Skip to comments.
Patriot Act To Be Made Permanent? (Trial balloon to gauge the public reaction?)
sierratimes ^
| 4/8/2003
| J.J. Johnson
Posted on 04/09/2003 8:21:51 AM PDT by TLBSHOW
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 321-339 next last
To: jmc813
In response to your question to another FR poster: Yes, I would like to see the sunset provision repealed and the act made permanent.
To: michaelje
If they make guns illegal, then you shouldn't have them. So whats your point?
I really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really hope you are being facecious and forgot your tag. Please clarify.
62
posted on
04/09/2003 10:52:11 AM PDT
by
jmc813
(The average citizen in Baghdad,right now, has more firearm rights than anyone in our country.)
To: jmc813
Would you like to see the Patriot Act made permanent? I will trust the judgements of GW Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Rice and Ridge over the likes of the New York Times editorial board, Adam Clymer, Maureen Dowd, RW Apple, and Paul Krugman( and to add), the ACLU, Libertarians, Phyliss Schafley, and other rightwing permanantly malcontet groups.
63
posted on
04/09/2003 10:54:48 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: Dane
You're such a good lapdog.
64
posted on
04/09/2003 10:56:54 AM PDT
by
Belial
To: jmc813
I appreciate your reply, but if firearms were to be made illegal, then frankly, you shouldn't own any. Where is the argument?
To: Dane
Fair enough. Just realize that most conservatives do not "trust" the government as fully as yourself.
66
posted on
04/09/2003 10:57:43 AM PDT
by
jmc813
(The average citizen in Baghdad,right now, has more firearm rights than anyone in our country.)
To: Dane
I will trust the judgements of GW Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, Rice and Ridge The Constitution is based on the concept of NOT fully trusting ANYONE in power. That's why putting sunset provisions in the Patriot Act was a good idea - after four years, we can re-visit the act and see which provisions actually did anything to fight terrorism and which ones didn't, and which ones were abused and which ones were benign.
67
posted on
04/09/2003 10:57:55 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(United States 2, Terror-sponsoring nations 0, waiting to see who's next in the bracket)
To: michaelje; dirtboy; HangFire; gc4nra; TLBSHOW
If they make guns illegal, then you shouldn't have them. So whats your point? Nice to see that you have no problem with shreading the Constitution. Are you sure you are on the right internet forum?
68
posted on
04/09/2003 10:59:20 AM PDT
by
Bella_Bru
(For all your tagline needs. Don't delay! Orders shipped overnight.)
To: michaelje
Quick, simple question: Where do your rights come from?
69
posted on
04/09/2003 10:59:43 AM PDT
by
jmc813
(The average citizen in Baghdad,right now, has more firearm rights than anyone in our country.)
To: Dane
Also realize that if you choose to trust GW, Ashcroft on this now, you will have to trust Democratic administrations in the future. See?
70
posted on
04/09/2003 11:01:14 AM PDT
by
jmc813
(The average citizen in Baghdad,right now, has more firearm rights than anyone in our country.)
To: Bella_Bru
Yes I am on the right internet forum- thanks for the concern though. Dont misunderstand me, I support the second amendment, but if legislation passes, at either the federal, state or local level that prohibits guns- you shouldn't own them. Period.
To: michaelje
The majority of Americans back the Patriot Act and would support making it a permanent. The majority of Americans have no clue what is in the Patriot Act. They do not realize that with a simple change in political climate, groups like the NRA could be labeled as terrorists.
Oh, I highly doubt the Founders of this nation would see anything patriotic about the Patriot Act.
They knew that freedom has some risks, but they were willing to take those risks. I guess this generation is full of chickenshits.
72
posted on
04/09/2003 11:02:20 AM PDT
by
Bella_Bru
(For all your tagline needs. Don't delay! Orders shipped overnight.)
To: michaelje
"Who was the architect of this legislation? Was it not our own AG John Ashcroft and his aides?"
Indeed it was, and heartily endorsed by the administration. That does not make it right.
To: Jason_b
Why are the Republicans doing this? I thought they were on our side. Are they that damn corrupt? I guess they are.They are corrupt politicians. Sorry, that was redundant.
To: jmc813
I know what you're getting at. The constitution, like it OR not, has evolved over the past 200+ years.
To: Belial
You're such a good lapdog Nope just know the intent of good people, not hyperbolic banterings of people who get all hot and bothered by a New York Times article.
John Ashcroft is a defender of the 2nd amendment and always will be.
Phyliss Schaflley and the GOA can jump in the sack with the ACLU and the New York Times. The thing that tells me is that the old addage "opposites attract" is wrong.
This tells me that permanantly malcontnent and paranoid right wing groups(Phyliss Schafley and GOA) are attracted to permanantly malcontnent and paranoid leftwing groups such as the ACLU and New York Times in the common cause of paranoia.
76
posted on
04/09/2003 11:06:06 AM PDT
by
Dane
To: jmc813
I beg to differ- most conservatives do trust the government these days.
To: Bella_Bru
No offense but the NRA has been useless in defending the rights of firearms owners over the past 10 years.
To: michaelje
I know what you're getting at. The constitution, like it OR not, has evolved over the past 200+ years.
a.)Al Gore is a proponent of the "living constitution" doctrine.
b.)Our rights do not come from the Constitution. Care to try again?
79
posted on
04/09/2003 11:07:38 AM PDT
by
jmc813
(The average citizen in Baghdad,right now, has more firearm rights than anyone in our country.)
To: jmc813
Also realize that if you choose to trust GW, Ashcroft on this now, you will have to trust Democratic administrations in the future. See? well that jus means that I will have to work hard in the electoral arena to make sure that a Hillary presidency doesn't happen.
And that miffs you since you can't an idealogical pure vote for Harry Browne in the future.
Semms that you would give up the War on Terroism, because you are in the fetal position in the corner sucking your thumb worrying about a Hillary presidency.
80
posted on
04/09/2003 11:10:20 AM PDT
by
Dane
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 321-339 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson