Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should the Patriot Act be repealed?
Yes 54 78.26%
No 12 17.39%
It should be tweaked 3 4.35%
Voters: 69. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-10-2009, 10:06 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,274,487 times
Reputation: 4269

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
I don't have questionable callers. I'm simply mentioning that the level of "suspicion" needed for monitoring is pretty low.

And, no, the government should not be permitted to record our phone calls except under the most extreme circumstances and only then after a warrant is signed by a judge.
No matter who appointed that judge? That may sound facetious but I certainly mean it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-11-2009, 04:02 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
2,553 posts, read 2,436,354 times
Reputation: 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny View Post
"The Patriot Act" was one of the most intrusive and repressive pieces of legislation ever to appear before Congress. As was the Military Commissions Act.

Both passed.
I live in AZ, the 100 speed cameras that Janet Napolitano had installed to pay for the state's billion plus dollar deficit, bothers me more. They've been running now for several months and she planned on getting another 100 but, she left to go work for Obama. They run in video mode 100% of the time, recording everything that passes them, regardless of whether or not it's going above the speed limit. The authorities have already started using them for investigations to help verify the where abouts of possible suspects and persons of interest at any given time. The only good thing is, now that Janet is gone, there's talk of having them shut down and removed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 10:01 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,464,090 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
No matter who appointed that judge? That may sound facetious but I certainly mean it.
It's better than it being allowed as a general practice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 02:55 PM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
24,511 posts, read 33,317,235 times
Reputation: 7623
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhcom View Post
Benjamin Franklin said it best; "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety".
Benjamin Franklin was not around on 9/11/01. And it's not "temporary safety" because there is no such thing as "temporary terrorists."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 03:52 PM
 
Location: Michigan
12,711 posts, read 13,481,395 times
Reputation: 4185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
Benjamin Franklin was not around on 9/11/01. And it's not "temporary safety" because there is no such thing as "temporary terrorists."
Benjamin Franklin lived through more dangerous times than 9/11. Don't even try using that garbage as an excuse for ripping up the legacy Franklin risked his life for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 04:15 PM
 
946 posts, read 2,604,651 times
Reputation: 509
Our government has repeatedly shown that collectively they do not have the track record nor the honesty to perform this level of societal monitoring. No discussion of the Patriot Act should be allowed without the preface, "When Fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in our flag and carrying a cross." The disgustingly named Patriot Act is a large step in fulfilling the flag part of this prophecy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 05:22 PM
 
Location: Orlando
8,276 posts, read 12,861,779 times
Reputation: 4142
This was the greatest affront to the Constitution. People (or the lemmings) where coraled with fear and subverted against the basic tenants of our country... making the Constitution as W said "just a GD piece of paper"

Repeal it and go after the Bush administration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 05:23 PM
 
19,226 posts, read 15,324,078 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE View Post
This was the greatest affront to the Constitution. People (or the lemmings) where coraled with fear and subverted against the basic tenants of our country... making the Constitution as W said "just a GD piece of paper"

Repeal it and go after the Bush administration.

Nicely said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 05:25 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,464,090 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by AONE View Post
This was the greatest affront to the Constitution. People (or the lemmings) where coraled with fear and subverted against the basic tenants of our country... making the Constitution as W said "just a GD piece of paper"

Repeal it and go after the Bush administration.
Great post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2009, 05:32 PM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,455,656 times
Reputation: 6541
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
There have been several recent threads on the Patriot Act, albeit based on a false assumption that the Patriot Act was responsible for certain arrests. I've decided to do a poll and see how many approve/disapprove.
There is nothing unconstitutional within the USAPATRIOT Act. Those who claim there is, have never bothered to read the document or the US Constitution.

The USPATRIOT Act corrects several mistakes made by Congress over the years, such as consolidating warrants. Before the USAPATRIOT Act, in order for law enforcement to monitor communications of a suspect they would require a separate warrant for each communication device used by the suspect. One warrant for their home phone, another warrant for their cell phone, another warrant for their e-mail, etc., etc. That is just plain stupid. The 4th Amendment was never intended to be that restrictive. The USAPATRIOT Act corrects this problem by requiring only one warrant (yes, a court issued warrant is still required even in the USAPATRIOT Act) for all communication devices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:20 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top