Whats your views on the patriot act and the fbi's new law the sneak and peak?
442911
Myth: The Patriot Act simply updated the tools of law enforcement to match the technology used by the terrorists and criminals today.\nReality: The Patriot Act “updated” surveillance powers but failed to “update” the checks and balances needed to ensure those surveillance powers include proper judicial oversight. \n\nSection 206 of the Patriot Act allows the government to obtain “roving wiretaps” without empowering the court to make sure that the government ascertain that the conversations being intercepted actually involve a target of the investigation.  \n\n“Pen registers” and “trap and trace” devices are also allowed and track detailed information about Internet use, like specific web pages viewed or search terms entered into a search engine read more:http://action.aclu.org/reformthepatriotact/facts.html#two\nMyth: The Patriot Act is “mostly taking what we can do to track drug dealers and thugs and give those tools to people tracking spies and terrorists.”\nReality: Before the Patriot Act, the government could use the same tools, like wiretapping or using grand jury subpoenas, to investigate drug dealers and terrorists. The government simply had to be investigating a crime of terrorism.  \nMyth: The codification of delayed notice warrants in the Patriot Act “brought national uniformity to a court-approved law enforcement tool that had been in existence for decades.”\nReality: The Patriot Act’s “sneak and peek” provision is about lowering standards for sneak and peek warrants, not imposing uniformity. Section 213 of the Patriot Act allows notice of search warrants to be delayed for an indefinite “reasonable time.” \nMyth: The primary effect of the Patriot Act was to “bring down this ‘wall’ separating intelligence officers from law enforcement agents” in coordination and information sharing.\nReality: Information sharing between criminal and intelligence investigations occurred before Sept. 11, 2001 and the Patriot Act. The primary effect of the Patriot Act was to remove necessary checks and balances in foreign intelligence investigations\nMyth: The Patriot Act’s “new powers have allowed authorities to charge more than 400 people in terrorism investigations since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and convict more than half.”\nReality: The government attributes convictions it says are terrorism-related that have nothing to do with the Patriot Act. The “400 convictions” claim overstates actual number of convictions and omits a number of key facts related to these numbers. Only 39 of these individuals were convicted of crimes related to terrorism. The median sentence for these crimes was 11 months, which indicates the crime the government equated with terrorism was not serious\nMyth: The Patriot Act does not contain a provision that allows the government to obtain library records, and “[t]he reading habits of ordinary Americans are of no interest to those investigating terrorists or spies.”\nReality: Section215 of Patriot Act does cover library records. It authorizes the government to more easily obtain a court order requiring a person or business to turn over documents or things “sought for” an investigation to protect against international terrorism. Business records include library records.\n\nYour medical records, records and lists of individuals who belong to political organizations are also fair game for the government to seize\nMyth: “[The] Patriot Act is chock-full of oversight in a lot of ways that regular criminal procedure is not:  full of the involvement of federal judges…”\nReality: The statute authorizing the use of “national security letters” as amended by the Patriot Act 505(a) contains no judicial oversight. The statute allows the government to compel the production of financial records, credit reports, telephone, Internet, and other communications or transactional records. \nSection 215 requires the FBI to apply to a Foreign Intelligence Sur
154424
I think there is a balance but Bush has overstepped that in favior of taking away our right to privacy in the name of the war on terror. Terrorism does exist however I think that if we give up rights then the terroist have won. We need to stick to the things in our constitution that made our country free and great.
126491
IT COMPLETELY IGNORES THE CONSTITUTION AND THE FISA ACT.\n\nIMPEACH!!!
824161
Sounds a bit socialist to me. \n\nOnce upon a time, there was a country called America, we fought wars on our own soil and we fought bravely. We were allowed to carry guns and protect ourselves and families. Now the government doesn't think we can protect ourselves or are brave enough to fight if nessasary. \n\nNo, just because you don't believe in the patriot act doesn't mean you are not a patriot. It means you feel you are brave enough to fight what comes along. They shouldn't be tapping US they should be tapping other countries!
127239
Ben Franklin said that "Those who give up liberty for the sake of security deserve neither liberty nor security."  \n\nI'm not sure if we will end up learning this the hard way, but we are becoming the USSA.  Wiretaps are part of a larger arsenal of tactics they are using to silence dissent.  It is likely that more sinister black ops programs exist that are tracking every one of us to some extent.  Think about every credit card purchase, every rewards card, every post on Yahoo Answers, every search engine search result, every survey, and every Amazon purchase or wish list being compiled and analyzed for keywords and other algorithm triggering events.  It is absolutely possible, and I would bet that it is happening now whether legal or not.  I believe it is completely antithetical to the definition of a "free" society, and I again believe it is to ultimately be used for more sinister purposes.
448473
I love this guy! The conservatives have been a little tricky on these pages the last few days man. For some reason they don't like people illustrating the truth to other Americans. So since Bush's, Brian Doyle the (Chester Molester) was implementing the Patriot Act on his 14 year old girl suspect, inside of the United States of America. I think that Nixon taking his punishment like a man, makes him look like ST. Michael.
51221
Unfortunately, the current administration is adept at using labels to disguise the real intent of laws and other actions. For example, the "Clean Air Act" actually encouraged more pollution that before. The Patriot Act encourages violations of our constitution and a strengthening of the executive branch. Some aspects are worthwhile, but the name makes it difficult to object to its details without being called unpatriotic. Sad to see the stifling of legitimate criticism. \nAs far as a better title, perhaps the Surveillance Act?
983891
The problem with the Patriot Act is that while it does provide a clause allowing judicial oversight, Title IV Section 412 includes provisions for judicial review in detentions, and Title II deals with warrant requirements for electronic surveillance, it does not make this oversight mandatory.\n\nThis means that these provisions are allowed to go unenforced. You see, the Executive Branch is in charge of this enforcement. So what we are seeing now and basically have a wide-open window to is when the laws get in the way of what Bush wants to accomplish, he just chooses not to enforce them.\n\nAlso, the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments are limitations on government action, and apply to anyone under US authority or control. Nowhere does it mention 'citizen'.\n\nAs far as warrantless wiretapping, 50 U.S.C. §1801 et al. Warrantless wiretapping is illegal under FISA if any US citizen or resident alien is a party to the conversation. Also 18 U.S.C. § 2511: Compliance with FISA "shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance... may be conducted". The Patriot Act runs head to head into legalities here.
345794
Sure, pay attention to the opinions of the Supreme and Federal Courts.  Also, actually read the bills going through the legislature.  At this point, a good place to start is with the Patriot Act.  See http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html
342225
The present. With Bush's war on terrorism and the Patriot Act.
230196
I don't particularly like it.  I mean, who really wants someone spying on them?  On the other hand, people say that it's necessary for our safety.  I mean, do we want another September 11th?  \n\nI guess what it really comes down to is, I don't mind them checking up on people as long as they use it wisely and don't go too far.  But then, who decides how far is too far?
883159
This from the Cato Institute: \n\nWhat are the most controversial provisions of the Patriot Act? One of the most serious threats to liberty comes from Section 215. According to the Department of Justice, that section allows investigators to obtain ‘‘business records’’ for terrorism investigations pursuant to a federal ‘‘court order.’’ In fact, the provision is not limited to business records. Federal\nagents can use that section of the Patriot Act to seize any tangible item (correspondence, film, personal belongings) directly from a person’s home.The ‘‘court order’’ is nothing but a fac¸ade because the Patriot Act says the judge ‘‘shall’’ issue such orders whenever the executive branch claims\nit is conducting a terrorism investigation.\nMost shocking of all, Section 215 makes it a crime for anyone to speak out about its use. Any person who speaks to a relative, a neighbor, or a reporter about the government’s demand can be jailed. Defenders of the Patriot Act demand specific examples of ‘‘abuses’’ of the law, but they fail to mention that the Section 215 gag provision keeps anyone affected from coming forward. That will obviously make it very difficult for Congress to assess how the orders are actually being used.\nThe second threat to civil liberties comes from Section 505 of the Patriot Act. Under that provision, federal agents can use so-called national security letters to seize transactional records, such as bank and rental car receipts.That Patriot Act provision bypasses the Constitution’s search warrant procedure by vesting a secret subpoena power directly within the executive\nbranch. Instead of having to apply for judicially approved warrants, federal agents can unilaterally threaten businesspeople with jail if they do not surrender employee and customer records. This represents an enormous\nchange in American law. Congress has steadfastly denied subpoena powers to the FBI and the CIA because it was deemed to be too much power for the executive branch. Now that both agencies have acquired the power,they will not surrender it easily. These subpoenas also contain ‘‘gag’’\nprovisions for Americans who receive them.\nThe third threat to liberty comes from the Patriot Act’s expansion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)—a law that created a special federal court to approve electronic surveillance of citizens and resident aliens alleged to be acting on behalf of a foreign power. Previously,the FISA court granted surveillance authority if foreign intelligence was the primary purpose of an investigation. But Section 218 of the Patriot Act allows the government to conduct surveillance if foreign intelligence\nis only a ‘‘significant’’ purpose of an investigation. That may seem like a trivial change, but it is not. Because the standard for FISA approval is lower than ‘‘probable cause,’’ and because FISA now applies to ordinary criminal matters if they are characterized as ‘‘national security’’ inquiries, the new rules offer federal agents another avenue to bypass the Constitution’s search warrant requirements. The result: rubber-stamp judicial consent\nto phone and Internet surveillance, even in regular criminal cases.\nLimit Power, Restore Privacy The sunset provisions do not apply to all of the Patriot Act’s problematic sections. This means that Congress must affirmatively act to repeal police power sections that threaten liberty in America. Three sections stand out\nabove all the others.\nThe first section is the so-called sneak and peek power. Section 213 of the Patriot Act empowers agents to conduct covert entries into homes and businesses. Agents still apply for a judicial search warrant, but the homeowner does not know about the entry until days or weeks later. This section of the Patriot Act is defended as an important ‘‘tool to fight terrorism,’’ but it can be used for any federal criminal investigation. Such\n
1160584
I too walk closer to the conservative line... and I do value our freedoms and rights... the liberals   carry it too far  though.... to such a point that they actually infringe on peoples rights such as in abolishing religion etc. as far as the patriot act goes... I think it makes every one nervous in some ways to  know big brother is watching... at the same time we do want to be protected  from  further acts of terrorism ...and some terrorist are home grown.... perhaps there just needs to be better checks and balances on what they are doing and how they are doing it................fiscally  Democrats  / liberals  most often are the ones  that   raise the taxes and   spend money   on    a multitude of  programs\n..though both parties need to be more conservative financially.....  I don't align myself with either party... some  republicans are liberal, some democrats are conservative..... I am independent...  either party requires dogmatic thinking to an extent... so I vote for the best candidate... who ever they are...
272888
Our constitutional right to privacy was definitely negated in this situation. If the government suspects someone of having terroristic capabilities, I do not think it would be too hard for them to get a warrant to eavesdrop the legal way. Bush is just trying cover his butts, as well as other members of our government are doing likewise. There are many conspiracy theories floating around concerning Bush and a few other members of our government, I think it is time the people of this nation take our government back, too many "actors" in power with selfish intentions!
105458
The only people who claim the Patriot Act is anti-foreigners are those who haven't read the law.\nTo sum it up, the Patriot Acts does the following:\n1. Removes obstacles in investigating terrorism and improves intelligence gathering capabilities.\n2. Deals with Immigration and Travel into the United States allowing for tighter restriction.\n3. Gives more tools to fight the funding of terrorists.\n4. Helps us in securing our borders.\n5. Preservation of Immigration Benefits for Victims of Terrorism (How is that anti-foreigner???)\n\nThe link given below is a summary of the bill with links to the actual text direct from the online archives of the US government. There is no commentary or opinion, just the law itself.
170557
The Patriot Act helps law enforcement officers find and arrest terrorists more easily. It also helps in more common crimes too.\n\nUnfortunately, its liberal use of bugging is considered a violation of privacy, since it makes bugging people easy for law enforcement. On the other hand, though, the government should have no need to bug you unless you need bugging. And besides, they don't have the manpower to bug everyone.\n\nThe government can spy on people anyway, or bug them, so it makes little difference. Now it's just easier, faster, and safer for cops. Privacy is nice, but I prefer to be alive and have a tiny bit less privacy.\n\nTo the person below me: it is not at all a false sense of security, because the Patriot Act's greatest impact is on law enforcement, not crime prevention. Putting NYPD officer at every large building and subway station is false security. But making it easier for FBI agents to collect evidence to convict criminals is not false at all.
80038
Could you please provide me with the name of 1 American citizen that "the president" spied on?  The president did NOT snub the law as many of you like to say in this section.