The Patriot Act - Your Thoughts?

This Patriot Act sucks,damn the government,I use to like the government but after the 9/11 thing our liberties and privacy are pretty much gone.

This act appears to be full of loopholes that a nearly removes the due process of law and leaves the door wide open for abuse. Picture this scenerio:

I don't like you, so I send an anonymous tip that you are involved in terrorist activity (I believe drug-related activity may fall under that soon?). Instead of you simply being observed, questioned and eventually the accusation being dismissed; you're arrested and detained. Your house is sifted through and your family is put through hell....

It may be a bit much to even say it will happen, but it seems at the very least a possible scenerio. That's what all these procedures for warrents and such were put in place for; to prevent innocent citizens from these wrongful searches and detainments. I'm not confortable with a lot of power put in the hands of a few people for that reason. The government is made of people, people abuse power...it's a fact of life.

Oh, what has happened to the America I was once so proud to be a part of? Has it always been like this, and I was just to content to see it? At this point, I don't know whether to cry or scream.

It's funny. We're attacked. Our leaders declare that this happened because "they" are jealous of our freedoms. Now while they continue to assure us that the war on terrorism is going our way, they're systematically doing what the terrorists want. Who's the real enemy here folks?

We are being played like fools.

I think the Patriot Act is agreat way to stop terrorists.

H.R. 1528, the Defending America's Most Vulnerable: Safe Access to Drug
Treatment and Child Protection Act of 2005 introduced by
Representative James Sensenbrenner on April 6, 2005

if enacted will have mandatory 2 year sentences for college kids who "suspect" someone of drug dealing but do not report it. thought crime!?!?

-Virtually eliminates the ability of federal judges to give sentences below the minimum sentence recommended by federal sentencing guidelines, essentially creating a mandatory minimum sentence for every federal offense (including both drug and non-drug offenses).

--Expands the federal “three strikes and you’re out” law to include new offenses, including mandating life imprisonment (with no possibility of parole) for anyone convicted a third time under the RAVE Act.

--Mandates a 10-year minimum sentence for anyone 21 or older that gives marijuana or others drugs to someone under 18 (i.e. a 21 year old college students gives a joint to his 17-year old brother). A second offense would be life in prison.

--Expands what is considered to be a “drug-free” school zone to include almost any place in an urban area, and increases penalties for selling or distributing drugs in that area. (The result will be enhanced penalties for people in inner cities, while people in rural and suburban areas get less time for the same offense).

--Mandates a 5-year minimum sentence for any person that commits a drug trafficking offense near the presence of a person under 18 or in a place where such person resides for any period of time. The sentence is 10 years if they are parent. (I.e. a mother that sells her neighbor a joint will get a 10-year minimum sentence, even if her kids were at school at the time).

--Creates a new offense for persons who witness or learn about certain drug offenses that fail to report the drug offender to the police within 24 hours or fail to provide full assistance to the police in tracking and prosecuting the offender. Offenses that would get someone a 2-year minimum sentence, including failing to report a neighbor that is storing or selling drugs when that neighbor has kids, failing to report anyone that gives a joint to someone under the age of 21, and failing to report a college student that is selling marijuana on a college campus.

--Mandates a 5-year minimum sentence for any person that offers, solicits, encourages, or induces a person enrolled in drug treatment, or previously enrolled in drug treatment, to purchase, possess or receive drugs.

--Makes it a federal crime to provide "drug paraphernalia" to anyone. While the goal is to make it a crime - punishable by up to three years in prison - to give someone a bong as a birthday present, it would also make it a federal crime to provide someone with sterile syringes (except where it is explicitly authorized by local or state law). If enacted, it would essentially criminalize many needle exchange programs.

The Dirty Filthy Plot against freedom's full text

Originally posted by Moe Foe
Here you go...a summary and the H. R. 3162 itself.

www.epic.org...
www.epic.org...

Thank you, much appreciated. 342-page pdf, it may take awhile to go over but I think it will be worth it. I'm not American (Canadian, in fact) but I'm still concerned a great deal about this issue; after all, the only country we share borders with is the US, and Canada often tends to follow the lead of the Americans on many issues. I'm hoping this isn't one of them.

... I'm not American (Canadian, in fact) but I'm still concerned a great deal about this issue; after all, the only country we share borders with is the US, and Canada often tends to follow the lead of the Americans on many issues. I'm hoping this isn't one of them.

You all have already begun to give up your personal freedoms, just like the US. One example that comes to mind almost immediately is your gun control program ...Turn them ALL in. At least that would be the one I am familiar with most immediately.

By the way... Love your signature... Is it possible that I am six degrees removed from Ernest Borgnine?

Originally posted by sigung86

You all have already begun to give up your personal freedoms, just like the US. One example that comes to mind almost immediately is your gun control program ...Turn them ALL in. At least that would be the one I am familiar with most immediately.

By the way... Love your signature... Is it possible that I am six degrees removed from Ernest Borgnine?

Yup that's exactly what I'm afraid of, that sooner or later, our country is going to follow the US on the removal of personal freedoms. I'm not too worried about the gun registry; actually, I think patriot act type legislation is what I'm worried the most about. (that and getting a mental retard as leader of the country!)

Originally posted by Boatphone
I think the Patriot Act is agreat way to stop terrorists.

yeah, we could just put everyone in jail! at least the terrorists would be locked up!

Originally posted by Boatphone
I think the Patriot Act is agreat way to stop terrorists.

Wow, what have you been drinking?

Can I have some? Then maybe I won't have to think about the possibility of concentration camps in this country, people being sent off to other countries to be tortured, the alleged boxcars with shackles in them....

Originally posted by Boatphone
I think the Patriot Act is agreat way to stop terrorists.

I say this with the greatest respect, but it is ignorance like this that allows politicians and lawmakers to remove our freedoms and rights. They count on beliefs such as yours to justify their actions, which they bring into play under the pretext of ‘our protection’. This is about the removal of rights and control - nothing more, nothing less.

Originally posted by Lady of the Lake

Originally posted by Boatphone
I think the Patriot Act is agreat way to stop terrorists.

I say this with the greatest respect, but it is ignorance like this that allows politicians and lawmakers to remove our freedoms and rights.

Ignorance indeed or just someone with the mental development of a 12 year old attempting to be humorous (if you're only eleven I guess that's a compliment). Sometimes I think people that really think like that deserve what they get and are almost not worth educating or protecting.

its not good.now in canada we having air space problems because of it.this can only get worse.nice act eh.....

Originally posted by flukemol
its not good.now in canada we having air space problems because of it.this can only get worse.nice act eh.....

How does this act relate to Canada's air space?

Originally posted by blanketgirl
do you know a letter +number name for the "intellegence bill" or how we could see that one?

I believe this is it.

www.globalsecurity.org...

My biggest question is, as a Mortgage broker, I want to know why I must ask someone's ethnicity in 5 different ways. This is on my application and BY LAW I must ask. And to run an application through automated underwriting(which all conventional loans sold to freddie mac/fannie mae are) You MUST put something down EVEN if it means guessing. By LAW.

Even though it does give you the choice of "I do not want to furnish this info" I, as your originator MUST. Why??? Here is a copy and paste of the wording. It is not the format as my mortgage software doesn't allow copying with MS clicking

I do not wish to furnish this information.
Ethnicity:
American Indian or
Native Hawaiian or
Asian
White
Black or
Alaskan Native
Other Pacific Islander
African American
Hispanic or Latino Not Hispanic or Latino
Race:
Sex: Female Male

I do not wish to furnish this information.
Ethnicity:
American Indian or
Native Hawaiian or
Asian
White
Black or
Alaskan Native
Other Pacific Islander
African American
Hispanic or Latino Not Hispanic or Latino
Freddie Mac Form 65 01/04 / Fannie Mae Form 1003 01/04 Page 3 of 4

Originally posted by llpoolej
My biggest question is, as a Mortgage broker, I want to know why I must ask someone's ethnicity in 5 different ways. This is on my application and BY LAW I must ask. And to run an application through automated underwriting(which all conventional loans sold to freddie mac/fannie mae are) You MUST put something down EVEN if it means guessing. By LAW.

Oh really? You're required to put down a guess on their race, if they don't provide it? That is weird.

I would hope to God that I am wrong in my assessment but what if the reason for asking for this information was to start to create a database, based on ethnicity that could be later used for ethnic cleansing?

This is yet another similarity between what happened in Nazi Germany. Of course, the official line would be very different such as the information would be used to target customers, create better products and identify lower socio groups who by and large get into financial difficulty. The frightening piece now of course capturing, storing and sharing information is now much easier than it was in 30's / 40's due to technology.

Good question and a dangerous one too.

To say 'damned if you do and damned if you don't' wouldn't suffice here.
I might suggest how much freedom will be given up for a little more possible safety (peace of mind) ?

It really is a wowy kind of question and to tell you the truth I for one cannot offer a reply.

Dallas

Originally posted by Dallas

Good question and a dangerous one too.

To say 'damned if you do and damned if you don't' wouldn't suffice here.
I might suggest how much freedom will be given up for a little more possible safety (peace of mind) ?

It really is a wowy kind of question and to tell you the truth I for one cannot offer a reply.

Dallas

Yes it is a dangerous question but one that I still have the freedom to ask, but for how long?

It appears to me, that the balance is not in any way in the favour of your personal freedoms. This act pervades every part of your life.

In reality is the terrorism treat that substantial that freedoms that have been hard fought to achieve have to be taken away with nary a thought for the population? I suspect not. Does this act make you any safer? I also suspect not. Does it protect you from feral government most certainly not.