Author Topic: Patriot Act (Read 2846 times)

Skuzzy · « **Reply #60 on:** April 10, 2003, 05:42:43 PM »

Well,..it was pointed at you, and if you feel that way, then I apologize to Erlkonig for the misunderstanding.

Carry on.

Sandman · « **Reply #61 on:** April 10, 2003, 05:45:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Well,..it was pointed at you, and if you feel that way, then I apologize to Erlkonig for the misunderstanding.

Carry on.

FWIW, I believe it was pointed at Koala and referenced this quote:

Quote

Are you so stupid you have to have the ACLU speak for you?

Thanks for the thought though.

Erlkonig · « **Reply #62 on:** April 10, 2003, 06:40:37 PM »

I misread. I thought Sandman's link was a FAS document, but it's actually from the Congressional Research Service which is apparently affiliated with the Library of Congress.

AKIron · « **Reply #63 on:** April 10, 2003, 09:01:59 PM »

Dolfy, I think you and Froggy are beginning to embarrass your fellow libs. Ya might wanna try a bit of rational thinking, just a suggestion.

AKIron · « **Reply #64 on:** April 10, 2003, 09:10:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
ISection 209 treats voice mail as stored data rather than intercepted communication. Prior to the Patriot Act, the seizure of voice mail required a Title III wiretap order. Now, all that is required is a search warrant.

Haven't studied the sections you mentioned yet. Everyone knows how voice mail works, however, are you aware that voice mail is in fact stored data?

I'm not suggesting that they should be treated differently than private voice communications. Both a wire tap and seizure of the voice mail require a court order so what's the big deal? The same judge can issue either, right?

Rude · « **Reply #65 on:** April 10, 2003, 09:55:36 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Montezuma
Knock yourself out:

Patriot Act

ACLU's opinion:

ACLU

ACLU????

Don't even go there....they're a joke.

As to anyone who fears losing their freedom....grow up....there's a difference between losing your freedoms and being afraid of losing your freedoms.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #66 on:** April 10, 2003, 10:27:54 PM »

I see certain sections in the Patriot Act (most already pointed out in this thread) that make me wary of the nation I live in.

Both because I *KNOW* our government would love to strip us of our rights because it makes their job easier (I'm not saying I know from 'outside looking in' either...) and also because I can see that the majority of the american people are complacent enough to let them be taken away.

"If you say it helps...", I can see some of it in this thread. Not reading it, and taking the government's word for it is a bad idea. If it's published by the government, it's in your best interest to scan through it several times.

It starts off small, it ends up bad. I'm not comparing our Commander in Chief to Hitler or the Nazi party or Communism.... but it's not too far off in some areas concerning the government as a whole.

If you seriously believe the government is looking out for your best interests, best to double check that one.

I'm not paranoid about it, it hasn't happened yet, but when it comes I'll know and I'll be gone before you can say "Ve haft a dissenter amongzt our rankz"...
-SW

AKIron · « **Reply #67 on:** April 10, 2003, 10:35:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Both because I *KNOW* our government would love to strip us of our rights because it makes their job easier

Just ain't true SW. Those Americans that write laws love their freedom just as much as you. Based on what I've read about it, the Patriot Act was written not only to give law enforcement the tools needed to deal with increasing terrorism in this country but also to update the procedures needed in dealing with modern communications technology. It may need some adjusting, or eliminating altogether. I can't say since what little I've read of it seems reasonable.

I can tell you this for an almost certainty, if terrorism were to become as rampant here as it is in say Israel, you'd definitely be losing some of the freedoms you now enjoy. Maybe even the right to breath, though it won't be your government that takes that one away.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #68 on:** April 10, 2003, 10:39:31 PM »

They love their freedom, they don't love my freedom.

This isn't paranoia here, this is what I've come to understand from working around these politicians.

You can love your nation, but you can be extremely distrustful of the government at the same time... you don't have to be the latter, but if you aren't- you are certainly inviting some bad things to happen to you. History has proven I'm right about that much.
-SW

Sandman · « **Reply #69 on:** April 10, 2003, 10:49:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
Haven't studied the sections you mentioned yet. Everyone knows how voice mail works, however, are you aware that voice mail is in fact stored data?

I'm not suggesting that they should be treated differently than private voice communications. Both a wire tap and seizure of the voice mail require a court order so what's the big deal? The same judge can issue either, right?

IANAL, but I believe a search warrant is much simpler to get than a wiretap order.

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #70 on:** April 10, 2003, 11:01:48 PM »

"Dolfy, I think you and Froggy are beginning to embarrass your fellow libs. Ya might wanna try a bit of rational thinking, just a suggestion."

some ak or another

there is nothing irrational about my thinking. how many times do i have to repeat. i dont want your party changing the system of law to their own selfish ends. they have mucked up enough.

Sandman · « **Reply #71 on:** April 11, 2003, 12:56:03 AM »

A quote to consider:

"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home." - James Madison

NUKE · « **Reply #72 on:** April 11, 2003, 01:30:01 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
I find these (and more) offensive:

Section 206 which covers "roving surveillance."

Section 209 treats voice mail as stored data rather than intercepted communication. Prior to the Patriot Act, the seizure of voice mail required a Title III wiretap order. Now, all that is required is a search warrant.

Section 216 has determined that pen register/trap and trace surveillance applies to internet traffic. Permits the use of technologies such as "Carnivore" and "Eschelon."

Here's the "Reader's Digest Abridged version": http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RS21203.pdf

I agree that voice mail is stored data, how could one argue otherwise?

Furious · « **Reply #73 on:** April 11, 2003, 02:15:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
A quote to consider:

"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home." - James Madison

Another appropriate quote:

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin

Montezuma · « **Reply #74 on:** April 11, 2003, 03:05:30 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rude
ACLU????

Don't even go there....they're a joke.

Nearly all of the ACLU's suits are against the government. Are you one of those wierd conservatives that loves and trusts the government?

Fully understanding this bill would require knowledge of all the relevant statutes and jurisprudence. That is why there are legislative analysts, and the ACLU has some pretty good ones. There has been nothing posted here that contradicts the ACLU's claims.

Show us a different summary of the bill. Let's see if anyone can explain how these new government powers could have prevented the intelligence community failure of 9/11.