how-to block ads
|
dda
Premium
join:2003-12-29
Bolton, MA
| reply to LegoPower77
Re: Pffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft!
quote:
I'm not going to say that Patriot Act or what the FBI wants to do is all perfectly ok (again we need to be vigilant), but in this day and age given the threat of terror attacks, such things are necessary and hopefully, like the Alien and Sedition acts, they can be rolled back when they are no longer needed.
Both the Alien and Sedition Acts weren't necessary when they were enacted; they were done for the same "fear + control" reasons as the Patriot Act. You don't step on the Constitution whenever you feel "threatened." Pulling my library records wouldn't have stopped 9/11; all it will tell you is that I like O Brother, Where Art Thou?.
There are very good reasons why the power of wiretapping and other information gathering techniques is limited; we need only to look at the FBI's past and the whole "Red scare." Since they have abused their power in the past, I see no reason to believe them when they say it will only be used against "terrorists" this time. | |
Trivista
join:2003-11-11
Longview, TX | reply to CCCMTech
They used powers granded by the USA PATRIOT act to go after a stripclub owner in Vegas.
He had NO terror ties. | |
LegoPower77
Abecedarian
Premium
join:2002-08-03
Arlington, VA
| reply to hpguru
Since when has the Constitution meant anything? If it's a living, breathing thing, then we just need the courts to say what the FBI wants to do is ok. They did the same thing for campaign finance reform—now I as a private citizen cannot make an ad that mentions the name of a person running for office 60 days before an election so the First Amendment is out the window. Since it's a living, breathing document, we can also kill it.
Now that being said, I want to say while we must be vigilant in these privacy matters, first of all, right to privacy is not in the Constitution, it was a fabrication of the court to justify the killing of the unborn. Secondly, administrative warrants—which is what we're talking about here—are not new. They are available for some 355 types of federal investigations, including investigations related to threats against the president, health care fraud and child sexual abuse cases. Thirdly, it's not as if these wire taps take place in a vacuum: they are subject to congressional oversight (so we can all breath easy now  ).
One of the, if not the primary responsibilities given to the federal government by the Constitution is the protection of the people. I'm not going to say that Patriot Act or what the FBI wants to do is all perfectly ok (again we need to be vigilant), but in this day and age given the threat of terror attacks, such things are necessary and hopefully, like the Alien and Sedition acts, they can be rolled back when they are no longer needed.
--
"Lunches don't get free just because you don't see the prices on the menu. And economists don't get popular by reminding people of that." --Thomas Sowell | |
CCCMTech
Premium,VIP,MVM
join:2002-05-17
Pound, VA
| reply to hpguru
haha, well it would be difficult to prove an issue of national security to most petty criminals. The only thing most guys can even remotely come close is maybe a virus.
Still I'd like to see someone take it to the supreme court over 4 amendment violations.
--
Thank you for choosing SBC Internet Services. My name is Rick. How may I help you today? | |
hpguru
Curb Your Dogma
Premium
join:2002-04-12
| reply to CCCMTech
said by CCCMTech  :
Police do have to have reasonable cause and/or a search warrant to issue a phone tap though. SO I'm sure the same rules apply to VoIP.
Not anymore. All they have to do now is utter the magic words "national security" and/or "classified" and they're in - no warrant, no court order, no pesky judges to strip the gears of fascism, no Fourth Amendment, no nothing.
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."
So much for the rule of law. :-/
--
Blue mountains after rainfall - much bluer. | |
|
