That seems a bit irrational to me. Or at least, a bit indulging in what feels good, rather than an appropriate response to risk. People are very bad at assessing very low-probability risks, and I think this is an example of one.

I understand your thinking that, in large part because I have not shared our risk factors. YMMV. Even with two toddlers in tow, and a gene bank from just about every European country, I would repeatedly get stopped at customs coming back to the mainland, as far back as early 2000's. Customs officials would approach me speaking Spanish, asking for documentation, even before I approached security check in. I played the dumb American and put a flustered look on my face, declaring I didn't understand, (though I did,) and did they speak English? Invariably, they basically said never mind, and waved me on at that point. DH's genetics adds even more complications. I look at what has happened here in the US to his family, in not so distant history, (while acknowledging that Canada's solution to the same factors was even worse,) and seeing how restraints are off POTUS, he considers himself immune from consequences, and things are as he defines them. While he may indeed eventually get restrained, that is of little solace to those who find themselves without merit rotting in El Salvador in the process. Oh wait, that's going on now!

When your family experiences history, you are not bound to ignore the rhymes you hear.

IP