That is currently being stalled in the House because of opposition from Democrats and some Republicans. Do you think it violates civil liberties or freedoms?
2006-09-14 07:33:25 · 29 answers · asked by Enterrador 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I do not support it and yes it violates privacy rights.
Some alarmists will say its needed.What its neede for is a downward spiral for the radical Right to stick its nose into everything.
2006-09-14 07:36:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 11⤊ 3⤋
I think the opposition to warrantless wiretapping is silly. Unless, that is we are willing to take back the rest of our civil liberties that have been stripped from us.
Every cash register in most retail mega stores are recorded. Most stores record their entrances and have random recording throughout the store. Pass a toll booth or use an ATM, smile, you're on camera. A few towns by me have cameras mounted in the downtown area that record everything. Did you get in a car today? If you did did you wear a seat belt because they make you safe, or because thats the law.
But then there are so many ways we give people our personal information. Credit card transactions, EZ Pass, phones with GPS, just using a cell phone, for that matter all phone records... what I'm getting at is that we leave an electronic trail where ever we go.
And I haven't even started listing the ways we've allowed the government and other entities to take away our liberties, I just gave a few examples. So they listen in on phone conversations, Ok thats just one more right I've lost. It's not the first and the way our government is going, it won't be the last.
But to tell you the truth government wiretapping doesn't bother me because I have nothing to fear. I'm not a terrorist, nor do I plan to be any time soon.
2006-09-14 07:48:01 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I think that all Americans should be able to communicate in private, in whatever fashion they choose, and say whatever they choose to say, without the possibility of being "caught" saying something the government does not approve of.
The current warrant is a mere formality, but the administration thinks that having no real plan and just stumbling into things may be jeopardized by having to explain to a judge what our Justice Dept. and Homeland Security Gestapo is looking for and why they are looking there.
2006-09-14 07:48:00 · answer #3 · answered by Chronic Observer 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is clear that poor intellegience impedes the efficacy of any national security plan. The govt. should be able to do all things possible to protect the people w/in its borders. Right to privacy should not supercede the most important right we have which is the right to life. That said, I have some concerns:
1/ Accountability, Oversight & Redress. Who is watching "big brother" as it is watching us? Do we have any legal redress the if they make a mistake?
2/ Data security and mining in the digital age. Don't be fooled. If they have access to your phone call's emails and so forth, they take that piece of info and combine it with the other millions of data imprints we leave to get a complete picture of us. Are we sure we want the same people who nearly lost confidential info. of country's veterans to be responsbile for securing ALL of our private info? Can this power be potentially abused and how do we check that it is not open to misuse/abuse?
Get some of these qtns answered and I am comfortable with giving them free reign into my life......
2006-09-14 08:00:56 · answer #4 · answered by boston857 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I WHOLEHEARTEDLY DISAGREE WITH THE IDEA OF "WARRANT-LESS WIRETAPPING"
We are a nation built on civil liberties and freedoms, to give those up would be to lose to the enemy. This can be done by the law without violating civil liberties....countless law professors have testified on this issue and the damage of going down this most UNAMERICAN road.
2006-09-14 07:42:25 · answer #5 · answered by Charlooch 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
I don't feel any safer as long as Illegal immigrants are just walking into our country. It seems the lazy mans way. Like the police sitting and waiting to give a ticket to someone on their way to work for going 10 miles over the ridiculously low speed limit, but not going after drugs in school or town.
2006-09-14 07:41:51 · answer #6 · answered by jackie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is in violation of the intent of the 4th amendment of the Constitution. It is therefore unlawful and an assault on the peace and freedom of the people.
If anyone agrees to this, then just throw the Constitution away and start calling the government Master.
2006-09-14 07:43:21 · answer #7 · answered by Paladin 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No I don't agree with it. It is another erosion of civil liberties that started with the Patriot Act, which should have been called the Unpatriotic Act. For a party that screams about freedoms all the time, the Republicans have spent the last five years taking them away.
2006-09-14 07:37:06 · answer #8 · answered by capu 5 · 6⤊ 2⤋
via fact the two events pick greater advantageous government. Our money is the backside of their skill. in hassle-free terms the Tea social gathering desires to provide up this, that's why they have been attacked by ability of the media and the two events. and you idiots believed them while they promoted the few persons that no person will like as representitive of the reason yet hailed the OWS as something particular.
2016-10-15 00:08:51 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Put yourself in that situation. Someone is parked across the street from your house listening to everything you say to use against you . Though the Constitution doesn't guarantee privacy anywhere on it,there are some rights to having some sort of security and/or sancutary in our own homes.
2006-09-14 07:40:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wiretaps should always require a court order. Not doing so does violate civil liberties.
2006-09-14 07:36:40 · answer #11 · answered by MishMash [I am not one of your fans] 7 · 8⤊ 1⤋