More Police Powers: Congressperson, "Just Screw em"

Washington Post ^ | March 25, 2002 | By Matthew Mosk

[survivalforum.com]

Washington Post - Maryland's House of Delegates is preparing to pass anti-terrorism legislation today that would dramatically expand the ability of police to tap phones and eavesdrop on the e-mail and Internet activity of suspected criminals -- part of a deluge of terror-busting measures under consideration in nearly every state capital.

The Maryland bill, like those in dozens of other states, has inspired a heated clash between civil libertarians and those who believe that some rights must be compromised to prevent another attack on U.S. soil.

[survivalforum.com]

This is the attitude? Very sad!

Franklin

[Boonie Rat]

And this is a surprize to .......?

Boonie Rat

MACV SOCOM, PhuBai/Hue '65-'66

[Uncle Sham]

"I realize that the law basically says you are required to pay income tax, and normally I would say "I agree", But if this legislation passes, I say screw 'em."

[Dan from Michigan]

Dembrow (D-Montgomery).

I figure that's where he'd be from.

[Evi Tavres Noc]

Should there be a difference between compromising civil liberties and taking civil liberties?

'Just Screw 'em' is a sad attitude, indeed.

[mattdono]

I figure that's where he'd be from

He? Well, with a name like "Dana Lee", I guess we know why he's a DemocRAT (that is, of course, if this person is a man).

[Dr.Deth]

Take it with a grain of salt; this is coming from the People's Republic Of Maryland, a state which identifies with the notions of limited government and individual rights the same way Hitler identified with Kosher salami and non-intervention.

[Alas]

[Puppage]

That's the SAME way the Nazi's came to power. They ran on the Law & Order platform, too. "Give us your rights & we promise you safety". Gee, THAT worked well for the citizens, didn't it?

[Doctor Stochastic]

we are At War now
do No Wrong, Nothing to Fear
it's for The Children

[Reagan Man]

Although some of the 1,200 anti-terrorism measures being contemplated by state legislatures this year have involved such benign security methods as requiring fencing around reservoirs, others will substantially broaden the scope of police rights to probe into private lives.

If anyone has a better plan to cope with possible wide spread terrorist attacks, that would kill thousands of innocent people, I'd like to hear them. Increased security requirements doesn't mean law enforcement has carde blanc to over step reasonable bounds. Anyone who over steps their authority should have to face the consequences. Anyone who abuses an individuals rights should have stiff penalties imposed on them. But we can't just allow criminals and terrorists free reign to murder people at will.

[poet]

Read section 802 of the Gestapo law, it has no sunset provision. I am not surprised and expect to see more of these totalitarian laws.
We did not need a new law because laws against hijacking planes were already on the books. Laws against murder are already on the books. Laws against property damage are on the books whether the damage is done deliberately or accidently.

Why do you think this obscene law was passed? You do know, of course, that no senator or congreeman read it because it was not printed at the time it was voted upon?

Could it be used against those of us who value our freedom over security? NAH!

[poet]

How about enforcing the laws that are already on the books or didn't you know the it is illegal to hijack anything or muder anyone or damage their property?

I do not feel "cuddly safe" in the arms of big goverment.

[Le-Roy]

I just don't know what to say about this one. How do you stand it up there?

[freeeee]

If anyone has a better plan to cope with possible wide spread terrorist attacks, that would kill thousands of innocent people, I'd like to hear them.

Radical foreign policy reform towards non-intervention.

Increased security requirements doesn't mean law enforcement has carde blanc to over step reasonable bounds.

Maybe you didn't read the article:

"I realize that this bill basically says you can tap someone's phone for jaywalking, and normally I would say, 'No way,' " said Del. Dana Lee Dembrow (D-Montgomery). "But after what happened on September 11th, I say screw 'em."

This less than flattering description of this law comes not from its critics, but from the legislator who passed it.

Anyone who over steps their authority should have to face the consequences. Anyone who abuses an individuals rights should have stiff penalties imposed on them.

...but they won't. No provision was included that even pretends such protection.

[gnarledmaw]

Maryland Freeps need to take a particularly close look at this legislation. In Wisconsin, when the same type of "anti-terrorism" garbage was attempted, the bill would have banned over 99% of all firearms and through manipulations of terms such as "detonator", "explosive", and "destructive device" would have made ownership of any cartridge component a 15 year felony. The only evidence that they would need to prove that you were a terrorist was "photograph, electronic image, videotape" of an object that met these newly defined terms.

WCCA alert: Doyle/Baumgart bill gets worse (more than 99% firearms banned)

[joeyman]

If anyone has a better plan to cope with possible wide spread terrorist attacks, that would kill thousands of innocent people, I'd like to hear them.

Close the boarders. Deport all illegal aliens. Racially profile middle eastern men between the ages of 18 to 50. Encourage the arming and training of local civil defense brigades. Encourage the widespread carrying of firearms for self-protection/shutting down terrorist actions by people who will most likely be on-scene (ie civilians).

[Travis McGee]

"THE CONSTITUTION? SCREW IT!"

[nd76]

I went to law school with Dana; of course, that doesn't say very much for me.