Hicup
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2009
- Messages
- 9,081
- Reaction score
- 2,709
- Location
- Rochester, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Yes, people not doing wrong doing have been caught into a web of issues due to the Patriot Act. What people seem to mistakingly think however is that magically somehow PRIOR to Patriot the government NEVER was able to use loopholes or be corrupt or just make a bad judgement and do similar type of things to people.
Whether or not it'll affect you because you are or are not doing wrong should not determine if one feels something is unconstitutional. Whether or not it matches up with the constitution should determine that. The potential for misuse should be looked at, regardless if you're law abiding or not, but the assumption of definitie wide spread misuse and the assumption that somehow there was magically no misuse before hand and would be none or significantly less simply by removing it is problematic.
It is entirely possible ot have issues with the PATRIOT Act and be an entirely law abiding citizen. Hell, I support keeping PATRIOT, am a law abiding citizen, and still have zero issues with certain parts being removed or taken out because I feel they're damaging to constitutional freedoms.
Ah, but see, that's just it, Zyphlin. Information gained through chatter must be of a specific kind in order for law enforcement to act without a judges permission or (due process). Law enforcement can't say as an example knock on joe the drug dealers house because they overheard a cell conversation with john the addict. The Patriot Act took great pains to make that clear within the context of the law. The Patriot Act as it matters to national security is the ONLY time that due process can be waived and ONLY if the waiver is warranted because of imminent danger to American citizens. And, to add, even after the danger is addressed, there is still a hearing after the fact where law enforcement must justify its actions. So, due process is indeed afforded great scrutiny, but in the case of national security, it is simply done after the fact, and I might add that evidence gained prior to an actual court ordered warrant is inadmissible as evidence in a court of law.
Tim-