"if you don't have anything to hide, what's the problem?" when speaking about warrantless searches or warrantless wiretapping? My problem is that many Americans don't want their privacy invaded, if bypassing acquiring a warrant, then what evidence or proof is there to link you with any crime? If they do have evidence and proof, then a warrant would be granted.
2006-09-15 01:59:38 · 13 answers · asked by Enterrador 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Warrantless anything would need no evidence or proof, just an accusation of a crime.
2006-09-15 02:04:16 · update #1
It's so discouraging to hear these foolish people not only HAPPY to give away their civil liberties... but to offer them up as a bloody sacrifice.
A sacrifice to the Great God Cheaper Oil, to Tax Cuts, to Flag-Waving, to Political Hypocrisy.
It's difficult to be patient with people who, in self-centered ignorance, are so content to observe the destruction of the one quality that makes America, and American values, worth saving.
2006-09-15 02:16:15 · answer #1 · answered by St. Hell 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am sorry but what privacy do you have anymore. When the Constitution was first made it was easy to respect privacy because short of physically searching a person's home there was nothing else. Now people's information is everywhere. Grocery stores keep records of what foods you buy, banks of deposits and withdrawls, telephone companies on who you call and where, the computer can hold countless information and then be supplied to the internet. Things move quicker. A transaction takes only a second now. Before it may take a day or two. Government agancies need some way to effectively target and obtain information to defeat those who wish us harm. We both know courts and the current process are not timely adaquiet as before. I am not all for losing my rights of privacy but I am willing to in the short term until a system can be placed that follows new and approved guidelines. So yes I do agree with people that say "if you don't have anything to hide, what's the problem". How often have you heard on the news searches or criminals delay justice because they refuse to corroperate? People have a right to be safe and not fear extreme-view and narrow minded individuals who take in upon themselves to settle "justice" for their cause.
2006-09-15 09:13:45 · answer #2 · answered by Mark S 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No, I do not agree that warrantless wire tapping is right. We have laws and protections from the government and it is not right that they circumvent these. No body should be above the law. These wire taps have a very good chance of being abused for political purposes and should be stopped immediately
2006-09-15 09:05:16 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
You are right, whether you have something to hide or not is not the issue here. The issue is to strip ordinary people of their privacy and make them believe it is for their own good. Sad that the government has sunk to such a low level
2006-09-15 09:03:17 · answer #4 · answered by Ya-sai 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
What rubbish. You americans have such a ruined country. You need to find out your rights and stand up for them. As far as I know they cannot bypass getting a warrant unless you consent, and they often trick or bully people into consenting to a search.
2006-09-15 09:04:13 · answer #5 · answered by TC 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
No.
Warrantless phone taps, email intercepts or any other illegal search is unacceptable. Who oversees such illegal searches? What makes you think they would stop at spying on the "bad guys". What stops them from using it for political gain?
The law is in place for the purpose of preventing abuse of power.
The FISA court was already in place to deal with intelligence surveillance. It should be used for its intended purpose.
2006-09-15 09:03:23 · answer #6 · answered by Dastardly 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
But who is to decide what my privacy is to include or exclude.
If the politicians are so gung-ho on wiretap, let them be first, OK?
2006-09-15 09:04:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
If you are not contacting a suspected terrorist, or are one, why would you be concerned? They don't have the time to look at anyone else.. Besides, there are more credit card companies that have more private information than what you appear to be concerned about.Further, if you take the time to read the act (rather than listen to someone trying to weaken it) you would find the safeguards are in the act.
2006-09-15 09:06:06 · answer #8 · answered by mrcricket1932 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋
No I don't. Civil liberties should be respected and not cut down.
2006-09-15 09:04:27 · answer #9 · answered by Dick V 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Hell no,I'll never agree with that.That's a police state.
2006-09-15 09:19:39 · answer #10 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋