The USPATRIOT Act shredded the Bill of Rights!
More attention appears to have been given finding a title for the new law than the substance of its provisions. The "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required To Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act," as Rep. Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, noted during the House debate, is a truly "high-flying acronym, it is the PATRIOT bill, it is the USA bill, it is the stand up and sing the 'Star Spangled Banner' bill."
It is also a law, Florida Congressman Frank lamented, that was processed by Congress "in the most undemocratic way possible, and it is not worthy of this institution."
No hearings were held in either the House or Senate on the USPATRIOT Act, and few -- if any -- members of Congress were really aware of what was actually in this massive, complex, highly technical 30,000-word statute, which is divided into ten titles, with more than 270 sections and endless subsections that cross-reference and amend a
dozen, or more, different laws.
There is a concept in the legislative process called "regular order." It is the time-tested procedure to make certain that our laws are carefully considered. The USPATRIOT Act was jammed through the House and Senate, with those calling for regular order being labeled unpatriotic. In fact, the 66 Republicans and Democrats in the House and the one member of the Senate who refused to be railroaded believed that law enforcement officials should have the tools needed to fight terrorists, but they should not be created at the expense of basic American freedoms.
2007-11-26 14:18:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Pragmatism Please 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
(Copies, Pastes one of my old answers)
AMENDMENT I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Freedom of the press? Well, we know how far that goes. The press is completely free as long as it doesn't offend someone. The press is free as long as it doesn't offend the government. We can still have freedom of the press, but unfortunately the freedom to read wasn't included. You think you are free to read what you want? Read the PATRIOT ACT and then ask your local librarian or bookseller. Congress killed legislation that would have exempted libraries and bookstores from the business records provisions of the PATRIOT ACT.
Do your homework and read the history of the late night House roll call vote #339, 2004 and what it was all about.
AMENDMENT IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Oops. Some people in the Senate and House of Representatives must not have ever read this one. If they had read it then they wouldn't have voted for the PATRIOT Act. I wonder if they can be removed from office because they violated their oath to protect the Constitution?
AMENDMENT IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
One more Amendment forgotten, ignored, flushed down the toilet. Remember the concept of common law? That's what this one is all about. Those who wrote this amendment thought it would take care of all the things they just couldn't write down in a lifetime. I guess they didn't try hard enough. Either that or they underestimated the power of stupidity in government.
Oops, excuse me. It's not in the Bill of Rights, so don't demand the right of privacy any more.
I could write forever, but my fingers need a rest.
John Ross Hendrix for United States Senate
http://www.hendrixcampaign.com
Take a week or two off to read this monstrosity. You should, because your Senators and Congressmen obviously didn't. They should be removed from office for violating their oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
Source(s):
Link to the PATRIOT ACT. Section 215 is the most interesting.
http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/terrorism/hr3162.pdf
2007-11-26 15:50:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by John H 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
It doesn't and people that say it does have never bothered to read it. The main thing it does in enable the various parts of the Government, FBI, CIA,NSA and others to exchange information on threats to the US. Of course since liberals believe that is a threat to the civil rights of terrorists they are against it.
2007-11-26 16:03:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by smsmith500 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
it gives the government the power to get what it wants without having to bother with the bill of rights. if they want your information or to search you they don't need to get a warrant or go through the work of building a case. you can also be arrested without the presumption of innocence and held without trial or representation. scary stuff we're letting the man who swore to uphold the constitution get away with.
2007-11-26 13:54:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
It supercedes about half of it. The patriot act is a bad thing for our freedom.
2007-11-26 13:52:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by Adam B 3
·
4⤊
1⤋
Yes.
2007-11-26 15:42:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by zombi86 6
·
0⤊
0⤋