Regarding this question: Is there a constitutional right to privacy?
2006-12-18 16:14:37 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The patriot act was a good thing, but shot down by the left. "We killed the Patriot Act" -- Jack Murtha or Dingy Harry Reed... I can't remember which.
Yes there is and should be a constitutional right to privacy but now when that privacy is costing lives of Americans by terrorists. Terrorists have no rights and should have no rights. There is no such thing as privacy for ANTI-AMERICANS. The Terrorist times were the first to share the news ... (aka New York Times). Press leaks have their time and place and when the country's welfare is at stake is not the time or the place.
The Liberal New York Times thinks that people's lives are just a story. They are ANTI-AMERICAN. I would rather read the National Enquirer than that "Newspaper". It completely supports the terrorists!
2006-12-18 16:27:48 · answer #1 · answered by Jade 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I am not in favor of giving up my right to privacy because people are scared there going to get blown up. Sorry. And I do not trust this administration with any of the powers in the Patriot Act. Nor do I think I would trust any administration with it.
2006-12-18 16:50:40 · answer #2 · answered by mrlebowski99 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If the right to privacy infringes on the other rights of American's and their lives as a whole, then the right to privacy is out the door. I don't mind the government keeping tabs on me, I just would not want the media knowing every thing I do!
2006-12-18 16:20:55 · answer #3 · answered by 2007 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Even if someone speaks of a murder they committed over the phone it is inadmissible in a court of law if the wire tap was based on the Patriot act. No search warrant could be obtained if I was selling drugs over the phone if the Patriot act was used to gain said information.
If you don't like the Patriot Act then don't speak of any terrorist plot you may have over the phone lines.
I have nothing to hide so I am for it.
2006-12-18 16:20:25 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
i'm not sure precisely what i think of yet. i do no longer think of that the Bush administration replaced into attempting to misuse it yet interior the incorrect palms it must be a foul potential used to crush political opposition forces. Who knows? i understand the Patriot Act replaced into bipartisan interior the wake of 9-eleven.
2016-10-15 05:28:54 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It has some good stuff in it, but it maybe goes a little too far in some areas (right to privacy issues). Something like it is absolutely necessary.
2006-12-18 16:25:52 · answer #6 · answered by gaskems 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Conservatives think the act doesn't gofar enough.
And it covers waaaay more than privacy.
2006-12-18 19:27:56 · answer #7 · answered by bettysdad 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here is the view.
Our troops are fighting for freedom. We should give up freedom to protect ourselves. Liberals hate freedom and should not be allowed the freedom to criticize Mr. Bush. We must sacrifice freedom for security.
It's circular logic and pure idiocy.
2006-12-18 16:35:42 · answer #8 · answered by txwebber 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is in the constitution, yes. Whether or not it helps criminals, it's against UN law and the vision of the founding fathers.
2006-12-18 16:24:40 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
you get life liberty ane the pusuit of happiness that's it.
now as a conservative and an ex-criminal i think we should be watched pretty closely
2006-12-18 16:18:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋