In the USA, the “Patriot Act” was enacted hastely in fear of domestic terrorism as a result of 9/11. It curbs certain civil liberties, providing more power to the FBI and other agencies with the goal to catch terrorists, and for the most part was designed to expire in 2005. President Bush is now pushing for renewal of the patriot act, as appearently americans don’t really need to keep these rights in the governments eyes. (See http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/politics/15gonzales.html ) The american civil liberties union stated “The president and the attorney general must realize that security and liberty are not - and cannot be - mutually exclusive.” in response to their concerns about this.
While there may have been some fear of initial round up of terrorists, it now seems these fears are being used while they can as an excuse to continue to reduce freedoms. The are many newly expanded elements in the Patriot Act 2 on top of what is already in the orginal patriot act including:
-fairly free search and seizure laws
-“secret” warrents
-Americans could have their citizenship revoked, if found to have contributed “material support” to organizations deemed by the government to be subversive
-Instant deporation of permanent legal residents could be deported instantaneously, without a criminal charge or even evidence
-national database of citizen DNA information, aimed at “detecting, investigating, prosecuting, preventing or responding to terrorist activities”, refusual to submit can result in 1 year jail time and $200,000 fine
-Authorities could wiretap anybody for 15 days, and snoop on anyone’s Internet usage (including chat and email), all without obtaining a warrant.
people detained without charges (done now), and The government would be specifically instructed not to release any information about detainees held on suspicion of national security issues
-legal (like from lawsuits) immunity provided to businesses that provide error-onous information on people to the government
-Federal “consent decrees” limiting local law enforcement agencies’ abilities to spy on citizens in their jurisdiction would be rolled back
This is real stuff that is in the Patriot Act 2 bill congress is considering.
MY question to all is. First, are these provisions necessary and are they worth it considering the loss of civil liberties. How far should the US government go? The second half of the question: is it not scary as these acts allow great abuses of power on the part of government and police agencies? It seems like the government is heading down an extremely slippery slope. A big part of the problem is wide definitions of the issues, allowing almost police state like powers.
To clarify, I don’t want to argue IF this is going to pass, but rather if it should, what is the mindset of a country/ government that would consider this, does it matter or not, are the losses of liberty worth having this law, and what are the ramifications of the patriot act being renewed or patriot 2 being passed.
The USA PATRIOT act is all about implementation. I sat down and read the mostly boring and laborious document years ago, and in all honesty on paper there are scarier laws.
Laws out there dealing with the President’s emergency powers are far scarier, especially if you look at some of the legal precedent for nearly totalitarian uses of those powers.
The USA PATRIOT act certainly is written in a way that would allow government to implement things that do curb our freedom. Is that good or bad? Hard to say, freedom and individual right’s aren’t absoute. They all have to have limits and restrictions, and no right is absolute (not even the right to life in our country.)
There’s some things I would like to see removed from the act, other things I think people raise too much of a fuss over. If I was in congress I would probably vote for a renewal but it would be with a heavy heart.
While I generally oppose further renewal, the Patriot Act doesn’t actually extend the US government’s power even to the extent it already exists in many other western nations. I don’t support renewal right now, but I know it isn’t going to send us into fascism. It was never the law per se that prevented dictatorship in the US. I mostly don’t see it as being very effective in its designated role.
I have to confess that Websense (the corporate firewall) is frustrating me here, as it can’t reach the ACLU or alternet. That other thing seems to be a one-page .pdf. Do you have a link to a mainstream (i.e., non-advocacy) media source which reports on this Patriot II thing so I could give it a look? Thanks.
I apologize, I provided the wrong link. To read the document see it here . Viewers should note this is a 120 page document, so it does take a moment to load.
The link to the pdf is the link to the document as provided by wikipedia, which is certainly a mainstream source, and is the best way to read the raw document yourself without any opinions.
In fact, all of them are. I’m aware of the draft legislation which circulated within the Justice Department two years ago and which some have labeled “Patriot II.” What I guess I’m looking for is some evidence that something similar to the things in the draft are “now being considered in congress.”
If you are looking for general current workings of congress and updates I recommend the news search at google.
Also note, that we aren’t looking specifically to debate if this is going to pass, but rather what does the bills existance say, if anything, and should it pass or not, and what would it’s effects be.
According to this – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act_II – some unspecified elements of Patriot II have been passed as riders on other bills. There is no mention of Congress considering the remainder at this time; the only current stories I can find mention only the debate over renewing Patriot I.
That’s kind of why I’m asking – a lot of people are like OMG PATRIOT HA11i3UR7ON!!!eleventy!! and even more hysterical about Patriot II. But no one seems to be willing or able to identify the pieces as they’ve been introduced or passed. I think there are some parts of existing PATRIOT USA that I like a lot, others which I think need changing or eradicating, and other parts I’d be comfortable with changing as long as they also changed the act as it regards non-terrorism things (it doesn’t strike me as fair to have a law that applies to CEO’s and not terrorists, for example). But it doesn’t make any sense to argue for or against an abstraction so I’m looking for specifics of what people like and don’t like.