Patriot Act Right, OK or BAD?

Answer 1

It's really hard to tell. That document is long and it change the laws of many other documents. The Patriot Act only refers to other documents in many of the rule changes it makes, so you would need to have access to many other documents to accurately analyze it.

Answer 2

Doing what has to be done at the time.

Lincoln suspended Habeus Corpus 3 times.
During the Civil War, President Lincoln suspended the writ of habeascorpus three times: first, on April 27, 1861, again on September 24, 1862, a few days after signing the Emancipation Proclamation, and finally on September 15, 1863. Although there is no exact record of the total number arrested during the Civil War, the Commissary General of prisoners listed 13,535 citizens arrested from February 1862 to April 1865. It should come as no surprise then that freedom from arbitrary arrest became the most important constitutional issue in the early part of the Civil War. This freedom was limited by the fact that the majority of the loyal North, both Democrats and Republicans, believed that secession was not a constitutional right and that a rebellion was underway. That elevated constitutional issues to paramount concern. Thus, these suspensions of rights enhanced the controversy regarding the constitutionality and amount of power allotted to the President. They also encouraged such government agencies as the Post Office to restrict free press by confiscating controversial issues of newspapers and other publications. These suspensions may have encouraged citizens to take the law into their own hands such as in the cases where they destroyed Copperhead presses. We now turn to an examination of these suspensions of the writ of habeascorpus in order to assess their First Amendment implications, their Constitutional justifications, and their impact on citizens and the press.


FDR
By 1942, 10,000 civil servants were reading and censoring a million pieces of mail weekly, especially those to or from POW's and other internees. (At the same time, they watched for potentially valuable information. Loose lips could also sink the other guy's ships.) GI's writing home-all subject to censorship by officers-were prohibited from mentioning anything about the military situation around them.(But warrantless searches of Al Qaeda makes Bush Big Brother? I guess FDR was Super Brother then) sound familiar?

Answer 3

Brilliant in a time of war--far better than Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus and Roosevelt's internment camps.

Now that we have the technology to spy on people, we can let them go about their lives.

I wish our leaders had the wisdom to put a "sunset clause" in the text. The Patriot Act is bad for democracies in peace time, and it wouldn't hurt to renew debate every four years or so just to make sure the provisions are still necessary.

(By the way, if the Patriot Act had never been passed, the NSA would be operating much as it does now. What the media isn't tell you is that the NSA has been around since WW II and relies on laws passed by Congress as well as executive orders from WW II to today, the most important were signed either by Reagan or Clinton. Bush simply reinterpreted an act passed in the 90's, "The Digital Communications and Telephony Act". While I was in the Navy, we used to hook up our equipment and listen to cell phone calls when we were board. Our equipment interpreted the digital sequencing in the calls and could unravel them. That was in 1998 before Bush took office, and our equipment was based on WW II technology used also by the NSA.)

Answer 4

The Act was formed in response to the terrorist attacks against the United States, and dramatically expanded the authority of American law enforcement for the stated purpose of fighting terrorism in the United States and abroad.

What many don't understand is that the act protects the citizens of this country yet many THINK it reduces their privacy from the government.

Do people HONESTLY think the government is using the Patriot Act to eavesdrop on the everyday citizens talking about their recipes for egg nog? Yeah they do .... which is the FURTHEST from the truth.

Until those who make assumptions learn what's REALLY going on...we're doomed to a nation of stupidity!

Answer 5

Benjamin Franklin said it best:

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The Patriot Act strips ALL Americans (no matter what the neo-cons say) of their right to privacy.

Answer 6

The only detrimental effect I have felt is having to take my shoes off at the airport. I do not know if the Bill of Rights guarantees the right not to go shoeless at the airport, but I'll get back to you.

Answer 7

Very bad. Any who give up freedom for "security" will find they'll have neither in the end.

Answer 8

I will re-enforce what others have said here.....BAD!!!!! Yep, you need to find copies...probably on the Net and read them. All citizens need to realize what we have given up...and what has been taken away from us.

Answer 9

If it gives any person in government absolute power over the people and their oversight then we are no longer a democracy.

Answer 10

Let me ring up "Hitler"...... Wait...... Wait.... okay here he is; he says: no not at all, and explains that if you can suppress people and their Rights it is all good and "Saddam was agreeing with him lucky as he was there!

ACLU, where are you; oh oh oh you helping out "ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS" and have "NO" time for the actual CITIZENS of AMERICA!

ACLU= "AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION" AMERICA standing for "USA"!

How's that.