The Patriot Act was enacted in direct response to the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, as well as the 2001 anthrax attacks, with the stated goal of dramatically strengthening national security. Opponents of the law have criticized its provision for indefinite detention of immigrants; permission to law enforcement to search a home or business without the owner’s or the occupant’s consent or knowledge under certain circumstances; the expanded use of National Security Letters, which allows the Federal Bureau…
Read more@ISIDEWITH12yrs12Y
No, and pass strict laws prohibiting government surveillance without probable cause and a warrant
@9FRHMLC8mos8MO
If someone is screaming in a home or in dire need of help, I believe they have reasonable cause to go inside no matter what, but i think the laws on the patriot act are good
@9FRHCCC8mos8MO
Goes against the constitution, if one part of the constitution falls, the rest of it will follow and our country will fall and become nothing
@Sharar 6mos6MO
Warrantless Surveillance and Data Collection:
Under Section 215 of the Patriot Act, also known as the "business records" or "library records" provision, the government can collect a wide range of records, including library records, medical records, and financial records, without requiring a warrant based on probable cause.
This provision has raised concerns that it allows the government to engage in mass data collection, potentially impacting the privacy of innocent individuals.
Use of National Security Letters (NSLs):
The Patriot Act expanded the use of National Security… Read more
@ISIDEWITH12yrs12Y
No
@9HFBYDK 6mos6MO
If the government passed this people that were innocnet would be killed. They could think that some random person is a terrorist or a killer, when in reality you can't fully tell.
@9FV23H68mos8MO
If someone has a spouse and children, imagine the nightmare you would see when the FBI is knocking on the door saying they need to search your house. When completely innocent, they could have found a crumb, paper work, or guns and they try and make it a case. "Its drugs, or this classified information that no citizen should have eyes one, or this is "unlicensed"." Tell me how that's fair to the families who are innocent.
@99NCX8NRepublican1yr1Y
It infringes on our privacy and gives the government too much power over people.
@ISIDEWITH12yrs12Y
Yes
@PantiusIndependent 8mos8MO
The patriot act is a blatant abuse of power and against the 1st and 4th Amendments and was a scapegoat to get the government to control people's lives
@9FVJ9XYRepublican 8mos8MO
The Government’s number one priority is to protect our citizens. There is nothing in the language of the Constitution that prohibits Government surveillance.
@PantiusIndependent 8mos8MO
The fourth protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, the patriot act actively allows the government to wiretap or secretly conduct a physical search of a citizen without a warrant.
@GiddyInd3p3ndentPatriot8mos8MO
While it's true that the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, it's important to remember that the Patriot Act was established in a post-9/11 world, when the threat level was incredibly high. The Act doesn't permit random and unwarranted invasions of privacy. Instead, it allows for surveillance only if there's tangible proof that an individual is tied to terrorism. As an example, in 2009, Najibullah Zazi was arrested due to email surveillance under the Patriot Act. He was planning to bomb the New York subway, which could have resulted in num… Read more
@Sharar 6mos6MO
While the Patriot Act was implemented with the intention of enhancing national security and preventing terrorism, its provisions have the potential to infringe on the civil liberties and privacy rights of individuals. The act allows for the collection of vast amounts of data, including phone records, financial records, and internet communications, without requiring a warrant based on probable cause. This is a gross violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Furthermore, the secretive nature of some surveillance activities, such as those conduc… Read more
@9FV23H68mos8MO
Why should they have the right to come into your house, look through your things, take valuables, and try and get you in trouble when you did nothing? Unless there is evidence they should have no rights to search your home. The evidence needs to be reliable, not sloppy. What they are doing can ruin lives, families, and relationships all for nothing. No kid should have to see they're home being searched because the FBI is bored. Irs childish and needs to be stopped.
@9HFBYDK 6mos6MO
It would be nice to be able to prevent terrorism from the world, but no one can just look at someone and tell that they're a terrorist.
@ISIDEWITH12yrs12Y
Yes, but limit the scope of the government’s powers
@ISIDEWITH7yrs7Y
I have a lot of concerns about how the Patriot Act infringes on US citizen rights and thus am generally skeptical of it.
@8F9BXYWConstitution4yrs4Y
No, thw gov' should have zero business in spying on you. its a violation of a basic human right to privacy, so yes there should be stricter laws on government for thid
@4TXVWDS4yrs4Y
No. I understand the idea, and I'm sure many terrorist acts have been prevented because of survelience. However, we cannot give up our individual freedoms in order to feel protected. You didn't see this scale of "American Infidel" in the past. We were a better country before. We were proud of our country (on the large scale) and there was such a thing as the American Dream. We have deterriorated as a country. There is no "American Dream" unless you county being materialistic, judgemental, and constantly offended. During World War II people gave up luxurie… Read more
@52YJQ554yrs4Y
The Constitution works just fine if it is used properly.
@8M7WLY44yrs4Y
Yes the sections regarding communication between agencies. No regarding the surveillance and searches.
@5BXFFJZ4yrs4Y
It has been the excuse to enforce the UN Global agenda. 9.11 was an inside job. Create the fear and terror, then work to destroy the country to the point they can call in UN "peacekeepers" who have no affiliation other than to the UN, and would work for their richest elite - not to help us.
@4QBFGKK4yrs4Y
No, many parts of it including section 215 completely undermine the constitutional rights of U.S citizens
@4S4KFX84yrs4Y
Well... Not really. They've gone too far with it. I do support placing cameras everywhere and monitoring what people do in public. Are 2 guys carrying satchel charges to the stands of the Boston Marathon? Gosh, maybe that's a problem. Did an unattended bag explode? Gosh, maybe we can see who put it there before it blew up... Is someone mugging your mother in front of the A&P? Gosh, maybe we could alert the cop on the next block...
@4S3TY7P4yrs4Y
With a warrant for any American citizen. Must have an individualized warrant. Mass survallence on Islamic citizens. Ban refugees for 2 years. Push a propaganda campaign for women's rights in the Middle East and stop lying about Islam for political gain or political correctness
@9HKX6M65mos5MO
No, abolish the Patriot Act and Dept. of Homeland Security and pass strict laws prohibiting government surveillance without probable cause and a warrant
@9H98WW76mos6MO
No, abolish the Patriot Act and Dept. of Homeland Security, and pass strict laws prohibiting government surveillance without probable cause and a warrant
@99MFTPG1yr1Y
Yes, and expand the scope of the government’s powers
@4ST4KNB4yrs4Y
I have a brown skin. Anytime I travel on a plane, I have to endure extra security procedures. I am not middle-eastern, I am an all-American racial mix. Think about that.
@4R2SYPD4yrs4Y
The Patriot Act should be subjected to a constitutional test as should be all legislation. It should have a sunset clause.
@4QC43PP4yrs4Y
Yes, but do away with detainment and deportation because it violates due process.
Yes, and increase the scope of the government’s powers
@4WGZZJKRepublican4yrs4Y
Yes, but with sunset provision requiring Congressional approval every 2 years.
@4QT6B3K4yrs4Y
Absolutely not this gives big government too much power to spy and pry into citizens private lives. There doesn't need to be a patriot act for the government to protect itself and its citizens. It's called have a pair of balls and let Old Glory fly.
@9GZDTYYIndependent6mos6MO
No, the government should not have free reign to conduct searches of these sorts of things without probably cause or a warrant for the activity.
@9GZ3BK86mos6MO
No, abolish the Patriot Act and Department of Homeland Security and pass strict laws prohibiting government surveillance without probable cause and a warrant
@9GYTGHDIndependence 6mos6MO
Yes, but limit the scope of government powers and pass strict laws prohibiting government surveillance without probable cause and a warrant.
@TruthHurts1016mos6MO
Abolish the PATRIOT Act now
@9B8BFNG1yr1Y
I don't really understand this but I think that any provisions of the act that allow invasion of a private residence without a search warrant is unconstitutional.
@8NNG93QLibertarian4yrs4Y
I support the idea that the government collects knowledge for security, but only with legal and necessary reasons.
@8Y92LTC2yrs2Y
I am unfamiliar with this topic.
@8XJ9Q7P3yrs3Y
Yes, but make more specific the list of activities that qualify for terrorism charges.
@8WNNV58Independent3yrs3Y
yes but only if the government morals are correct and not corrupt
@9MFZB7P1wk1W
Yes and no limit the government oversight and then create and independent oversight commission for the Patriot Act so no one’s civil liberties are violated
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...