Jurispudence experts around the world agree with you: it's unconstitutional and creates the basis for the transformation of the US into a police state. (Read Anna Funder's book about the old East Germany, 'Stasiland' if you want to know how little 'the innocent' are protected when governments are given these sorts of powers)
Just a quick note to the answerer who thinks only 'children' oppose the Patriot Act:
"Nearly 400 city governments—including most major US metropolitan centers—as well as seven state legislatures have passed resolutions condemning the Patriot Act’s trampling on basic democratic rights. Yet the legislation has been made permanent without a single Democratic senator casting a vote against it."
2007-09-27 17:17:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Rebecca P 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), passed in 1978 after revelations of domestic surveillance abuses during the Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon administrations, designated a secret court to approve warrants for domestic surveillance. Since 9/11, however, there's been criticism that FISA is not flexible enough to keep up with the terrorism threat. Some experts from FRONTLINE's report weigh in on the debate.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront/themes/fisa.html
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was first enacted in 1978 (Public Law 95-511) and later amended by the Patriot Act.
http://www.cnss.org/fisa.htm
2007-09-27 23:23:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by scarlettt_ohara 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
How is it that you don't understand how laws are passed? Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate, MUST pass the bill by at least a simple majority and by a super majority if one person in the Senate objects strenuously enough.
That means at least 218 US Representatives and 51 Senators voted for the Patriot Act. Yet, you only blame the President?
edit: Unfortunately, some parts of it are Unconstitutional. But this must be determined by a court of competent authority. It appears that has in fact happened in two of the provisions.
2007-09-27 23:25:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by plezurgui 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
I agree entirely
remember that it is not truly an act of patriotism but the
U.S.A.P.A.T.R.I.O.T Act nothing but an acronym to hide the various bizarre legislation parts in it
secret subpoenas of library check-out information? You've got to be kidding me on that...
plus Bush has gone beyond the Patriot Act in collecting domestic phone call records of all Americans and doing some wiretaps without any court order
----
1) If you want to investigate terrorists, you can do it with good old-fashioned surveillance and secret court orders. The point is, have a warrant for what you're doing
2) You can't say because Congress passed it in a panicked time that somehow it's constiutional. The courts have stricken several portions of this down. If you don't like it, try passing a constitutional amendment.
2007-09-27 23:18:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by MrPotatoHead 4
·
2⤊
4⤋
I suspect the safety and security of the American people deserves more priority after the events of 9/11 than the monitoring of telephone calls to known terrorists or terrorist supporters.
The Patriot Act has diminished which of your rights? I fully realize the potential for abuse - but I also realize the absolute need and the strict oversight (remember the FBI agents who decided that they could tape just about anyones conversation? They were promptly prosecuted.)
Simply stated, if the US is to have any chance what so ever of preventing terror attacks within this country, they must have a reliable and steady flow of valid intelligence and the means to procure this information.
2007-09-27 23:29:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by LeAnne 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
A lot of people think that just because Congress passed it, the Patriot act is constitutional; that is absolutely not the case.
2007-09-27 23:47:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by ash 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
Did the left wing libs you support protect your constitution when the congress passed it, making it constitutional? Or is it easier for you to just Blame G.W.B.?
2007-09-27 23:26:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
The Patriot Act is unintelligible, and that SHOULD render it Unconstitutional, but since that would erase the entire US Tax Code, it is well settled law that there is no requirement that statutes be intelligible to be valid.
2007-09-27 23:15:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by open4one 7
·
3⤊
3⤋
The Patriot Act only hurts criminals, why would you want to protect them. Ohhhhhh, I see.
If you want to protest violation of freedoms, go after the Credit bureaus that actually sell your information to anyone that will buy it. They disseminate it freely. Everything about you from the time you got your social security card.
2007-09-27 23:18:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
2⤋
oh the good old ironically named 'patriot' act...
pretty much hands all power over to the government, the power to spy on the people, the power to detain and terrorize anyone based on suspicions rather than proof...
is it just me that find it hilarious that all you people that are so opposed of anything social in nature (aka communist) are embracing this act?
the same act that would be better aptly named as the Stalin Act?
2007-09-27 23:32:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by Cristina 5
·
1⤊
3⤋