patriot act
By tascerUSA
I’ve heard of such things and I would love any advice from anyone who knows how to do this. Do I need a lawyer or can I simply reserve a date to put forth my proposal to the county commissioner and public officials? Plus, how many signatures do you need for this type of petition?
I’m 23 years old so doing this myself is certainly a struggle.
I’ve heard that over 400 cities nationwide have thrown The patriot act out of the system. Just imagine if people in every city in the country did this.
Check out the Safe Act. This needs to be tackled from the local level up. I just watched Free Speech TV and their is a website telling people how to get this done. I wish I would have written it down. Maybe you can find it on the net or watch FSTV. Look that up too to find your channel. Good luck.
Filed in: patriot act
By tascerUSA
Identify and describe four ways in which the USA PATRIOT Act changed the way in which federal law enforcement investigates terror-related activities.
^^Need help the only one i can think of is it makes it a lot easier for them to find terror related activities, i just need some help to point me in the right direction.^^
Through patriot act they can:
1-Tap emails without consent
2-Do phone taps without consent
3-Detain a person indefinitely if they are considered an "enemy combatant"
4-Has defined "enemy combatant" in very vague terms so that essentially it could be just about anybody without any real tangible proof
Look for this video, "Unconstitutional – The War on Our civil liberties " it can be found here, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3105519703637733227
Filed in: patriot act
By tascerUSA
I have looked on wikipedia and the Whitehouse's webpage; it is incomplete or brief in mention on both. I am doing a research paper and cannot otherwise find sufficient coverage on a specific aspect of the patriot act. Any help will be enjoyed. Please no diatribes or ranting about unconstituitionality of the patriot act as the preamble will prove you to be otherwise than correct. But I am less than interested in arguing this aspect…
Please help me find a detailed copy of this or maybe where I can locate a real paper copy of said law.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ056.107
Filed in: patriot act
By tascerUSA
How has the patriot act influenced how information and records are retained and released to the public ?
much more has been classified, and will not see the light of day for decades, if then.
Filed in: patriot act
By tascerUSA
I see alot of people on here saying that under the patriot act laws every American is a criminal, is this true?
So, let me get this right, if the powers that be think you MIGHT commit a crime, you are considered guilty. And are you guys not worried about this?
It is an Act of Congress that President George W. Bush signed into law on October 26, 2001. The acronym stands for: Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001
Filed in: patriot act
By tascerUSA
How can you tie it into Immigrants or Refugees? What are the complications or troubles of the Patriot Act?
The best answer I can give you is that the terms of the Patriot act are nothing new. In reality it extends powers into the fight against terrorists that are already possessed by the fed and routinely used to fight organized crime. Much of the hoo haw arises from the redirection of the expanded rights the feds possess regarding the interception of communications, such as the internet, from the fight against organized crime to the war on terror. Many restrictions and checks and balances that previously existed in this regard were left out of the Patriot Act in the name of national security.
The Act also lowers the standard for foreign intelligence surveillance for the same reason.
It gets complicated because of the nature of the likely targets of investigation. When one is dealing with organized crime, nobody much cares whether the feds are checking out their library cards or tapping their phones. But a terrorist can be anybody at all, in theory. Suddenly, powers that the fed had used for decades, with minor oversight, to investigate suspected criminals can be used with less oversight to investigate anybody suspected of any ties to terrorism. In theory, that could be any anti war activist on the block.
At least some opponents of the Act would have us believe so.
But, I think that buried in all that overblown paranoia, the opponents of the Act may have a small point. It comes down to whether or not one is willing to trust his own government in a crisis when that trust has been abused in a less worrysome past. Some people have made a rational decision not to trust and others are simply believers that their own government is a greater threat to them than any enemy could be.
As to immigration issues, the patriot act increased the authority of the INS or what is currently known as the USCIS to track down illegal immigrants with terrorist ties. For example, the USCIS has access to some of the FBI’s systems like the Wanted Persons File and the NCIC-III. These systems allow the USCIS to check the criminal history of visa applicants. The USCIS is also authorized to make inadmissible the spouse and children of illegal immigrants who have some ties to terrorism within the last five years. The spouses and children of individuals who have some association with a terrorist organization can be excluded from entering the country automatically.
The Patriot Act also gives the Attorney General authority to detain any non-citizen he certifies as a threat to national security. Originally, this authority was virtually unlimited, but safeguards were later introduced into the law and his decisions in this regard were made subject to judicial review. The primary objection being made to this at present is that it can theoretically result in the detention of non-citizens who have never been charged with a violent crime or national security offense but who have violated their immigration status in some way. Because the Attorney General has seven days under the statute to decide whether or not to charge them with a national security violation, it is possible that a mere status violator could be held until the statute runs out before he is handed over to USCIS for deportation.
Also, in some countries, governments compile lists of suspected "terrorists," a label they attach both to those who have committed acts of indiscriminate violence against innocent people but also to those who are non-violent critics or political opponents of the government. These lists are provided to our government and could theoretically result in an inappropriate detention until the time the government has to charge the detainee runs out.
I hope that this helps you.
Filed in: patriot act
By tascerUSA
I heard that the patriot act took away some of our freedom and replaced it with security.
The patriot act said that the U.S. Government can tap your phone to hear conversation you have to figure out whether you are a terrorist or not. What if I'm doing other illegal activity and they tap me can they used that as evidence? Also if our government doesn't trust us, should we trust them, with all this 911 controversy, I really don't know.
I am a US Citizen.
That is a great quote. My sociology professor mentioned that quote last week.
I oppose the patriot act, its unconstitutional.
If you give up freedom for security you deserve neither.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin
Filed in: patriot act
By tascerUSA
I need to find some instances of the Patriot Act being put into use to find terrorist rings…etc.
I remember one about finding a terrorist ring in california. But that's all I know.
Every suspected terrorist found under the "Patriot Act" would have been found under the law enforcement techniques available and used before the patriot act.
Filed in: patriot act
By tascerUSA
what is the Patriot act and the relationships to the constitution?
The law is the law is the law. Any bill which the congress passes, and the president signs and the U.S. Supreme Court rules as constitutional, is a law, with one single exception. When a law comes into conflict with a higher law, the higher law prevails. The U.S. Constitution is the highest of all laws. No law may supersede the U.S. Constitution unless it is a constitutional amendment.
Some of the provisions in the Patriot Act do come into conflict with the U.S. Constitution and therefore by law, those provisions are not valid, even if law enforcement says it is, or the attorney general, or even the courts. They are required to obey the law, the same as anybody else.
Law enforcement may have additional rights granted to them by the patriot act, but those rights do not trump your rights. They have the right to conduct warrantless search, but you still have the right to require them to have a warrant.
The 9th amendment to the U.S. Constitution says that laws shall not be construed yet law enforcement weaponizes the law by using it in a construe way all the time. For example, Police show up at your home and tell you they are there to search it. You ask them if they have a warrant at which time they inform you they don’t need one and they begin searching anyway. Fact is they do NOT need a warrant if you do not object to it. You need to say stop or cease and desist, or something similar. This is still a construment if not in the letter of the law then certainly in the spirit of the law.
People say the government is taking away our rights, and that is not true. They are attempting to take them. Rights are not privileges; they are rights, and clearly defined as such. Rights cannot be taken away, only given away by those who choose not to stand up for them.
Filed in: patriot act