Respectfully, how would they be able to verify that a) you are being truthful, and b) that only part of the shipment is real, when once part has been shown not to be?
The burden of truth is supposed to be on the accuser.
Consider if you will - a robber is caught by police in his own house. In this house, they found the items the robber stole. Should they:
a) take the items the robber stole b) take everything
OP is inside of the US, and probably lives here as well. He's not a flight risk, and its totally reasonable to ask them to go through slow bureaucratic means to make sure they get it right.
CBP acts like they are the first line in a war when really they ought to be helping people come into compliance, and track down bad suppliers.
Taped to the wall on the Sault Ste. Marie crossing CBP station:
"We Are The First Line Of Defense"
They don’t know what anyone’s intentions are except to apply electrical components to solving a problem.
Should they stop all electronics shipments? Except for the Apples of the world?
Would that make you feel safer?
The occasional irrational actor isn’t as real a threat to me as my constantly paranoid neighbors and government.
Why should CBP siege all the electronics if just the adapters are not legal? Sure, if the main electronics also have counterfeit UL marks then they also should be seized, but if the main electronics aren’t counterfeit why should invalid adapters be the grounds for seizing everything else?
You are "trusting" the poster here and assuming there "intentions" are good.
As far as me “trusting” OP on the story, well yeah, it’s a random HN comment. Literally nothing is at stake here. If you’re going to start assuming that OP is lying for HN cred then be my guest, but it seems needlessly paranoid to me.
If you bought something and it arrived and was a fake, would you buy from that shipper again?