FR Poll Thread: "The Patriot Act Should be..."

Free Republic ^ | 6-13-2005 | DTogo

[DTogo]

As recently suggested, here's a thread to allow FReepers to post (if they want to) how they voted on this poll, why, etc. Let's keep it civil! :)

[CheezyChesster]

Did I say abolish the PA ?, No; I did not. I'm saying it should be scaled back. Can you tell me how many instances we still find in our news about airport security being scrutinized even after this (act) was put into place ?. Hell, they can't even guarentee safe passsage through an airport. And you expect the Fed's to keep you totally safe by trading in our freedom's ?. Are you a democRAT ?

[pageonetoo]

...I wanted it balanced out so those in favor of the act would not be afraid to post.

Don't post articles if you don't agree with them. If you agree, then don't be afraid to post your thoughts. If you're too chickenshiite to post against the tide, God help you...

Patriot Act implies that we should blindly follow the lead of our Politicians, as they suspend rights guaranteed by our constitution. There is no other reason for this 'Patriot Act", but to suspend rights.

I wore a uniform, and fought in a war, for those rights. Keep your, and your politicians, fingers off of them...

I keep and bear arms, too... and would not be afraid to defend them, again, against the cynical despotism that now rules in DC, under the guise of Conservatism/Expediencyism...

"let them eat cake..."

[processing please hold]

Are the numbers on the poll dropping for...

EXTENDED

MADE PERMANENT

When I voted yesterday, the DROPPED was at 15.5%

[faq]

Patriot Act implies that we should blindly follow the lead of our Politicians, as they suspend rights guaranteed by our constitution. There is no other reason for this 'Patriot Act", but to suspend rights.

I disagree that the Patriot Act suspends rights guaranteed by the constitution. The Fourth Amendment does not say a subpoena can only be issued by the Judicial Branch.

Is there potential for abuse? Sure, when isn't there potential for abuse? Seems that there was some controversy about Clinton using the IRS to audit people he didn't like. That doesn't mean the IRS shouldn't be allowed to audit anyone. Did Clinton have anything to do with Vince Foster or Ron Brown? I don't know. But, Clinton was not above the law just because he was President. If it could have been proven, he would have been charged.

Does the Constitution guarantee me the right to bear arms? It certainly does. But, I am not legally able to purchase a fully automatic weapon. Does a highway patrolman have the right to issue me a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt in my own car? Not in my opinion. I hate that seatbelt law.

Do judges have perfect judgement? No, I think Terri Schivio's civil rights were violated. So why should only judges be allowed to issue subpoena? They are not all knowing and perfect.

During the Cold War did the CIA have to obtain a subpoena to spy on the Soviet Union? No. I think of this in the same way. Terrorism is the same type of threat, only we are not dealing with a foreign government.

With other types of administrative subpoenas, there are only certain circumstances when they can be used. Put is some wording defining a terrorist activity, define when it can be used, and I see nothing wrong with it.

[inquest]

Granted an administration as corrupt as the Clintons wouldn't need to justify their actions as per the Patriot Act

It's not a question of justifying actions. The Pratriot Act would grant them abilities that they simply wouldn't have without it. It makes it a criminal offense to disclose that government has been poking through your records.

[inquest]

Needs to be reviewed and renewed (if necessary) every December.

Actually I'd recommend October.

[Leatherneck_MT]

This Patriot act should be abolished.

Until the government begins to crack down on those who are here illegally and closing our borders and enacting REAL security measures, this entire act is a smoke screen designed to limit and eventually abolish your freedoms.

Far too many people here go right along with it and that is scary.

[MaryFromMichigan]

An absolutely perfect reply.

[inquest]

The Fourth Amendment does not say a subpoena can only be issued by the Judicial Branch.

No, but Article II grants only executive powers to the executive branch, and Article III grants judicial powers to the judicial branch, and emphasized that those exercising such powers must be as free from political influences as possible (appointments "during good behavior"). Issuing subpoenas is a judicial function.

Seems that there was some controversy about Clinton using the IRS to audit people he didn't like. That doesn't mean the IRS shouldn't be allowed to audit anyone.

It means that the IRS shouldn't exercise judicial subpoena-type powers either.

Does the Constitution guarantee me the right to bear arms? It certainly does. But, I am not legally able to purchase a fully automatic weapon.

So you think one violation of the Constitution justifies another? Sweet.

During the Cold War did the CIA have to obtain a subpoena to spy on the Soviet Union? No.

Nor did the CIA issue its own "subpoenas" against the Soviet Union.

[Age of Reason]

When they leave us alone, OK, but that's tough nowadays

So I guess they attacked us for following George Washington's advice about avoiding foreign entanglements.

[PaRebel]

To say that I am astounded by this trend, on FR no less, is an understatement!

The level of ignorance about the essentials of maintaining a truly free republic, virtually guarantees that we will not!

The Left has accomplished their mission all too well. Thesis, antithesis, synthesis. Works every time. Or as Kintoon would have called it, "triangulation".

We The People have been duped. The bs issues to distract us while the socialization of the nation has marched on unabated for almost 100 years has worked wonderfully.

Who was the politician who said there wasn't a dimes worth of difference between the dems and the republicans?

And G.W. is NOT a conservative!

[PaRebel]

You are correct, sir, but why encourage the CONTINUED erosion of our rights by not demanding the sunsetting of these oppressive provisions of the "Patriot" ACT.

There is no OFF-SWITCH in the Constittution! All Acts contrary to the provisions of the Constitution are void. Contemplate the implications of this.

[processing please hold]

So I guess they attacked us for following George Washington's advice about avoiding foreign entanglements.

Well, they won't have to attack us because they hate our freedoms anymore. If they wait just a little longer, our government will fix that little problem for them.

I thank God for the second amendment. That's all that stands between us and pure tyranny.

[pageonetoo]

So why should only judges be allowed to issue subpoena?

Does the Constitution guarantee me the right to bear arms? It certainly does. But, I am not legally able to purchase a fully automatic weapon. Does a highway patrolman have the right to issue me a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt in my own car? Not in my opinion. I hate that seatbelt law.

Click it or ticket...

[Age of Reason]

Government should protect our freedom before our lives and property.

Are you so afraid of the terrorists?

If being a free nation is impractical . . .

Let us learn that by continuing the experiment the founding fathers began.

And bravely should we hold their course.

[pageonetoo]

Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water

In getting rid of waste, don’t also discard what is worth keeping.

This country was founded so people could be secure in their persons, and homes. we're not, these days, unless we're queer...

ir

[Red Badger]

Government should protect our freedom before OUR lives and property.

Key word being OUR, as in: NOT THEIRS. The freedoms guaranteed by OUR Constitution should be for US and for OUR POSTERITY. Seems I read that somewhere, Pre-ambling around.....

[processing please hold]

The USA Patriot Act contains some powers useful and necessary in fighting terrorism but it also includes several provisions that just go too far and with too few checks in giving the federal government the power to secretly collect the private information of ordinary Americans.

But, despite the concerted opposition of many Americans from both the right and the left, some in Congress are poised the make the entire Patriot Act permanent and to expand the law to give the FBI the power to write its own orders to demand our library, medical, hotel, gun purchase and other personal records—all without judicial approval. This is happening at this very moment, and a final bill could be voted on within a month.

The Constitution is not something that can be dispensed with when it may seem inconvenient. Conservatives, who believe that a government of limited powers is the surest protection against the violation of our constitutional rights, understand this more than most.

We're on that slippery slope now.

[processing please hold]

"It is vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, peace, peace; but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?

"Forbid it, Almighty God -- I know not what course others may take; but as for me -- give me liberty or give me death!"

Patrick Henry

[faq]

The United States Congress also has the power to issue subpoenas and can punish individuals who fail to comply by contempt of Congress, which is similar to contempt of court.

And I ain't wearing no friggen seat belt. Come and get me copper.