Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Were you personally hert by the patriot act?

I see so many posts that cry about how the patriot act took away their rights. And why only some of the more sensible democrats are a bit angry at Obama for strenthening it after all the cries about how bad it was. So would people please tell me how their rights were personally oppressed by it?

Answer Question
 
Carpy

Asked by Carpy at 5:49 PM on Jun. 11, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Level 39 (114,053 Credits)
Answers (83)
  • what rights were taken by it??... hey... they can listen into all my phone calls if they want.... to protect my country.... sure :)
    JuLiAnSmOmMy317

    Answer by JuLiAnSmOmMy317 at 5:52 PM on Jun. 11, 2009

  • yes and I see you were devestated by the LIMITATIONS on that. And i meant HURT not hert.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 5:53 PM on Jun. 11, 2009

  • I have not had my rights limited by it. And for those that have, consider the alternative, thousands of people die because of terrorism.
    TheDiva320

    Answer by TheDiva320 at 5:55 PM on Jun. 11, 2009

  • I feel that if it is for the safety of the masses, they can listen in on my phone calls. I don't really care. I think of those who got bent out of shape about it, what did they have to hide, you know?
    sfwilson

    Answer by sfwilson at 5:57 PM on Jun. 11, 2009

  • Sorry, I'm not willing to wait till they come for me to protest. Just because I personally haven't been hurt, that I know of, doesn't make it Constitutional.


    Did you know Clinton signed similar legislation and the SCOTUS struck it down as unconstitutional?


    I have no problem with wiretapping, with a warrant. I am also VERY displeased with Obama for continuing some of Bushco's policies in the war on terror.

    Friday

    Answer by Friday at 5:57 PM on Jun. 11, 2009

  • Sorry, I'm not willing to wait till they come for me to protest. Just because I personally haven't been hurt, that I know of, doesn't make it Constitutional.

    I have no problem with wiretapping, with a warrant. I am also VERY displeased with Obama for continuing some of Bushco's policies in the war on terror.

    exactly
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 5:59 PM on Jun. 11, 2009

  • well it is a computor that picks up words in conversations that are to foreign countries that are on the terrorist list. And if certain words are picked up then the call is recorded. So i don't think too many people really ever needed to worry that Bush was sitting in the Oval office listening to you talk to you great aunt about the weather.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 6:01 PM on Jun. 11, 2009

  • And where was the outrage when Clinton ordered a swat team into the house in I beleive St louis without a warrent and nabbed terrorists. What is the difference? No warrent is no warrent. I do happen to think Clinton was right on what he did too.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 6:03 PM on Jun. 11, 2009

  • well it is a computor that picks up words in conversations that are to foreign countries that are on the terrorist list. And if certain words are picked up then the call is recorded.

    you keep thinking that. wiretaps are monitor by agents.. and they choose what to record. and it's not just conversations to foreign countries
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 6:03 PM on Jun. 11, 2009

  • you keep thinking that. wiretaps are monitor by agents.. and they choose what to record. and it's not just conversations to foreign countries

    You cant actually beieve that and I do know from an inside source how it is done. But if that were true half the damn world would have to be agents.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 6:04 PM on Jun. 11, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.
close Cafemom Join now to connect to other members! Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN