Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 47

Thread: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

  1. #11
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Read more @: Part of Patriot Act ruled unconstitutional - US news - Security - msnbc.comk so it seems that one part of the Patriot Act is about to hit the dust, so i ask can we just get rid of the whole thing? All the bleeding heart conservatives and consitutionalists on the right can we get rid of this whole bill yet? I mean it seems to be a bill that ACTUALLY IS very unconstitutional.

    Thoughts?
    Comments?
    Response? [/FONT]
    [/FONT]
    [/FONT]
    The Patriot Act was adopted to help untie law-enforcement's hands and keep us safe. The CIA has always had all the powers in that act and probably more. There is no way we should throw out the entire Patriot Act. That's what we have a Supreme Court for -- to put checks and balances on our laws, rules and regulations. Tweak it. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  2. #12
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    The Patriot Act was adopted to help untie law-enforcement's hands and keep us safe. The CIA has always had all the powers in that act and probably more. There is no way we should throw out the entire Patriot Act. That's what we have a Supreme Court for -- to put checks and balances on our laws, rules and regulations. Tweak it. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.
    This ain't a baby, it's a manbearpig and should be drowned in the water first before we throw it out.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #13
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,764

    Re: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

    Here's my take on this:

    It's about 2 things: Power, and how government views it's citizens. This can be broken down into Republican and Democratic views on American citizens.

    1) Republican - Citizens must be continually watched, and deprived of their rights. Although they push for smaller government, they are in favor of a large government police state that must repress freedom. The Patriot Act is an example of this. I call this "Fatherland".

    2) Democratic - Citizens must be continually protected from themselves, and deprived of their rights. They push for larger government that must repress freedom, in the name of protecting it's citizens. Obama's mandate for insurance coverage is an example of this. I call this "Motherland".

    But whether Fatherland or Motherland, our founding fathers would call it "Crazyland". The laws that BOTH parties push, for their own ideological reasons, are patently unconstitutional. But as long as the government can keep us divided into "Red" and "Blue", condemning what the other guys do, but fully supporting what their own guys do, the government wins. Divide and conquor, folks. That's the name of this game.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  4. #14
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    The laws that BOTH parties push, for their own ideological reasons, are patently unconstitutional. But as long as the government can keep us divided into "Red" and "Blue", condemning what the other guys do, but fully supporting what their own guys do, the government wins. Divide and conquor, folks. That's the name of this game.
    Don't kid yourself. It's not about ideology. It's about money, power and re-election. Mr. Smith is dead.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  5. #15
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,136

    Re: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    There shouldn't be "exemptions" to due process.
    i agree. i was speaking in the theoretical : if due process were to be removed, it would have to be done via the amendment process. simple legislation cannot rewrite the constitution. the patriot act attempts to do just this, as do many pieces of legislation dealing with the failed drug war.

  6. #16
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    This ain't a baby, it's a manbearpig and should be drowned in the water first before we throw it out.
    What's wrong with these things:

    Those who operate or own a "protected computer" can give permission for authorities to intercept communications carried out on the machine, thus bypassing the requirements of the Wiretap statute.[
    . . . like a library computer. . . a company-owned computer. Oh, wow!! Such an infringement!! Not.

    This?

    Financial institutions must now undertake steps to identify the owners of any privately owned bank outside the U.S. who have a correspondent account with them, along with the interests of each of the owners in the bank. It is expected that additional scrutiny will be applied by the U.S. institution to such banks to make sure they are not engaging in money laundering. Bank must identify all the nominal and beneficial owners of any private bank account opened and maintained in the U.S. by non-U.S. citizens.
    OMG!!! I have to provide two types of identification to open a bank account!!

    The definition of money laundering was expanded to include making a financial transaction in the U.S. in order to commit a violent crime. The bribery of public officials and fraudulent dealing with public funds; the smuggling or illegal export of controlled munition[65] and the importation or bringing in of any firearm or ammunition not authorized by the U.S. Attorney General[66] and the smuggling of any item controlled under the Export Administration Regulations.
    The Act also introduced criminal penalties for corrupt officialdom. An official or employee of the government who acts corruptly — as well as the person who induces the corrupt act — in the carrying out of their official duties will be fined by an amount that is not more than three times the monetary equivalent of the bribe in question. Alternatively they may be imprisoned for not more than 15 years, or they may be fined and imprisoned. Penalties apply to financial institutions who do not comply with an order to terminate any corresponding accounts within 10 days of being so ordered by the Attorney General or the Secretary of Treasury. The financial institution can be fined $US10,000 for each day the account remains open after the 10 day limit has expired.[
    Enough funds were set aside to triple the maximum number of Border Patrol personnel, Customs Service personnel and INS inspectors along with an additional US$50,000,000 funding for the INS and the U.S. Customs Service to improve technology for monitoring the Northern Border and acquiring additional equipment at the Canadian northern border.[
    I have no problems with these. You? USA PATRIOT Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  7. #17
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    What's wrong with these things:

    . . . like a library computer. . . a company-owned computer. Oh, wow!! Such an infringement!! Not.

    This?



    OMG!!! I have to provide two types of identification to open a bank account!!







    I have no problems with these. You? USA PATRIOT Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Pass them in separate laws.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  8. #18
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,764

    Re: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Don't kid yourself. It's not about ideology. It's about money, power and re-election. Mr. Smith is dead.
    Mr. Smith never existed in the first place, except as a propaganda tool.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  9. #19
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,013

    Re: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

    For all those in favor of overturning the entire thing...

    Are you also in favor of overturning the FISA Act as well as TITLE III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act? Since a large majority of the Patriot Act is updating and altering those laws to get them up to speed with the 21st century. For all the blathering about how "PATRIOT Act" is a poor name just used to make people foolishly go along with it, it seems a lot of people are mindlessly just going along with the call for "THROW IT ALL OUT" simply becuase that's the vogue, anti-establishment, "dey tuk ar freedomz!" war cry at the moment. Or is your issue actually with the notion of the government being able to perform survelliance of any kind in which case why are you sweating the new act when the old acts will still let it be done, only with glaringly large loopholes.

    If your issue was about the constitutionality, HONESTLY about the constitutionality, you'd be fighting for the unconstitutional parts to be removed. If your issue was about the invasion of privacy and power to the government, then you'd be pushing for those older laws to be repealed thus making Patriot useless because its largely building upon those other laws through amending them. However, in reality, most people are doing the exact same thing they accused lawmakers of doing due to the name PATRIOT...going along with someone because it simply is the popular sentiment being pushed without actually taking the time to fully understand or grasp it.

  10. #20
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,013

    Re: Judge rules part of Patriot Act unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Pass them in separate laws.
    Little if any of our survelliance laws have been passed in individual segment laws. Why is it that you're not equally out there decrying the FISA Act and for overturning the entire 1968 Omnibus act? Not to mention that we're at an incredibly partisan time compared to the early 2000's and attempting to pass any of this stuff would likely be difficult not because its necessarily bad law but because it has become such a politicized propoganda fueled mess.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •