Choosing between Big Brother and the Bill of Rights. Where do you stand?

2015-05-30T04:41:07-04:00

Around 1:30 a.m. Saturday, there was a seismic shift in the U.S. Congress. As the Senate deadlocked over what to do about several expiring provisions of the Patriot Act, it became clear that political momentum had moved away from surveillance and secrecy toward freedom and privacy.

In a rare and theatrical overnight session, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell tried and failed to reauthorize or even briefly extend the Patriot Act's surveillance powers before senators left Washington for their weeklong holiday break. At every turn, he was blocked by a bipartisan group of civil libertarians and surveillance skeptics led by presidential hopeful Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, and Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat from Oregon. Their main target was Section 215, which the government argues allows the National Security Agency to collect, store and analyze Americans' phone records and other intimate information in bulk.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0529-abdo-martin-nsa-20150529-story.html

Choosing between Big Brother and the Bill of Rights

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 30 at 2015 6:02 AM

2015-05-30T06:02:45-04:00

Always the bill of rights. Living in a free society comes with risks.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made May 30 at 2015 8:00 AM

2015-05-30T08:00:30-04:00

Any chance we can get to rein the Power we have vested in the government back in, we should.

It is far better for the government to be impotent, as us to have our Rights preserved than the other way around.

Response by SPC Carl K. made May 30 at 2015 9:02 AM

2015-05-30T09:02:56-04:00

I would far rather have Liberty over Security. I think the government is getting far too intrusive into people's lives without the protection of the Fourth Amendment.

Response by PO3 David Fries made May 30 at 2015 9:09 AM

2015-05-30T09:09:15-04:00

Bill of rights. Period

Response by SGT John Wesley made May 30 at 2015 9:11 AM

2015-05-30T09:11:06-04:00

I think that we allowed fear to dictate what we would accept as "Security" and as most bureaucrats do, they expanded their programs because knowledge is power and power is control.

It's ridiculous to record every conversation/text , it felt like the KGB had run these programs.

Time to move on.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made May 30 at 2015 9:17 AM

2015-05-30T09:17:54-04:00

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
- Benjamin Franklin

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 30 at 2015 9:22 AM

2015-05-30T09:22:31-04:00

I didn't know there was an article in the Bill of rights limiting the government from monitoring communications. ??? No one wants the government spying on us, but has any American been hurt or had their rights trampled on - or been their lives affected - because the NSA is tracking phone numbers? Not even organized criminals, politicians, or targets of FBI probes have been bothered by this - because courts require warrants. So, who has really been bothered by the NSA doing its job in a time increasingly consumed by evolving communications???

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made May 30 at 2015 9:23 AM

2015-05-30T09:23:25-04:00

I say the Bill of Rights. While I also recognize the need for security and surveillance of our enemies I don't think that can be done to all of us in the name of security. They need to refine the act to focus on the actual threat and not toss out a blanket that allows them to collect everything, just in case. This is the sort of sweeping government power the founders were concerned about even though the technology was not envisioned.

Can you imagine the founders approving the US Government going into peoples homes and taking information (papers and effects) to see if you were doing anything wrong? I don't think so. Get a warrant backed up with probable cause, signed by a judge. If there is a serious national security element their is a process for that too.

Response by SPC Elijah J. Henry, MBA made May 30 at 2015 11:03 AM

2015-05-30T11:03:44-04:00

Too easy, especially when you call it what it is. We have a burgeoning Surveillance State/Police State, and most Americans don't even realize it. I choose Freedom.

Response by Sgt Luigi Croce made May 30 at 2015 1:07 PM

2015-05-30T13:07:02-04:00

Bill of rights all the way

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made May 30 at 2015 6:33 PM

2015-05-30T18:33:56-04:00

I don't mind giving up a little freedom for safety, I guess this is a topic that I'm not overly concerned about. The way the system was pre 9/11 worked mostly, and I feel the same after 9/11 the new system worked mostly... so either way with the whole surveillance issue.

Response by CH (MAJ) William Beaver made May 30 at 2015 7:08 PM

2015-05-30T19:08:17-04:00

I choos Bill

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made May 30 at 2015 8:59 PM

2015-05-30T20:59:11-04:00

21 years I worked for "Big Daddy" Largest Chunk was in the Reagan Years. I remember signing a document every year "Thou Shalt not Spy on thy Fellow Americans" I suspect that rule, law and document are still in effect. The only thing that I suspect has changed that in my time, when in doubt we assumed you were "Our Fellow Americans" I suspect the reverse is the case now. Proceed until you know for a fact that is "American".

Response by CPT Jack Durish made May 30 at 2015 9:00 PM

2015-05-30T21:00:41-04:00

Big Brother or the Bill of Rights? Is that the choice? Sadly, I think that the debate has gone off the tracks whenever someone argues that it is a choice of liberty vs safety. To be honest, I believe that safety, true safety, lies only in liberty. When we surrender liberty for some hollow promise of safety, we end up with neither.

Sadly President Bush missed an opportunity following the attacks of 9/11. Basically, he told Americans to sit back and allow the government to secure the nation. I would have much preferred it had he sounded the call to all Americans to take up the cause of defending ourselves. He could have reinvigorated Civil Defense providing organization and training for citizens to respond to all disasters, natural and man made. How many times must we be treated to images of citizens sitting on their roofs or cowering in shelters waiting for the government to come save them?

Think about it. Many major cities suffered cataclysmic disasters in the past: San Francisco, Chicago, Seattle, Galveston, New York, etc. In every case the citizens rebuilt their homes with little help from the federal government.

Think about it. If terrorists come marching down main street, our government has already failed. Who would think it reasonable to sit around waiting for them to come save us?

Think about it. What would be the purpose of martial law in response to a terrorist attack? Again, such attacks are prima facie evidence that government has failed.

I would prefer that President Bush had lent government resources to organize, train, and equip local militia so that citizens could better defend themselves. No individual, no matter how well armed, can withstand an organized assault on their own.

Well, Bush is no longer President. He had his chance and he employed a different strategy. Now we have an Administration hell bent on denying us the opportunity to prepare and defend ourselves even if we are of a mind to.

President Obama complains that he was left a mess by his predecessor. Imagine the mess his successor will find when they take office. It makes one wonder why so many are clamoring for the job...

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Jul 30 at 2015 10:53 AM

2015-07-30T10:53:58-04:00

We pay a cost for our freedom...and sadly, or gratefully?, many here on RP will pay the lion's share of that cost.

With this being said, their is a difference between collecting information on our citizens and anyone else in the World. I think a big part of the population do not realize that their are people trying to protect the privacy 'rights' of people plotting the destruction of our Nation?

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 30 at 2015 11:29 AM

2015-07-30T11:29:18-04:00

For any of the Bill of Rights to be modified, the change needs to come through the Constitutional amendment process. Anything else goes against the US Constitution which all politicians take an oath to uphold and defend. The question that needs to be asked is what happened to the Rule of Law?

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Jul 30 at 2015 1:40 PM

2015-07-30T13:40:22-04:00

Bill of Rights.

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 2 at 2015 11:05 AM

2015-08-02T11:05:28-04:00

I say gut it and put it back to the bill of rights and then re-work the entire fraudulent and manipulated system of law that has sprouted since the early 20th century. My oath was to support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies foreign and domestic. It wasn't a punch line. It doesn't matter if it's a terrorist or POTUS because we are bound to this oath which is beyond them. Patriot act, and executive orders are atrocities that while they can help, they ultimately undermine the constitution.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Aug 8 at 2015 3:57 AM

2015-08-08T03:57:03-04:00

Bill of Rights.
And I personally would like to talk to anyone who is for big brother.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 8 at 2015 4:11 AM

2015-08-08T04:11:35-04:00

I believe we traded some liberty for security through the USA PATRIOT Act, and I wasn't happy about it then, and I'm still not happy with it now. But it wasn't with Section 215 and the NSA collecting phone numbers for use in chaining future calls. It was the FBI being able to check in libraries with no warrants for what books you were reading, to snnop on your ISPs about your Internet use, and the other kinds of blatant 4th Amendment rights that were violated by the Act.

He said it many ways, but I'm with Ben Franklin who said, "Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither." As much as I trust the people we have empowered, I still do not want to cede that power to them, or to anyone. It is my power and I prefer to keep it for my own use in the cause of Liberty!

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Oct 16 at 2015 3:22 PM

2015-10-16T15:22:17-04:00

I stand with the Bill of Rights and the Constitution

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 12:34 AM

2016-03-22T00:34:48-04:00

The Lincoln administration wrestled with this question years ago. Many wrestle with this every day on the job, in the courtrooms and across the globe. There are those that would see our great land torn from within again. But I say nay! We know already who the enemy[ies] of the Constitution are...They commit treason anytime they think and currently are not held accountable. They know the law is a schoolmaster and so have thrown out the law by declarations of their failed impeachments and have heaped up lawyers and judges who pardon their treaties, treason, nay sayings and wreck-less failures even failing to read their own laws written by the hands of them they have staffed, entrusted with their life, and say, "Nay for we have done no whoring to you or this piece of paper I constantly wipe my butt with!" In your time Lord, we are ready pour out your spirit and without bloodshed let us secure freedom and liberty!

Response by MSgt Mark Bucher made Jul 16 at 2016 2:13 AM

2016-07-16T02:13:12-04:00

Bill of Rights. A no-brainer