The Patriot Act

[5stringJeff]

So what exactly is it about the Patriot Act that all of you liberals are so worried/scared/angry about? I mean this as a serious question. There are thousands of people who are screaming mad about the Act. What are your objections to it, and what would you change, given the chance?

 

[Aquarian]

Personally, I am not sure whether I have a problem with the actual provisions themselves or not. I'm sure they'll make for easier and better investigations of actual criminals. I just don't trust the government not to abuse whatever power we allow them. From the arrogant, overbearing highway patrol officer we see so often in films ("you know how fast you were goin', BOY?") and in real life (not to say all officers or even most are like this, but some definitely are, I've met them...) to the president who orders a break in at the opponents hq, those in power tend to abuse it. Couple the wide reaching provisions of the patriot act with all the secrecy it also provides, and it should at least make one pause... Also don't trust Ashcroft specifically, this is the man who wanted the statue of justice, which has stood since 1930, covered when he made a speech in front of it because it had boobies...

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/AshcroftDrape/main.asp

Just to note, that's not the sole or largest reason I have for distrusting him, just the quickest to illustrate and the funniest.

 

[DKSuddeth]

There are several issues with the patriot act that, on a personal level, I find extremely unsettling.

1) sneak and peek search warrants
This is a complete abomination of the 4th amendment. While so many 'pro-bush' or 'pro-government' people tend to say that law enforcement agencies do this anyway, I have yet to read about a case that hasn't been thrown out because of it. One of the reasons that warrants are supposed to be presented is that it defines what may be searched and what may not be searched. It also allows the person who is being served with the warrant to dispute a wrong address, obtain an attorney, or whatever else should be done.

2) relaxing the standards required for issuing warrants.
there should be a bit more than just 'certifying' or testifying that the search is related to an ongoing terror investigation.

3) the abuses of the act already being committed
While I think its a great thing to prosecute 'meth labs' and such, Its a clear and egregious abuse of a law that was meant to combat terrorism to classify 'meth' as a weapon of mass destruction.

4) the library issue.
I shouldn't have to worry about an FBI squad breaking in my door because I want to read how thermonuclear weapons were created and their uses in deterence of aggression.

This country was founded on the basis that the people had freedoms and liberties. Its constitution was based on limiting the governments power over them and not the way that Scalia would have it viewed as defining the limits of an individuals freedom.

 

[eplax34]

"There ought to be limits to freedom" -Bush

Wait, wasn't the excuse to protect our freedoms from the terrorists? Yay! Hypocrisy at its finest!:huh:

 

[jimnyc]

Everyone in America does have freedoms, more than any other civilized country that I know of.

And there should be limits. The biggest spoke of is "Freedom of Speech". Does that mean we should be able to yell "fire" in a movie theater for laughs?

I don't have a problem with restrictions if it's in the best interest of our country (and it's safety).

 

[eplax34]

Bush said it over ****.com, a website that pokes fun at him. So now we can't dissent or else he will bring the wrath of the executive branch upon us. Heil Bush.

** Note - Moderator deleted link. Sorry, no advertising for other forums here. **

 

[lilcountriegal]

I'm not disagreeing eplax... and I know it would be a hard link to locate on such a short topic... but could you possibly find a link that Bush said that in regards to this website?

I just think back to the incident with the Dixie Chicks stating they were ashamed to be from the same state as Bush. When asked in an interview how he felt about the Dixie Chicks, he chuckled and stated (something along the lines of... I can probably find the link if you need it)... "its Freedom of speech. They're entitled to their opinion. Thats what makes this country so great".

 

[Roberta Lynn]

Isn't that how Hilter got started,taking away small rights from the Jews and eventually taking away most of Europes rights.

If you break the small rules it is only a matter of time before you start breaking the bigs one because no one said anything.

But then I didn't vote for Bush and thought he stole the election with the help of the Supreme Court

 

[NightTrain]

the library issue.
I shouldn't have to worry about an FBI squad breaking in my door because I want to read how thermonuclear weapons were created and their uses in deterence of aggression.

This is a favorite liberal war cry, and it is misleading. Grand Juries have always had access to a suspect's library reading habits. Libary records in courtrooms is nothing new.

What the Patriot Act did with this particular issue was decrease the timeframe needed to obtain the information in order to allow law enforcement to respond quickly.

 

[NightTrain]

From the arrogant, overbearing highway patrol officer we see so often in films ("you know how fast you were goin', BOY?") and in real life (not to say all officers or even most are like this, but some definitely are, I've met them...)

LOL

You know, I've always subscribed to the "Yes sir, Officer" and "No sir, Officer" approach when I'm getting grilled beside the highway by a cop.. I get warnings probably 25% of the time, which I attribute to my respectful manner with them and my fuzzbuster combined with emergency braking.

However, I was driving a friend of mine up to Fairbanks a couple years ago in my wife's Laser. That car was scary fast. Fairbanks is about 300 miles from my house, so I had a 600 mile day planned. The highway winds around mountains a good portion of the way, and I was getting bored. Only one way to solve that - Speed, and lots of it!

There's a beautiful straight stretch about 40 miles outside of Fairbanks, it's probably 7 miles long. I told my buddy, Jeff, "Hey, watch this... this damn car will scare you!" and I dropped the hammer.

We were whistling along at 130 MPH in short order and still climbing, when a Trooper came around the corner ahead. My fuzzbuster's silence meant that he still hadn't turned on his radar but he certainly would when he saw how fast we were approaching. We went into emergency braking procedures, all 4 tires were squealing slightly - I was riding that ragged edge of lockup.

Suddenly the fuzzbuster started screaming at me... the gig was up! We flashed past the trooper, who already had his lights on. I just pulled over & waited for him to turn around.

Man, that was one pissed off cop... he came running up to the window and just stood there, sputtering. He was about 25 years old, and about 5' 6". It was real hard not to laugh, but I managed not to - I could almost feel those handcuffs. In Alaska, anything over 20 MPH is a jailable offense, so I figured 70 MPH over would be worth a pistol whipping.

Finally, he calmed down & managed to say, "How fast were you going?"

"You know, officer, I just don't know.. I did swerve there a little bit, but that was because I dropped a cigarette on my legs." There was no way in hell I was going to admit anything. If you're decelerating fast enough, the radar gun can't get a "lock" on you. He was fishing, and we both knew it. The smell of over heated brakes was overwhelming.

He was quivering. Quivering cops are not a good sign. He took my license & registration & went back to his car for 15 minutes. I didn't know how fast he got me for, but I was sure it was well over 100. I had been too busy to look down at my speed when the fuzzbuster announced that a cop was zapping us.

Finally he came back & chewed my ass something fierce, his hand on his pistol. He yelled for about 15 minutes straight & covered a wide variety of topics including How To Be A Good Citizen. Being called a Bad Citizen reminded me of a cheesy Batman line & I was beginning to wonder about his mental state.

I was about to just tell the little fella to save his speeches & gimme my ticket, when he finally announced that he got me for 74 and threw the ticket at me. I've never been so happy to get a ticket in my life.

He got fired about a year later, he pepper sprayed another speeder - it turned out that the motorist was handicapped.

 

[5stringJeff]

NT,

Great story! And BTW, am I the only one around here that thinks that speed limits are way too low nationwide?

 

[NightTrain]

Yeah, I think they're too low, too, Jeff.

It's 65 on the highways, even though they're engineered for much higher speeds.

I think 75 would be acceptable, I like to cruise at 80 commuting to Anchorage every day.

 

[rtm]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Everyone in America does have freedoms, more than any other civilized country that I know of.

And there should be limits. The biggest spoke of is "Freedom of Speech". Does that mean we should be able to yell "fire" in a movie theater for laughs?

I don't have a problem with restrictions if it's in the best interest of our country (and it's safety).

Sorry but I think Canada, Holland, and Britain are more free than the United States. At least there, you don't get sent to jail for life for selling a plant

don't have a problem with restrictions if it's in the best interest of our country (and it's safety).

Yes, and we better restrict people from going to liberal sites cause it's threatening to the fuher's safety and interests

 

[jimnyc]

That's your perogative to believe so, but I disagree.

And how will you get life in prison for selling a plant? The only way you'll get life in prison is if it's a felonious charge, and even then it would have to fall under the new 3 strikes law. If you've made it that far you deserve to rest behind bars.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by rtm
Yes, and we better restrict people from going to liberal sites cause it's threatening to the fuher's safety and interests

Care to elaborate?

 

[Joan]

Maybe the plants are marijuana - and rtm is up for his third strike!

 

[Keebs]

Well, I think anyone seriously trying to look at the New Patriot Act, should look at it as if Clinton was writing it.

I don't think its good for any of us. Not just Liberals/Dems but Conservative/Republicans, too.

The problem I have with it, is it has removed a lot of the protections on the people. Which means big brother can be in our business more than usual.

So, since Republicans are in office, and the Dems don't like it. The Republicans refuse to hear what our complaint. And it would be vice versa if the Democrats where in office.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
There are several issues with the patriot act that, on a personal level, I find extremely unsettling.

1) sneak and peek search warrants
This is a complete abomination of the 4th amendment. While so many 'pro-bush' or 'pro-government' people tend to say that law enforcement agencies do this anyway, I have yet to read about a case that hasn't been thrown out because of it. One of the reasons that warrants are supposed to be presented is that it defines what may be searched and what may not be searched. It also allows the person who is being served with the warrant to dispute a wrong address, obtain an attorney, or whatever else should be done.

2) relaxing the standards required for issuing warrants.
there should be a bit more than just 'certifying' or testifying that the search is related to an ongoing terror investigation.

3) the abuses of the act already being committed
While I think its a great thing to prosecute 'meth labs' and such, Its a clear and egregious abuse of a law that was meant to combat terrorism to classify 'meth' as a weapon of mass destruction.

4) the library issue.
I shouldn't have to worry about an FBI squad breaking in my door because I want to read how thermonuclear weapons were created and their uses in deterence of aggression.

This country was founded on the basis that the people had freedoms and liberties. Its constitution was based on limiting the governments power over them and not the way that Scalia would have it viewed as defining the limits of an individuals freedom.

DK,

I just realized that I had never responded to this post. Sorry for taking so long.

1/2. Sneak-and-peek searches. What are these? I am not familiar with the terminology, but I wil try and do some research today and find it in this context. As far as search warrants, I don't think that law enforcement even uses these any more for things like drug raids, so I'm not surprised that they would want to relax their use for the GWOT. However, I think that they do still technically have to get a search warrant still.
3. While the law was written to protect against terrorism, there's nothing to say that you can't use their provisions to prosecute other cases. In the military, for example, the charge of "conduct unbecoming an officer" is never used alone, but always in tandem with another charge. Same thing with adultery (which is a crime if you are in the military).
4. The library issue was commented on by NT. I have yet to read about someone being arrested or searched bec ause of their library books. And, as liberal as much of the media is, I'm sure it would be plastered all over the news and decried if it happened.

 

[DKSuddeth]

1/2. Sneak-and-peek searches. What are these? I am not familiar with the terminology, but I wil try and do some research today and find it in this context. As far as search warrants, I don't think that law enforcement even uses these any more for things like drug raids, so I'm not surprised that they would want to relax their use for the GWOT. However, I think that they do still technically have to get a search warrant still.

explained and debated in the other posting.

3. While the law was written to protect against terrorism, there's nothing to say that you can't use their provisions to prosecute other cases. In the military, for example, the charge of "conduct unbecoming an officer" is never used alone, but always in tandem with another charge. Same thing with adultery (which is a crime if you are in the military).

Technically, there is nothing to say that, however, when this bill was brought forth in congress and presented to the american people it was introduced as legislation to fight terrorism, not domestic criminal activity. I feel its a 'bait and switch' law, you obviously see no problem with it, and thus we will simply have to agree to disagree.

4. The library issue was commented on by NT. I have yet to read about someone being arrested or searched bec ause of their library books. And, as liberal as much of the media is, I'm sure it would be plastered all over the news and decried if it happened.

As far as the public knows there has never been an arrest, or even an investigation, concerning the library issue and Justice has even said as much publicly. The main crux of the issue is the 'gag order' on the librarians part, along with the threat of prosecution, and there is little, if any, disclosure to congress. Many times Mr. Ashcroft has stated to congressional panels that due to national security he cannot reveal this information because of its classification.

Now, to me, we have very little checks and balances left because of the political party makeup of the government (not that it would be any better under democrat majority either) in that President Bush presents a spending bill and although it gets debated alot a majority republican house and senate is going to give him the money regardless. Only a couple things have actually been denied this administration which, at their face value, are really inconsequential and mean nothing at all.

 

[Ike]

From what I've read about the act...it is somewhat troubling.

We here in Canada have recently passed anti-terrorist legislation. It too has re definded our civil liberties, so i have an idea where the americans are coming from.

Bottom line,
THe constitution is not a suicide pact.

Terrorists would use the freedom and goodwill the founders of your country, and mine created to hurt innocent people. That cannot be allowed.

In Canada we have a charter of rights and freedoms.

Americans have the constitution.

Neither were created with our current conflict in mind.