What exactly is the problem with the Patriot Act?

Question

the revised version

Answer 1

The problem with the Patriot Act is that while it does provide a clause allowing judicial oversight, Title IV Section 412 includes provisions for judicial review in detentions, and Title II deals with warrant requirements for electronic surveillance, it does not make this oversight mandatory.

This means that these provisions are allowed to go unenforced. You see, the Executive Branch is in charge of this enforcement. So what we are seeing now and basically have a wide-open window to is when the laws get in the way of what Bush wants to accomplish, he just chooses not to enforce them.

Also, the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments are limitations on government action, and apply to anyone under US authority or control. Nowhere does it mention 'citizen'.

As far as warrantless wiretapping, 50 U.S.C. §1801 et al. Warrantless wiretapping is illegal under FISA if any US citizen or resident alien is a party to the conversation. Also 18 U.S.C. § 2511: Compliance with FISA "shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance... may be conducted". The Patriot Act runs head to head into legalities here.

Answer 2

Below are some resources which provide evidence of the PATRIOT Act's flaws and use in an abusive manner:

Text of the Act - Read it yourself (the people who passed it didn't). It can be pretty enlightening.
Wikipedia article on the PATRIOT Act - Provides a great overview, including history and tour of abuses. Many kinds of abuses are represented, including (amazingly) one against a web site operator who was running a fan site for the TV show "Stargate SG-1". The alleged crime was... copyright infringement! Also points out that sections 505 (National Security Letters) and 805 ("expert advice or assistance") were ruled unconstitutional and vague, respectively.
Documented abuses - Abuses of the act as determined by justice department investigators (not outsiders such as the ACLU). By 2003, over 1000 complaints had been received and about 34 had been deemed within-jurisdiction and substantial. Does anyone have an update of these figures?
Act's "successful" track record questionable - A lengthy blog post breaking down the PATRIOT Act terrorism conviction figures, comparing claims to reality. Bush claims the number of convinctions is in the ballpark of 200, with the implication that these are all having an effect against terrorism. The Justice department's own figures give a "slightly" lower number for terrorism-related convictions: 39. You read that correctly— about 160 convictions under the patriot act had nothing to do with terrorism by the Justice dept.'s own admission; thus non-terrorism applications of the Act outnumber terrorism applications by a factor of more than 4:1.
It is interesting to compare this "success count" to the Justice department's own figure for abuses of the Act, which had already reached a comparable level (34) two years ago (see above).

The ACLU's PATRIOT Act myth's and facts page - Nice page, provides some more facts and arguments.
Below are some links demonstrating popular opposition to the Act and arguments against it:
Local government opposition - In this article an example of a local government is taken, which outlawed cooperation with the PATIOT Act's provisions by local officers. This is one example of many (hundreds?)
Library opposition - Librarians of course hate the PATRIOT Act because circulation records could be subpoenaed and patrons implicated purely by what they have been reading— and not notified they are being investigated.
Congressman Ron Paul argues against retaining the act - Succinct speech before congress by Ron Paul arguing that the PATRIOT act is not necessary and should be let to expire. The crux is that law enforcement doesn't need the extra-constitutional powers granted by the act, and that terrorism-fighting efforts are actually harmed by not requiring efforts be focused based on probable cause.

Answer 3

1. get over yourselves - the Patriot Act has not affected your life in any way, except by empowering governement agencies to better protect your meager existence.

2. You people need to get your facts straight before blabbing away. You have a responsibility as an American to state facts and not unsubstantiated dribble. Facts from MSNBC, NY Times and Wikipedia below:

Bush served his country as part of the Air Defense Command during the Vietnam War and has repeatedly said that if his unit had been activated to fight in the war, he would have proudly gone. Bush was honorably discharged from service, something that would NOT have happened if he had dodged any sort of duty.

Cheney did not "dodge" the draft. He applied for student deferrments while he was in school that were also applied for by nearly 16 million other students and young fathers all across America during that time. Just after he finished school, his wife became pregnant and he sought to defer his duty until after the baby arrived. However, by that time he was no longer eligible to serve due to an age limit imposed on draftees. Cheney was a supporter of the Vietnam War and had no problems whatsoever with military service - unlike Bill Clinton, who did not support the war effort and fled north.

Answer 4

Ah, the "A mic on every phone" act. Just like freedom, that's all. Can't say the same for chagee.

Answer 5

Well, I have only one problem with it. It only makes changes to existing laws, by adding phrases to sentences, without revealing the full context. Standing alone, it's totally and completely incomprehensible. You have to have the US Code at your fingertips to have a clue what it's talking about.

I rather dislike laws that can't be understood.

Answer 6

George Bush said the terrorists hate us because of our freedom. Bush then proceeded to do many many things under the guise of "fighting the terrorists" (i.e, the Patriot Act) which takes more of our freedoms away than any terrorist could ever dream of accomplishing. GB is our country's worst enemy and is doing more harm to our way of life than the terrorists.

Answer 7

Most of the people who created it are not patriots-they are coward draft dodgers like Cheney and Bush...

Answer 8

creates a "national" police force run by the secret service (ss) violates most of the bills of rights. what more could you ask for?

Answer 9

It helps protect us from terrorists. It seems that some people don't like that idea.

Answer 10

ahhh, the parrot act

It says no one is allowed to kill red/green parrots even if these parrots are trying to kill you