Patriot Act

2. Some news reports have suggested that the Bush administration used the USA Patriot Act to look at the e-mails of American citizens without a warrant. What’s your position if this was indeed the case? Should citizens be willing to give up their privacy? Does it bother you to know that your online communications are very potentially semi-private instead of private?


The Patriot Act on so many levels is wrong an does not agree with the constitution. The night before it was to be voted on, over 60 pages were added to the already 400+ page document. Those pages, along with the other 400, did not originate in the Senate where they are supposed to, but from unknown sources in the executive branch. Ontop of that, the original sunset date for the patriot act was 2004, but once reinstated, a sunset date was eliminated meaning that there will never be a vote to shut it down. The powers granted to the President increased and can you imagine a President revoking his powers? 


That said, how naive do you have to be to think that a.)this didn't already happen, b.) that they would tell us, and c.) that it isn't necessary (to an extent.) 


Sure, everyone is entitled to their rights - that's what this country was founded on. But if you look closely at the Bill of Rights in the Constitution, our forefathers were clever enough to leave themselves a bit of wiggle room:


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


What is "unreasonable?" Is unreasonable what I think it is or is what those reading my emails thinks it is? 


So if we're going strictly by the book, its perfectly spelled out that Uncle Same may read my emails if they think its ok to. 


What do I think? Not sure yet. I don't want be that jackass that says "The government should never read my emails because their MINE! and this is 'Murica not Russia!" On the flip side I don't want to be that guy who thinks everyone is honest and that the world is made of rainbows and butterflies.


I can understand the need for both. National security is extremely important, so is respecting our "rights." At the moment, I'm not necessarily bothered by it - I don't have anything to hide. At the same time however, where does it stop? As more and more powers are granted to to the executive, and more and more laws are written to suppress the inhabitants, it starts to sound like a monarchy. That's pretty extreme though. Do I think its gone that far? Absolutely not, but who knows.


What I'd prefer to see is better education to people about this touchy topic. Very few people can even site the bill of rights, even fewer know what the Patriot Act does. If people were better informed, they would more likely be comfortable with the issue or more engaged in changing it. 


On a side note...Without picking red or blue, how stupid do you have to be to think that Obama would actually close Gitmo? That's not how it works. They are detained off shore so that they are out of the realm of US Constitution and granting them rights including a right to trial.  That's how you get votes in November. He even went as far as signing a bill that would close it down within his first 100 days. Did it close down? Nope. Both sides are happy - Blue is happy he tried, Red is happy its still there. Besides, if it was closed down, the prisoners - rightfully or wrongfully there - would just be moved to another base somewhere else off shore. The morality of it is a different conversation.