driving in the U.S? Do you really want to share U.S. roads with fourteen year-old Mexican drivers who’ve been behind the wheel for thirty straight hours?
And should U.S. occupational safety rules not apply once the drug cartel’s tunnelers cross the border from Mexico?[/quote]
No issues w/soveringty at all, but wold be nice to see a balance esp from countries that are on friendly terms….for instance, CR and USA are by and large friendly….I would expect that customs/immigration do its job, of course, but not too many yrs ago, we had a story run in the US of several Egyptian and Saudi men that went missing……they are coming to the US to become pilots!! There was very lax requirements to let them in and to keep eye out for them….yet they came from two nations that were replete with anti-American hostile people and a large and active Muslim extreme base…whether they were nor not, they should have had more stringent requirements then a Tico trying to connect in Miami to Spain for example….the Visa thing seems like a hassle when a person has valid passport,etc…..no easy answers, esp on a forum of everyday folks like us, true, but a shame…..none the less.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
