# [Wet Thumb Forum]-Patriot act



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

My daughter works in a small restaurant owned and operated by two sisters. One is a medical student at the University and the other is working to put her through school. The women are Muslims of Indian extraction, one a Canadian citizen and one a Tanzanian citizen. Today agents from the INS entered the business and took the women away. Because of the conditions of the Patriot Act there is no need to show cause, have an arrest warrent or even state a reason for their arrest.

I feel like I live in Nazi Germany. I'm sick of this, and I'm sick of the snivelling cowards who supported the Patriot Act. Maybe I don't care much if you want to give up *your* rights in exchange for a false sense of security, but I sure as hell don't want you giving up my rights, or the rights of any other innocent people.

Just like in Germany, if we let them take one group, then next they will take another, and then finally they will come for you.


Roger Miller


----------



## TWood (Dec 9, 2004)

We were unpleasantly surprised by a new policy at our son's middle school that required every student to now wear a badge around their necks when attending. I've been making the rounds trying to get this rescinded, and I'm amazed at the animosity I've run into from the people who pushed this through. Parents, teachers, administrators. All in the name of safety.

TW


----------



## Tonka (Mar 20, 2004)

America had a chance to take back the country last November - but blew it. History will show whether Bush saved us from nuclear terror or turned us towards a facism of a brand not so different from Italy in the 1930's. 

We need to doubt those who drape themselves in symbolism, who question the patriotism (or Godliness) of those who question current policies. Thomas Jefferson is turning over in his grave right now. Where is the Supreme Court? The Patriot Act is a flagrant violation of the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments!


----------



## Wally (Aug 31, 2003)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Tonka:
> America had a chance to take back the country last November - but blew it.


John Kerry voted for the patriot act also.


----------



## Robert Hudson (Feb 5, 2004)

On the surface Roger, thats sounds pretty bad, but they really don't have that much power. There has to be more to it. 

Here in Oregon a year or so ago, six muslim people were arrested. A whole bunch of people came out in their defense and testified on the television that these people were fine upstanding citizens, good neighbors, involved in the community, involved in the schools and PTA. They found two of them target practicing with semi automatic weapons, and trunkloads of guns, ammo. and explosives. They call them the Oregon six. I think two of them were women. At least one of them finally confessed to plotting some kind of attack, and even with this confession their neighbors are still claiming these people were railroaded, and victims of the evil patriot act. They even had a candle light vigil in their honor. It made me gag. 

There have been simular arrests in Chicago, and many other parts of the country. You don't always hear a lot about it. Our government is not the gestapo. If you think there are not people in this country that want to do us harm, you are kidding yourself.

Now you can draw all the comparisons you want, what we did to the japanese in world war two, or the holocaust, but it is not even close. The government is investigating targeted people, and they are being held accountable. Personaly, I am gratefull.

I just wish Bush was as tough with our borders as he is on everything else.


----------



## DataGuru (Mar 11, 2005)

It's good they caught them. however... due process is an important thing. We're talking about being picked up by the government and held indefinitely and having no rights at all. none. from what I've heard regarding the justice department's definition of torture, they can do just about anything cept kill you and it's not torture. I find that very creepy.


----------



## Robert Hudson (Feb 5, 2004)

They are not doing physical torture, has anyone here actually read the Patriot act? I havn't, but I have seen all the political debates about it on TV. I would like to actually read it myself before drawing further conclusions. I think it is a lot less intrusive than what some people are making it out to be.

Anyone here a fan of the TV show 24?


----------



## McKee (Feb 7, 2003)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Robert H:
> They are not doing physical torture, has anyone here actually read the Patriot act? I havn't, but I have seen all the political debates about it on TV. I would like to actually read it myself before drawing further conclusions. I think it is a lot less intrusive than what some people are making it out to be.


As usual, the truth about it hovers between the 2 extreme and vocal sides. I don't agree with the erosion of the Constitution, and I think that we'd do better by registering people who enter and leave the country. What is to keep people from being required to give fingerprints or traceable and verifiable ID before buying plane tickets, for example? Why are the borders as open as they are? Why are we promising freebies for illegal aliens? Why are we giving so many people easy entry into the country without holding up the law with regard to their "visit"?

Politicians are better about making more laws than they are about supporting current ones. It is a waste of our money and a danger to our security. And no matter which side occupies the White House, it will always be the same. Never believe that "your" candidate will do any different. The US is living in an aristocracy, and as long as politics offers money and power, things will not change. Dems, Repubs, it doesn't matter.


----------



## WarEagleNR88 (Jan 24, 2005)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Robert H:
> On the surface Roger, thats sounds pretty bad, but they really don't have that much power. There has to be more to it...
> ...


I agree with what Robert is saying here. The US government is definitely not the gestapo. I agree in some aspects it's a little overbearing and cautious at times, but if you look at our history of how open and vulnerable we are to attack by people who care nothing for the freedoms we have, then you'd begin to understand our post 9/11 stance.

Now many conservatives have been advocating that the government continues to invade our privacies and infringe on private life and well being. This is obviously true, but for what reason?

My personal thoughts about the whole thing is the US is sick and tired of the backstabbing by people around the world. On one hand we are trying to help them out by food, education, money, technology, etc etc etc. Then what do they do with it? They turn around with their children years later with the exact resources we've helped them with and they try to kill us and rob us of our safety.

How would you react to the situation? If you lose trust in someone, how do you rectify the situation while at the same time protecting yourself? Honestly, the people in this country need to understand that the US is much safer now than it has ever been in its entire history. Not because of anything one person has done, but a unified effort between many, many people who are disgusted at the way the world responds to our help and kindness.


----------



## Wally (Aug 31, 2003)

One important thing to remember is that the two women are not U.S. Citizens, and as aliens they have far fewer rights than citizens do.


----------



## WarEagleNR88 (Jan 24, 2005)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Wally:
> One important thing to remember is that the two women are not U.S. Citizens, and as aliens they have far fewer rights than citizens do.


Yeah here's a webpage for them.

US Immigration and Naturalization Service - The Easiest and Fastest Way to gain US Citizenship


----------



## imported_locus (Feb 2, 2003)

Robert brings up a valid point that unless you know the facts, you cannot make an educated judgement.

If you are concerned about the Patriot Act, these articles may be of some interest:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/04.02A.JVB.Patriot.htm

It is my opinion that we should constantly question the motives of our leaders and at all times hold them accountable for their actions.

Although I am not American, the Prime Minister of Australia is an outspoken supporter of George W. Bush. Such as it is, I feel that the actions of the U.S. government have some relevance in this part of the world too.


----------



## Robert Hudson (Feb 5, 2004)

I want to say I respect everyones view point, and I really appreciate that people have kept this conversation under control and friendly, as this topic has the very real potential to get emotional and out of control. During the short time after 9/11 I was really shocked at all the protest to the war. It never even occured to me that anyone in their right mind could protest what we were doing after what happened. I will never forget about a month after it happened a phone call I got from a customer placing an order and he suddenly started crying. He told me he lost his brother in the towers. It is hard for me to describe that moment so anyone can really understand. It had a very profound impact on me, thats all I can say. He wasn't looking for sympathy or comfort. He didn't even want to talk about it, and was embarrased that he broke down. It moved me in a strange way that is hard to put into words.

But since then I have come to understand people have very different views on this ongoing struggle, and I guess that is only natural regardless of the circumstances. History will be the judge on what was right, depending on who is writing it.

With all due respect Locus, that link you provided only tells one slanted side of the story. It is the view point of someone who has already made up their mind. I would be more interested in reading what is exactly in the Patriot act so I can come to my own conclusion. It must be on the net somewhere.


----------



## Wally (Aug 31, 2003)

Robert,

Here is a very good link written by a lawyer, that is a summary of the act. I like it in that it is just a summary and does not take sides.

http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RS21203.pdf


----------



## Robert Hudson (Feb 5, 2004)

Wally, that is excellent. Absolutely great. That article does nothing but explain what the Patriot act consists of without the political bias.

Everyone who is interested in this subject should read this document and if you believe all the hype against the Patriot act, then please read this and point out what paragraph you find objectionable and why. A good intelligent debate or discussion.

This is what a true independent thinker desires. I consider myself an independent. I am not a registered republican or democrat, although I lean more to the conservative side on certain issues, but I dislike any idealog that can not look at an issue ojectively to form an opinion.

You won't find this document on moveon.org or any other radical left WEB site, or even on the right.

Roger, if you read this document you really got to wonder what the reasoning was for those women to be arrested, or brought in for questioning or whatever it was that happened. Did they have their phones taped? Were they laundering money? Who knows.


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Robert H:
> Wally, that is excellent. Absolutely great. That article does nothing but explain what the Patriot act consists of without the political bias.


"They" say that a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. The linked article is so short on detail that most of the items that get people upset are lost in generalizations or simply omitted.

http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/usapatriot/RL31377.pdf

Is a more comprehensive (i.e.78 page) summary by the same author working for the same organization. It goes into more detail and includes historical discussions and some pros and cons.



> quote:
> 
> Everyone who is interested in this subject should read this document and if you believe all the hype against the Patriot act, then please read this and point out what paragraph you find objectionable and why. A good intelligent debate or discussion.


Even in the shortened article that Wally posted I see a lot of problems, mostly hidden in the haze of generalization. People have complained about a number of features of the Patriot Act, and as far as I have read those features *are* in the act. As far as the current issue is concerned, the problems I see are:

1) Government agents are permitted to arrest and detain individuals "suspected" of terrorist activities and to hold them indefinitely, without charge, and without an attorney. According to some source, simply participating in this thread could qualify me as a suspect.

2) Federal agents are permitted to conduct full investigations of American citizens and permanent legal residents simply because they have participated in activities protected by the First Amendment, such as writing a letter to the editor or attending a peaceful rally. In this case I think the Patriot Act may just be codifying something that the government has done for a long time -- as when the FBI was keeping files on peace demonstrators in the 1960s.

3) Terrorism suspects may be tried in secret military tribunals where defendants have no right to a public trial, no right to trial by jury, no right to confront the evidence, and no right to appeal to an independent court. In short, the Constitution does not apply. Apparently neither does the concept of an "inalienable right" -- a concept that formed the anchorbolt of American freedom.

4) The CIA is granted authority to spy on American citizens, a power that has previously been denied to this international espionage organization.

For what it's worth, I did paraphrase these items from an anti-Patriot Act group. I removed a little of their emphasis and rhetoric and added a little of my own.



> quote:
> 
> This is what a true independent thinker desires. I consider myself an independent. I am not a registered republican or democrat, although I lean more to the conservative side on certain issues, but I dislike any idealog that can not look at an issue ojectively to form an opinion.


Ideology is what it is about, Robert. The question is (and it is an ideological question) are the conditions of the Patriot Act an appropriate or necessary response to a threat of terrorism?

My sense it that they are not; I value my freedoms. Beyond that, the Patriot Act allows activities by law enforcement agencies in this country that have long been held as unacceptable encroachments on individual privacy and freedom. That attitude changed after 9/11 and I think that change was a terrified response, not a reasoned one.

Benjamin Franklin has been attributed with the statement (which I am probably paraphrasing) "Those who are willing to sacrifice their freedom for security deserve neither." That is precisely how I feel about it. The freedoms that we supposedly hold so dear have always come with a price. In the past that price has meant risk and sacrifice. We have now become too cowardly to pay that price.



> quote:
> 
> You won't find this document on moveon.org or any other radical left WEB site, or even on the right.


The more detailed document that I linked to is from the website of a privacy watchdog site. I'm not sure if you would call that radical left or not. Personally I am and always have been a political moderate and voted for candidates from both parties. The political climate in this country has now shifted so far to the right that it makes me look solidly left-wing. By today's standards I think Dwight Eisenhower would be a liberal-leaning anti-business pinko.



> quote:
> 
> Roger, if you read this document you really got to wonder what the reasoning was for those women to be arrested, or brought in for questioning or whatever it was that happened. Did they have their phones taped? Were they laundering money? Who knows.


Getting back to the issue at hand, their family has been told that the women were arrested because their visas were out of date. They are still being detained and may be released by the end of the week.

To put this in context, this is a border state with a very large population of foreign (mostly Mexican) residents. They are an important part of our economy. Some are legal, many are not. In the course of walking from their car and into the business where the INS agents made the arrest they may have passed two or three foreigners illegally resident in this country. They aren't hard to find. They're enrolled in our schools, they work in our stores and the build our homes. Clearly, these Muslim women were targeted.

Employees at the restaurants say that someone (a mysterious third party) issued a complaint against the two women who owned the restaraunt, and that was the actual reason for the arrest. The INS does not need to say what the complaint was about or who issued it. It may have come from a business competitor who wanted to get rid of the sisters. Employees of the company believe that it might have come from the women's brothers who want to take over the business.

Regardless of what the real reason was or what the stated reason was there is no reason I know of why these women -- established members of the community, business owners, home owners and students with a large family in the area -- should be considered flight risks. Their continued detention is an abuse. In all likelihood the original complaint that probably prompted their arrest was also an abuse, but a legal abuse that is not only allowed by the Patriot Act, but encouraged by it.

Roger Miller


----------



## jacob benedict (Jan 30, 2005)

I'm new here, just been poking around and soaking up info. Hi everyone and thanks for the great content here...but onto the Patriot Act, I just can't resist.

The thing that saddens me the most about Robert's story, and the broader issue, is it really is proof positive that our weaknesses have been found and exploited. We have given into our own impulses to over react to tragedy in spite of the lessons of history.

We have forgotten the idiocy of Japanese internment and the horrors inflicted by both sides in Vietnam and World War I. Also, the inherent racism in the way the law is applied has virtually nullified the progress made when racial profiling was outlawed. 

The way the act itself was put through Congress was knee jerk and manipulative at very best. As you all know, from Mr. Moore and about 20 different sources from both parties, the act was debated, re written in the middle of the night and then voted on in the morning. The majority of congressmen and women didn't even read it. In essence, with the exception of Sen. Byrd, the entire congress just scrambled to do something, anything, to make it appear the situation was under control without weighing the implications of it. (I would also say that it handed the law enforcement agencies rights they had been begging for for years- got to support the lobby groups). 

Congress has fallen on it's face, tripping over a steaming pile of historical hindsight. Its ability to regulate itself, act in accordance with its Constitutional obligations, and maintain the spirit of our law broke at that point.

While yes, the rights of these women are significantly less than our own, no government has the right to indefinite detention. Fundementally, it is that negligence towards human rights that justified our presence in Iraq. To justify it legally here in the US, we are quite literally duplicitous everytime the notion of fostering freedom and liberty elsewhere is mentioned.

I really hope that one day we can get this type of thing right as a country and begin to combat our enemies more intelligently.

On a side note-

I myself have even fallen prey to the effects of the Patriot act, financially anyway. I deposited a large check into my bank account about a year ago. Because of regulations supplied by the Patriot Act, my entire account, including my previously available balance was frozen for a week and half. The CS reps at my local brach and at headquarters were legally bound not to tell me why it had been frozen while the funding was investigated. 3 small checks bounced, and I was forced to pay for everything else with plastic. The Act cost me money in CC interest and at leat 10 hours of phone calls. Of course if I were running guns, drugs, or pipe bombs I would have been really angry. It was still disheartening and frustrating to be denied access to my own money. 

I know several people this has happened to as well, all beware.


----------



## Ted Bell (Feb 7, 2005)

Roger,

I'm troubled that you feel like you "live in Nazi Germany". "Troubled" is putting it lightly.


----------



## Roger Miller (Jun 19, 2004)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Ted Bell:
> I'm troubled that you feel like you "live in Nazi Germany". "Troubled" is putting it lightly.


I overstate slightly. The weather here is much sunnier, warmer and drier than it is in Germany.

But on the legal/political front I don't see much difference.

We have a ground swell of nationalism that is being fed by the government and is in turn being used by the government to shield itself from criticism despite the fact that its policies are harming American citizens, killing innocent foreigners and benefitting noone but a few major corporations and their stock holders.

We have a government working so closely with industries and in the interest of industries that the relationship can easily be described as a marriage. See Mussolini's definition of Fascism.

We have federal police forces that are taking security out of private hands, taking over law enforcement duties on an increasingly local scale and a Federal espionage agency that is turning its attention to domestic targets. Just the name "Department of Homeland Security" scares me.

We have arrests without warrants, we have confinement without bail and without trial, we have trials without civilian rights. We have agents from the INS and the DEA riding rough shod over rights we once thought were inalienable. They're only missing the jack boots. Oh, and we don't call them the Gestapo or the SS. Our ire isn't aimed at Jews, gypsies and communists, its aimed at foreigners and Muslims and "terrorists."

We are fighting wars in countries that pose no threat and the president's speeches come with the sound of ever more sabre rattling. But the countries are Iraq and Syria and Iran, not Poland and France and Hungary.

This isn't the USA that I learned about in school, the one I pledged my allegiance to daily or the one that I grew up loving. This is a nation of people who have become so afraid of domestic crime and international terror that we signed away our own freedoms in exchange for a false sense of security.

If all that concerns you, then discuss it with your US Senators and Representatives. It can be changed.

Roger Miller


----------



## TWood (Dec 9, 2004)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Roger Miller:
> 
> We have a government working so closely with industries and in the interest of industries that the relationship can easily be described as a marriage. See Mussolini's definition of Fascism.


When I complained about the new policy requiring all students to wear ID badges around their neck at our middle school, the cadre of parents and teachers that implemented this said "But these badges are just like the ones at local businesses, so it prepares the children for their life ahead."

Great, now they are conditioning my kids for a lifetime of servitude.

TW


----------



## Wally (Aug 31, 2003)

> quote:
> 
> Originally posted by Roger Miller:
> 
> ...


----------



## TWood (Dec 9, 2004)

Roger, you ain't gonna like this either:

http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleprint/2655/-1/316/


----------



## aquafroggies (Feb 16, 2005)

> I value my freedoms. Beyond that, the Patriot Act allows activities by law enforcement agencies in this country that have long been held as unacceptable encroachments on individual privacy and freedom. That attitude changed after 9/11 and I think that change was a terrified response, not a reasoned one.


Actually Rog, I don't think their attitude has changed at all. They feel the same way they felt when these exact same laws were being used only to catch drug traffickers and corporate smuggling. Libertarians like myself along with EPIC, have been preaching about law enforcements privacy intrusion powers for the last 10 years, or so. I still get the same response from people today as I did before 9-11. "If you're not breaking the law then you have nothing to worry about."

Given that the Republicans opposition is the party that created these laws, the only hope we have at eliminating them, is the Republicans. The SAFE Act may come up on the Senate floor again this year when the Patriot Act is due to expire, and since it was written by two republicans (Sen. Craig R-Idaho and Sen. Murkowski R-Alaska) we may get some of the provisions like "sneak and peek" modified if not eliminated. 


> Benjamin Franklin has been attributed with the statement (which I am probably paraphrasing) "Those who are willing to sacrifice their freedom for security deserve neither." That is precisely how I feel about it.


Bet you let out a sigh of relief when Kerry lost the election. Not that Bush is better, but we could it could have been worse. 


> Personally I am and always have been a political moderate and voted for candidates from both parties. The political climate in this country has now shifted so far to the right that it makes me look solidly left-wing. By today's standards I think Dwight Eisenhower would be a liberal-leaning anti-business pinko.


LOL! I musta been asleep during the shift. Last time I checked taxes were still too high; restrictions and regulations on businesses were still too many; my uncle Mike and cousin Wanda, (the two black sheep in my family), were still abusing the welfare system, even though they've been reported 6 times over the last 10 years. And both parties were still voting to continue corporate welfare, foreign aid, the destructive government education that is dumbing down our children, farm subsidies, government health care, $2-trillion budgets, the insane War on Drugs, and violate the Bill of Rights in every conceivable way. What shift to the right??


----------



## aquafroggies (Feb 16, 2005)

> Originally posted by jacob benedict: ...The way the act itself was put through Congress was knee jerk and manipulative at very best. As you all know, from Mr. Moore and about 20 different sources from both parties, the act was debated, re written in the middle of the night and then voted on in the morning. The majority of congressmen and women didn't even read it.
> ... ... On a side note-
> 
> I myself have even fallen prey to the effects of the Patriot act, financially anyway. I deposited a large check into my bank account about a year ago. Because of regulations supplied by the Patriot Act, my entire account, including my previously available balance was frozen for a week and half. The CS reps at my local brach and at headquarters were legally bound not to tell me why it had been frozen while the funding was investigated. 3 small checks bounced, and I was forced to pay for everything else with plastic. The Act cost me money in CC interest and at leat 10 hours of phone calls. Of course if I were running guns, drugs, or pipe bombs I would have been really angry. It was still disheartening and frustrating to be denied access to my own money.
> ...


Dude don't fall for that BS. Everyone knew exactly what was in the Patriot Act when they passed it. Members of the Senate stood on the senate floor and threatened to hold up the entire package unless the very provisions that you have fallen prey to were included in the package. They had to have read it to know Title III, Sarbanes useless money-laundering provisions, were not in it.

Write Paul Sarbanes, Carl Levin, and John Kerry and tell them about your experience with their intrusive provisions and that you'd like them removed from the patriot act.


----------



## Eric686 (Dec 3, 2003)

Thanks aquafriggies, 
I wrote Carl Levin my senator which I voted for in many elections and told him that I was not happy with job that he was doing. I will be voting for somone else to fix the problems that he has created in his 25 years on the job. It time to retire Carl.


----------



## Margolis (Sep 22, 2004)

> Originally posted by Eric686:
> Thanks aquafriggies,
> I will be voting for somone else to fix the problems that he has created in his 25 years on the job.


you know that if you vote for his republican opponent things will only get much much worse


----------



## Eric686 (Dec 3, 2003)

Margolis,

I am not talking about the whole government only one guy that votes with his buddies and not for the people anymore. At this point I don't care if who takes his place is male or female, Rep or Dem, green party or Libertian. I don't want Carl back in office


----------



## imported_trilinearmipmap (Feb 11, 2003)

As a Canadian I am puzzled by something about the U.S. response to the terrorist threat.

Every month in the United States approximately 3000 people are killed by firearms. This has gone on for years and years. There was no new legislation put in place to infringe on people's "rights" to slaughter each other with handguns. There was no crisis, it did not make the evening news, the FBI did not sweep people up and send them to third world countries to be tortured. In short, 3000 deaths a month from firearms were ignored by the U.S. public and lawmakers.

However, when Arabs killed about 3000 people in New York, the response was much different. Civil rights have been suspended, people are arrested and tortured without right to legal counsel, a country has been bombed and invaded that had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks. 1500 U.S. servicemen are dead, tens of thousands of Iraqis are dead, and ordinary Americans have seen their civil rights taken away.

I believe in some increased government powers to detain and investigate terrorist suspects, but completely taking away people's basic rights to an attorney, trial, right to confront their accusers, habeas corpus, etc is excessive.

I think that by the Americans' brutal treatment of Arabs at home and abroad, your government is making the problem worse, not better.


----------



## Paul Higashikawa (Mar 18, 2004)

This might piss off some hardcore patriots, but I think in general it applies to us all. That is, harboring the character of hypocrisy. trilinearmipmap brought up an excellent point when he mentioned why we don't care so much about our own people killing each other in everyday life but as soon as some foreign powers set their feet on the US soil we became all roudy. That's hypocrisy in its truest and most raw form. We Americans harm and kill each other everyday through all forms of crimes(homicide, robbery, kidnapping, you name it, we got it; just like rest of the world) And yet we don't draft any significant legislative changes to soothe this ugly wound. We'd rather spend enormous amount of money and energy when someone/some people from abroad do something nasty to us. And this nastiness they did is by no means even close to the ugliness we Americans infringe upon one another. Or...maybe one Michael Jackson alone is bad enough to rock our American world I say from now on, forget them Iraquis and terrorists. It's time we take care of our own problems first; economic, societal, socio-economic, whatever ya got. Now, who's gonna elect me to be the next president? Oh wait, one alone from Texas is already enough(3 if you include LBJ and daddy HW Bush)







Patriotism? It's time we wake up and realize that in the end it's all about money, money, and..........more money! Money from what? Money to do what? I'm sure y'all don't need me to explain. Now, don't you all just miss the good'ol 99cent/gal gas?! I sure as hell do, but sure as hell know I won't see it happenin' Let's just grow some plants, y'all~


----------



## jacob benedict (Jan 30, 2005)

SurWrathful, you are so entirely right.

Ironically, there was an article in the NY times not long ago about how 50 people on the FBI's terrorist watch list were able to legally acquire firearms here inside our borders. Really makes you wonder...And to add to the comedy of it, the NRA is actually maintaining that their (the folks on the watchlist) right to bear arms should not be infringed upon. Funny, they can buy guys after the assualt weapons ban has passed, yet they can't get on a plane?

Like eddie izzard says...
"guns don't kill people, people kill people........well, i think the guns have something to do with it"


----------



## WarEagleNR88 (Jan 24, 2005)

3000 deaths from firearms in America a month? How many of those deaths are accidents? Not included in the statistic, most likely just a number pulled from a news article. Perhaps true, but just saying that 3000 Americans were killed by firearms does not even approach what happened on 9/11. Hard truth is that people are going to kill people, even without guns. Terrorism is an entirely different evil and hopefully you guys see the difference. Mass murder and destruction of the public buildings do not equal a monthly statistic of 3000 deaths by firearms.

And I've debated the quote from Ben Franklin with my friends concerning giving up a little bit of freedom for a little bit of security. While you can take the quote for its face value, I'm fairly certain that Ben Franklin in ~1780AD had no idea that ~220 yrs later there'd be a 9/11. He had no idea that there would be criminals who would come into this great country he helped to birth, freely buy knowledge under flight schools that were brought about by the free thinking, ingenuity, and inventiveness bred by his efforts in ~1780AD, board public transport airlines which were brought about by the capitalism of this country our forefathers had helped to create and then crash those very airliners into symbols of all they had helped to bring into existence.

And I'm curious about this part, but hypocrisy from whom? Criminals and killers have been hunted for a long long time long before the words terrorists and terrorism ever came into existence. People are smart. And when they want to try and play above the rules they are going to and its all law enforcement officials can do to capture them. Now that statement can open an entirely new topic, but the system is working and has been working since the beginning of mankind. While not perfect by a long shot, interestingly, I'd say it as good now as it has ever been at apprehending killers.

And all this freedom infringing talk comes down to this. How many of you all are going to wake up tomorrow or any other day when you want, wear the clothes you want to wear, eat what you want to eat and can afford, go to work via whatever mode of transportation you choose, work where and how you want or dont work at all, go where you want, do what you want, eat however many bigmacs you want, invest however way you want, go to whatever church or supermarket you want, have relations with any other adult you want, etc etc etc etc on and on. And most MOST importantly, say whatever you want about anybody you want--as long as it is not threatening and you mean it to be. Talk all you want about how our freedoms are being taken away, but the fact is that we are pretty damn free as a state. If you don't like it, please exercise your first amendment however you see fit. Just keep it civil and orderly.


----------



## imported_trilinearmipmap (Feb 11, 2003)

WarEagle,

I don't have data on how many of the 3000 firearms deaths a month were accidental, common sense would say probably around 1% or so, or a few dozen per month. Three thousand deaths per month from firearms between Sept/2001 and now adds up to roughly 126,000 people dead from firearms in the U.S. in the past 3-1/2 years. Agreed, this does not approach what happened in 9/11, it is a lot worse, but it just doesn't make the news because it is one person at a time.


----------



## WarEagleNR88 (Jan 24, 2005)

Yeah I understand and agree completely about the amount of deaths and that most of them are flat out homicides and violent crimes. But having the ability of possessing a firearm in the US is something we've prided ourselves with from the very beginning. It is just that people are not responsible with those firearms. Here's an excellent report that I've looked at before concerning the "Right to Keep and Bear Arms" that may help those of you who read that are not US citizens and even US citizens.
http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm

Granted the facts and the history of this very controversial topic, my personal thoughts are that within reason, every free person--just like it says--should be allowed to own whatever and however many firearms as they would like. Now this wouldn't include a tank or a piece of artillery, but arms including anything from knives to automatic weapons. This is our right as free people to protect our person, property and family from whoever wishes to take those things away.

But as you all know, the world is not so honest and that's what makes it a problem. People would take advantage of a truckload full of automatic weapons. They'd prefer to use those for personal gain instead of protection and personal defense. Just imagine if you turned on the news not to hear that citizen X was robbed, raped, killed, etc but that criminal Y who broke into citizen X's home was caught red handed trying to do the above, shot dead and dragged into the street. If everyone protected their person, property and family that way, in an ideal world crime would significantly drop off.

Instead what happens is gun control activists lobby for gun control laws that limit the protective arms bearing capabilities of responsible citizens. In some legal cases--and I'd have to do a little research, but perhaps someone can go into a little further detail--there has been instances where criminal Y breaks citizen X's home with the intent to rob, maim, rape or kill. Citizen X--under the capacity of the 2nd amendment--whips out his shotgun, blasts criminal Y with buckshot, and goes to prison for using too much protective lethal force if criminal Y is not armed with the proven intent to kill citizen X. And now it's oftentimes to the point where citizen X has no arms to bear for protection and criminal Y is loaded to the teeth with assault weapons.

Now while the 2nd amendment discussions are far from the topic of the Patriot Act, it's actually not that far from it. America was meant to protect herself and while I don't agree with all of the Patriot Act, I think that the underlying basis of it is to protect honest, free citizens from a danger that doesn't walk in a uniform, looks just like you and me, and can come from anywhere at anytime. The snoopiness and attentiveness that is required to discover the breeding grounds of terrorism is extremely controversial because it clearly violates amendments 1,4,5,6,8--but the way it is supposed to work is if you are not being honest. Then you deserve to be caught.

Additionally, we cannot forget that a system made by men will be perfect because it won't. We can only hope it is as effective as possible and to act long after much intense investigation. And Jacob Benedict, I'm sorry that you experienced your account being frozen and I'm sure it turned out to be purely an accident. To any others who were honest but mistaken for not being so, I'm sorry again. But I believe that for the ones who were wrongly apprehended, many more who were not honest were brought to justice. And the fact that actual terrorists--those who are proven dishonest--are treated more as though they have committed treason is a good thing in my opinion. Those who are actually dishonest have given up their rights. If they want to complain that they have none, perhaps they shouldn't have consciously partaken in terrorist activities.

To end this book of a reply, the Patriot Act while not perfect is meant to protect honest patriots of the United States. And I feel strongly that if you are citizen but not a patriot of the US, then perhaps the United States is not the place for you. In my honest opinion, you're just a pre-terrorist waiting for his/her chance to become a dishonest citizen.


----------



## Paul Higashikawa (Mar 18, 2004)

Sometimes I wonder, just what does being a patriot mean. Does it mean not talking sh*t about your government or country? Or does it mean you have be a WASP? Or does it mean your ancestors have to be from Europe? Western Europe? Eastern Europe? It's like asking what does believing in God means? Or what does it mean to be a true believer of God? What kind of God? Which God? Your God? My God........
Again, all the statements from most others I agree to some point. And yes, the world is NOT a perfect place. I also think nothing is black and white; good and evil. That's why we have this thing called the 'motive' in the justice system. Not all thieves or killers deserve to be executed. Right? Wrong? Hm...perhaps this will be another good debate?! I'm asking lots of questions, but perhaps sometimes the answers can ONLY be found in them. Cause and effect. What did they (people who are terrorists) do to us? What did we do to them(in the past)? What did we do to their countries(in the past)? Perhaps it is wise not to be so naive in thinking 'because they killed our men so we will kill theirs'. Why did those people did what they did to us, particularly 9/11? What have WE done to them in the past? After WW2? In the 60's? 70's? Oil? Money? Again, I'm asking more questions. Who were right? Who were wrong? How was America founded? What happened to the lost Indian nations? How come we only have so few tribes nowadays? Was America being a terrorist long ago too? To get more land? To get more slaves? Hm....I ask more questions still. Perhaps it's good to ask questions. Such is the true spirit of innovator, no? I leave the rest of this endless topic to you guys; just as with so many countless other topics which will never have 1 absolute answer. Things come and go. People too. Time is so short. I'm gonna go scape my tanks more. For me, being a patriot means it's time to gear up my scaping skillz so I can kick some butt in the international contests! I don't wanna see Japanese/Taiwanese scoring in the top 100's. I wanna see AMERICANS there! It's time to rally and get down and dirty, people!!!


----------



## jacob benedict (Jan 30, 2005)

I couldn't agree with the opening of your post more, SurWrathful. One of the largest parts of Patriotism, historically, is "speaking truth to power." The facts are that too many people are killed by guns, the government blunders nearly as often as it succeeds, too many Americans are without adequate health care, gas is too expensive, average pay is too low,the unemployment rates are too high and the crime rate is as well. How do we go about fixing these things perfectly? Nobody truly knows how to do it, but attempting to choke off opposition viewpoints or silence the guy who is willing to acknowledge the elephant in the room certainly isn't the way to fix anything. It isn't honest debate open debate without it. In fact, it isn't debate at all.

I do appreciate the things we have are wonderful and there are many things we all should be greatful for as Americans. I, as well as many others, disagree that the idea of building a "more perfect union" was completed when the ink dried on the constituion. Issues need to be voiced, acknowledged and addressed from all points of view. 

That said, WarEagle, I agree with you on many points, but you lost me at the 'leave the country' stuff. I think if you search really long and hard, you'll find that any country where the majority exports all minority opinion and dissent is not a country you want to live in. In fact, the mere suggestion of it is on face contrary to the spirit of this nation. 



(Sorry I have to call you out on this, but I'm so utterly sick of those nationalistic sentiments. As a hard working, tax paying, country loving, blue blooded American, I feel I'm entitled to just as much of a share of this country as anyone, even if I want to speak and act in a matter that might not classify me under what is ultimately a completely subjective term- patriot.)


----------

