Hot Topic (10/12): Government eavesdropping approved by Senate Judiciary Committee...

[Cafe GroupAdmin]

 

From NYTimes.com:

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation to reauthorize three sections of the USA Patriot Act, the anti-terrorism legislation enacted after Sept. 11, that are set to expire at the end of the year. By a vote of 11 to 8, the committee sent the bill to the Senate floor.

The bill would extend provisions that expanded the power of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to seize records and to eavesdrop on phone calls and e-mail in the course of counterterrorism investigations. In its current form, the Senate bill would impose stronger oversight safeguards on the F.B.I.’s use of these and related powers, such as by requiring new audits by the Justice Department’s inspector general. The bill would also cause several Patriot Act powers to expire after another four years without further legislation, a measure intended to ensure that lawmakers will continue to monitor how the powers are being used.

* * *

Do you think the Patriot Act infringes on the privacy of citizens?

Does the Patriot Act concern you or do you think it's necessary for national security?

What are your thoughts?

[hsteele]

Ok, first I do not have anything to hide, so it doesn't concern me all that much that they are hearing what I talk about with my family or if they look at my records. However, I think this is a huge infringement on privacy and it should be illegal. Isn't that what warrants are for. If you can't get a warrant, then maybe you don't need to be listening? I mean if it were important enough to snoop you should be able to get a warrant right? I hate the patriot act. I am disappointed that this congress is renewing it.

[resamerie]

I believe it is an infringement of sorts but one I'm willing to live with. I doubt the government has the time or resources to eavesdrop on people unless they have good reason to. BTW, aren't these the same people that bashed the hell out of Bush for enacting it the ones now wanting to renew it? Wow.   

[hsteele]

But if they have "good reason" why can they not get a warrant to do so? With this act, the FBI can do whatever they want in the name of the patriot act. If there is some need to eavesdrop, get a friggin warrant!

[resamerie]

Quoting hsteele:

But if they have "good reason" why can they not get a warrant to do so? With this act, the FBI can do whatever they want in the name of the patriot act. If there is some need to eavesdrop, get a friggin warrant!

And I thought about that as I was typing my answer. They should be able to get a warrant and I don't even pretend to know why they don't. All I know is Bush started it and this administration seems to want to continue with it. I could ponder all day as to why but I have no idea.

 Any suggestions anybody?

[bakebiscotti]

I agree.  Kind of.  I am going to use the slippery slope argument.  I don't often use this easy way out argument, but here I think it fits

Quoting resamerie:

I believe it is an infringement of sorts but one I'm willing to live with. I doubt the government has the time or resources to eavesdrop on people unless they have good reason to. BTW, aren't these the same people that bashed the hell out of Bush for enacting it the ones now wanting to renew it? Wow.   

[sappharie]

 PART OF ME THINK YES AND PART OF ME THINK NO . IF IS GOING TO BE THAT ITS MONITORED HOW IT IS USED AND FOR THE GOOD OF OUR SECURITY

[Friday]

 I am and always have been against the PA, it's unconstitutional and I'm quite disappointed that Obama is continuing so many of Dubyas war on terror policies.

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin

[stormcris]

If it is illegal for me, it should be illegal for them.

[JenE4]

I don't have an issue with it. It's not like they're going to spill my secrets I email to my friends or anything, lol. If they think someone might be a terrorist, it might be a matter of life or death to find out the information immediately. I can't imagine you can get a warrant in less than 24-hours. Also, it's a great waste of time and expense, tying up the courts for every warrant issued. I don't see it as a slippery slope of first suspected terrorists and then they'll just bust into my house for any little reason, which I suspect is the concern some people might have.

[Friday]

Quoting JenE4:

I don't have an issue with it. It's not like they're going to spill my secrets I email to my friends or anything, lol. If they think someone might be a terrorist, it might be a matter of life or death to find out the information immediately. I can't imagine you can get a warrant in less than 24-hours. Also, it's a great waste of time and expense, tying up the courts for every warrant issued. I don't see it as a slippery slope of first suspected terrorists and then they'll just bust into my house for any little reason, which I suspect is the concern some people might have.

Under FISA laws the Feds can get warrants retroactively as long as they can prove probable cause, they were set up specifically for these situations. There is absolutely no need for warrantless surveilance.