Repeal the Patriot Act - ANDREW NAPOLITANO

The Wall Street Journal ^ | Friday, March 5, 2004 | ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO

[TroutStalker]

Earlier this week when President Bush asked Congress to re-enact the portions of the Patriot Act that are due to expire at the end of next year, he provoked a critical review of this controversial law. Those who believe that our freedoms are guaranteed and cannot be legislated away by Congress remain committed to the repeal -- not the renewal -- of this overreaching legislation.

[GrandEagle]

(1) We have been attack free using these tools, and our agencies are cooperating with each other whereas they did not before.

We were attack free (from terrorist) for over 200 years without these "tools".

(2) I don't believe the good judge can cite a case where a "joe average" citizen has has his rights trampled on.
(a)Just because a case can't be cited does not mean it has not happened.
(b)This argument assumes that in spite of historical evidence to the contrary human nature does not apply to those who lead us.
(c)Your also assuming that your rights would only have been violated if you are arrested. The natural assumption from this is that it is OK for government to plunder through your personal records, house, telephone, or anything else it wants, as long as they don't take action on what they find. I contend (along with the founders) that the mere act of looking without a search warrant violates my rights.

(3) We can argue that in the hands of another administration rights can be trampled on, but we are not supporting handing this over to another administration, and finally
I was unaware of the "Patriot Act" provision that stated it expired when President Bush left office. That would also be a very dangerous merger of the Executive and Judicial departments.

(4) When the threat is really over is the time to back off, not now when we are only just engaged.
(a)The "threat" will never be over. People in power do not voluntarily give up that power. The "threat" will continue to justify the continuation of them having the power. Much like the elephant repellent we use here in Alabama (it must work - I have never seen an elephant here); your argument #1 can be used to justify keeping the power.
(b)I have never known a bad law to be repealed.

[evad]

It's unfortunate because most cops are upstanding citizens, but like most govt's whether it's Federal, State or Local, they're looking to make money off of their constituents.

Absolute 100% DITTO.

Oh well, time to go fight the wolf..
wish me luck ;-)

[The_Eaglet]

"Many of you are just paranoid."

Left-wing smear tactics resume when facts can not support their assertions.

[Txslady]

.. some of you are just ignorant or just plain stupid.

[Wolfie]

I love these threads. When Napolitano says something the Bush administration agrees with, he's hailed here as a hero. When he does the opposite, he's a useless "liberal".

[Dan from Michigan]

The "Patriot Act" needs to be tarred, feathered, drawn, quartered, and burned at the stake.

[Dan from Michigan]

Strengthen the Patriot Act.

No way.

[HELLRAISER II]

Whether they're DemocRat or Republican, both can be corrupted with absolute power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely and this gives the govt. way to much power over we the people

[reelfoot]

Napolitano Bump on this issue. There would be no need for infringement of constitutional liberties of citizens if terrorists were prevented from entering this country. Let the PA die, close the borders to all illegal immigration, greatly reduce legal immigration (making it very difficult for Islamo-terrorists to enter), and expel non-citizens suspected of terrorist sympathies.

[Dan from Michigan]

Which parts don't you like?

All of it. But going by memory(It's been 2+ years but from what I remember)

We can start with sneak and peak without a warrant.
And then judge shopping for warrants. And district judge anywhere can sign off on a warrant anywhere in the country. Easy to abuse. And most of all taking property with 'affirmative defense' needed to get it back. Affirmative defense means 'guilty till proven innocent'.

[xusafflyer]

I don't know this Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004. Thanks for the link.

[dead]

The judge is right, but will be ignored.

[Dan from Michigan]

next President & his cabinet/Law Enforcement may hurt us later.

Like this maybe.

President John Kerry
AG - Chuck Schumer
Supreme Court Chief Justice Stephen Reinhardt.

[petercooper]

paranoia can be very damaging to one's mind

[agitator]

The problem with the "Let the PA die" is that unlike the throw-away diversions like the library book issue, the financial provisions do *not* expire. The financial provisions are nothing but a collection of police-state wish lists accumulated since day-one. In fact, I would argue that they are simply a resurrection of the Writs of Assistance.

[Dan from Michigan]

U.S. citizen has had his rights violated. It's that simple.

If they CAN violate them, they HAVE violated them. MINE.

Many of you are just paranoid.

Janet Reno has that effect on people.

[agitator]

"paranoia can be very damaging to one's mind"

So is the bliss induced by willful ignorance.

[jackbill]

I strongly disagree with the Judge:

Check out:

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/19356.htm

Anti-Patriot Act rhetoric makes me sick.

[HELLRAISER II]

10-4 on that D F M.

[GrandEagle]

both can be corrupted with absolute power.
Absolutely! If this had been passed by Klinton everyone here would have been throwing a fit!