Patriot Act game

[Pandora]

Patriot Act game


I want to play a game. I might lose the game but its worth playing.

From what I know of the patriot act it doesn’t seem like it is taking my rights away but I am told often that the patriot act is taking our rights away.

So I am openly admitting this is not my topic and I don’t know much about it, I will hopefully learn through this thread what rights of mine are being taken from me. But to make the game fun I want to do it this way.

For every right posted that the patriot act is really taking away from me, I will post a right that the liberals have taken away from me or is trying to take away from me.

Does anyone want to play?

 

[BigRob]

Patriot Act game


I want to play a game. I might lose the game but its worth playing.

From what I know of the patriot act it doesn’t seem like it is taking my rights away but I am told often that the patriot act is taking our rights away.

So I am openly admitting this is not my topic and I don’t know much about it, I will hopefully learn through this thread what rights of mine are being taken from me. But to make the game fun I want to do it this way.

For every right posted that the patriot act is really taking away from me, I will post a right that the liberals have taken away from me or is trying to take away from me.

Does anyone want to play?

Most people yelling about the Patriot Act do not know what it means. The Patriot Act did not make any new laws, it simply put together existing laws. For example, well before the Patriot Act, it was legal to go into a house and set wiretaps with no warrants and then obtain them afterwards.

The "warrantless" wiretaps are a joke as well because the NSA intercepts every call anyway and a FICA warrant could be obtained by saying please. So Bush cuts some of the bureaucratic fat and steamlines the process to make it work better and he is somehow "taking away our rights"

The Patriot Act is all old laws, people who complain about do not have a clue (even Congress people). There was one who voted against it (won't say who) and then was briefed on the actual process and said he had no problem with it, and did not even realize what the actual process involved. Truly sad.

 

[Pandora]

Hi Rob

Thank you for the explanation.
That is pretty much what I thought from what arguments I have listened to, but people keep going on about how are rights are eroding. I do not want my rights to erode anymore than the next guy but I also want our Country protected. If there are any real rights that are being taken away hopefully someone will be able to point them out.

 

[GenSeneca]

Patriot Act game


I want to play a game. I might lose the game but its worth playing.

From what I know of the patriot act it doesn’t seem like it is taking my rights away but I am told often that the patriot act is taking our rights away.

So I am openly admitting this is not my topic and I don’t know much about it, I will hopefully learn through this thread what rights of mine are being taken from me. But to make the game fun I want to do it this way.

For every right posted that the patriot act is really taking away from me, I will post a right that the liberals have taken away from me or is trying to take away from me.

Does anyone want to play?

I'll play DA... According to everyone's favorite Civil Liberties group, there is much wrong with the Patriot Act. Here are the top 3 complaints:

1) Section 215 (known as the "library records" provision, but which actually applies to "any tangible thing") which does not require any individualized suspicion to get a court order for any record wanted in intelligence investigations;
2) Section 206 (known as “John Doe” roving wiretaps in intelligence investigations, which allow multiple phones to be tapped) which does not require law enforcement to ascertain that a suspected foreign terrorist is using the phones being listened to by government agents;
3) The lone wolf provision (added by the 2004 intelligence bill) which applies the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act's secret surveillance powers to non-US citizens in this country but without requiring that they be acting for a foreign power and without sufficient safeguards.
ACLU (Another Crazy Leftist Union)

So lets hear your top 3....

 

[Pandora]

I'll play DA... According to everyone's favorite Civil Liberties group, there is much wrong with the Patriot Act. Here are the top 3 complaints:So lets hear your top 3....




1) Section 215 (known as the "library records" provision, but which actually applies to "any tangible thing") which does not require any individualized suspicion to get a court order for any record wanted in intelligence investigations;
2) Section 206 (known as “John Doe” roving wiretaps in intelligence investigations, which allow multiple phones to be tapped) which does not require law enforcement to ascertain that a suspected foreign terrorist is using the phones being listened to by government agents;
3) The lone wolf provision (added by the 2004 intelligence bill) which applies the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act's secret surveillance powers to non-US citizens in this country but without requiring that they be acting for a foreign power and without sufficient safeguards.
ACLU (Another Crazy Leftist Union)

I should have been more specific, I meant constitutional rights. That is the claim I hear when it comes to the patriot act. Our constitutional rights are being eroded, Bush hates the constitution and that is why he has the patriot act. Exc. Exc. Exc. But this is good, we can work with these. (If I can understand them)




Please explain #1 to me better. I really don’t understand it. Can you give an example? What comes to mind is the government has a right to find out what citizens are renting (book wise) and viewing (computer wise) from the public library. IE: books on making bombs, video of child pornography. Is this what the first law does? Now under the 4th amendment of the constitution, the government can not come into your home or car without a warrant, but they could go to your desk and computer at your office if your employer O.K.’s it. The library is a public place paid for by the rich in this country, and belongs to us The People. So, it is not private like your home or car would be. I am unsure why it is not ANYONES right to know what is being viewed or used in a public library since the library belongs to all of us collectively.

If I am mistaken please show me. I really do want to understand this.

#2 I am assuming this is going against the right to privacy also the 4th amendment? Are the phone lines public access? Like the internet or are they private. And who do they belong to for permission to listen or look?


I do not think the 3d one should count. It spy's on non US citizens in this country. I do not think the constitution gives non us citizen’s rights for anything.


Here is my list of three things liberals take away from me.



I do not have the right to cut a tree in my own yard even if I planted the tree without city permission.

I do not have the right NOT to drive with out my seat belts. I hate them, I would never wear them except for the liberal government in my state forces us to wear them. They force me to do with my body what is against my will every single day.

I do not have a right to ride my bike without a helmet. I have to wear one or be subject to fines and possibly the loss of my license. I hate them; I would not ever wear them if it were not for the liberals in my state forcing me to do it. Again I am forced to do with my body what is against my will.

 

[BigRob]

Please explain #1 to me better. I really don’t understand it. Can you give an example? What comes to mind is the government has a right to find out what citizens are renting (book wise) and viewing (computer wise) from the public library. IE: books on making bombs, video of child pornography. Is this what the first law does? Now under the 4th amendment of the constitution, the government can not come into your home or car without a warrant, but they could go to your desk and computer at your office if your employer O.K.’s it. The library is a public place paid for by the rich in this country, and belongs to us The People. So, it is not private like your home or car would be. I am unsure why it is not ANYONES right to know what is being viewed or used in a public library since the library belongs to all of us collectively.

This is not a new law.

#2 I am assuming this is going against the right to privacy also the 4th amendment? Are the phone lines public access? Like the internet or are they private. And who do they belong to for permission to listen or look?

The constitution says nothing about the right to privacy. It was written in by the Supreme Court (which is bogus). Further, this is not a new law either.

 

[Federal Farmer]

"Sneak and Peek" searches. FBI agents would conduct a search, without first going before a Judge and presenting specific evidence that a crime has been committed, and detailing the specific person or thing to be seized, or even attempting to obtain a warrant, and then use what they had found to arrest an individual, in direct violation of the 4th Amendment. This had never before been allowed in America, and was struck down in Sept. of '07 as un-constitutional after an American attorney was jailed for over 2 weeks, uncharged, on suspicion of involvement in the Madrid bombing, even though subsequent evidence proved him to be completely innocent of any involvement.

National Security Letters, which ordered someone to turn over records on an individual to the FBI, and prevented them from telling the subject of the search that their records had been demanded by the FBI on penalty of prison. These were also ruled un-constitutional.

 

[BigRob]

"Sneak and Peek" searches. FBI agents would conduct a search, without first going before a Judge and presenting specific evidence that a crime has been committed, and detailing the specific person or thing to be seized, or even attempting to obtain a warrant, and then use what they had found to arrest an individual, in direct violation of the 4th Amendment. This had never before been allowed in America, and was struck down in Sept. of '07 as un-constitutional after an American attorney was jailed for over 2 weeks, uncharged, on suspicion of involvement in the Madrid bombing, even though subsequent evidence proved him to be completely innocent of any involvement.

National Security Letters, which ordered someone to turn over records on an individual to the FBI, and prevented them from telling the subject of the search that their records had been demanded by the FBI on penalty of prison. These were also ruled un-constitutional.

Sorry, Sneak and Peek searches were going on well before the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act simply brought them to light and generated all this outrage over an act that had been going on for years (under other Presidents as well)

 

[Federal Farmer]

Sorry, Sneak and Peek searches were going on well before the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act simply brought them to light and generated all this outrage over an act that had been going on for years (under other Presidents as well)

Actually, they had been challenged previously, on numerous occasions, but the 2nd and 9th Circuses failed to rule them unconstitutional. Under the USA Patriot Act, they were once again challenged, and this time they were ruled un-constitutional. The aspect that the Patriot Act changed re: "sneak and peek" searches was that it expanded the rules under which they could be conducted, and it was this expansion that led to them being challenged and declared un-constitutional. The expansion was that the FBI was allowed to conduct the searches without first obtaining a warrant from a Judge, as had been required under the previous rules.

 

[Pandora]

Actually, they had been challenged previously, on numerous occasions, but the 2nd and 9th Circuses failed to rule them unconstitutional. Under the USA Patriot Act, they were once again challenged, and this time they were ruled un-constitutional. The aspect that the Patriot Act changed re: "sneak and peek" searches was that it expanded the rules under which they could be conducted, and it was this expansion that led to them being challenged and declared un-constitutional. The expansion was that the FBI was allowed to conduct the searches without first obtaining a warrant from a Judge, as had been required under the previous rules.

Sneak and peak....if it was before or after Patriot act I can not say but the question is, Is not sneaking and peaking on my phone line a constitutional issue?

Is privacy in my phone lines part of my constitutional rights?

 

[Federal Farmer]

Sneak and peak....if it was before or after Patriot act I can not say but the question is, Is not sneaking and peaking on my phone line a constitutional issue?

Is privacy in my phone lines part of my constitutional rights?

The "sneak and peek" was where they went into your home or place of business when nobody was there, and essentially look around, take notes and pictures, but they're not supposed to take anything with them. They're really not even supposed to listen to your answering machine, or check your computer (if it's off), BUT, the do, and did, and they did it without a Judges approval, and that's why they've been declared un-constitutional.

 

[Pandora]

The "sneak and peek" was where they went into your home or place of business when nobody was there, and essentially look around, take notes and pictures, but they're not supposed to take anything with them. They're really not even supposed to listen to your answering machine, or check your computer (if it's off), BUT, the do, and did, and they did it without a Judges approval, and that's why they've been declared un-constitutional.

Ok I can agree if they are sneaking in your home or car it would be UN constitutional. I am mixed about the listening on the phone lines though, I do not own any phone lines I only borrow or rent them.

And I laugh at the public library thing; we own it collectively but not individually. Public libraries are public information.

So, if this is true that it is part of the patriot act that they can now sneak in my home and look around then I say that is bad and wrong and I don’t like it.

What did you think of the other 2 things on the list?