The Patriot Act Splits GOP Presidential Contenders... Where do you stand?

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 May 2015 18:16:58 -0400

http://www.stripes.com/news/us/patriot-act-renewal-splits-gop-presidential-hopefuls-1.345182

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2015 6:20 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 May 2015 18:20:33 -0400

I would like to see The Patriot Act dissected and each program and policy reviewed. Only those parts that have proven valuable should be considered for renewal. Of those that make the short list, only those that are the least invasive into the lives of private citizens should be renewed.

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made May 8 at 2015 6:23 PM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Fri, 08 May 2015 18:23:38 -0400

The truth is that if this wasn't tripping them up, something else would. As much as I hate to say it, Hillary Clinton will win this election simply because the Republicans won't be able to field a viable candidate that is acceptable to all of the party. Frankly, I think that is exactly what the Clinton camp is counting on.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made May 8 at 2015 7:24 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Fri, 08 May 2015 19:24:35 -0400

Here's what it really boils down to.

Ignore the benefits. Screw the benefits. They don't matter. They absolutely do not matter.

How much does the Patriot Act infringe on essential liberties? Does it give the US Government more Power than it should have? Would the Framers of our Constitution have allowed any of the provisions had it presented to them?

That's what I want to know?

Now... the big one that comes into play is the "gag orders" and the inability to challenge or seek aid from legal representation. Additionally the "sneak & peak" warrants...

Let's be real here. There may be "legal" but they are in no way "right" or "correct." They can only be called Slimy, and a perversion of Justice. That's abuse of Government Power. Maybe for a Noble end.. but I don't want my government doing noble things covered in muck.

Response by SGT Michael Touchet made May 8 at 2015 8:49 PM

SGT Michael Touchet — Fri, 08 May 2015 20:49:41 -0400

I almost had to down vote you Gunny, but it sadly true. We need a leader that will unite the GOP!

Response by MAJ Bryan Zeski made May 9 at 2015 2:30 AM

MAJ Bryan Zeski — Sat, 09 May 2015 02:30:50 -0400

The Patriot Act is the greatest affront to the Constitution in the modern age.

Response by PO1 John Miller made May 9 at 2015 3:12 AM

PO1 John Miller — Sat, 09 May 2015 03:12:41 -0400

At the time the Patriot Act was enacted I considered myself a Republican. With that said, I didn't agree with it then and like many others considered it (and I still do) a gross violation of our Fourth Amendment rights.

When Obama was running, I seem to remember him saying something about abolishing the Patriot Act. As we all know that didn't happen.

In short, just how in the blue hell are my phone records a matter of national security? Abolish the Patriot Act NOW.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
~Benjamin Franklin

Response by GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad made May 9 at 2015 5:18 AM

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Sat, 09 May 2015 05:18:51 -0400

Interesting article related to the topic at hand ...

http://www.engadget.com/2015/05/06/the-fight-to-control-the-patriot-act/

Racing to June 1: The fight to control the Patriot Act

If Defcon is the cultural Comic-Con of security conferences, then RSA is more like the business-focused Game Developers Conference (GDC), though largely packed...

Response by MAJ Keira Brennan made May 21 at 2015 2:35 PM

MAJ Keira Brennan — Thu, 21 May 2015 14:35:36 -0400

I stand with Martin OMally

Response by PO2 Terry Meadows made May 21 at 2015 11:39 PM

PO2 Terry Meadows — Thu, 21 May 2015 23:39:26 -0400

If you give up your freedom for security you deserve neither, Ben Franklin.

Response by PO2 Terry Meadows made May 24 at 2015 9:59 AM

PO2 Terry Meadows — Sun, 24 May 2015 09:59:19 -0400

The patriot act needs to be done away with completely. As a disabled vet I see no reason for it. That is, unless you want your security ver your freedom. I will never give up my freedom of privacy over security. Look up what Benjamin Franklin said about it. We as veterans know about the UCMJ over freedom. We each gave our permission. Then we stood in the breach so others didn't have to. Never, vets, surrender your freedoms for anything. You will only live to regret it later.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made May 24 at 2015 10:26 AM

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Sun, 24 May 2015 10:26:41 -0400

"Murders are planned in privacy. Sabotage, revolutions, they all begin in privacy. I’d put my own family, anyone, in the spotlight, naked, to protect this country.”
- George Peppard, Groundstar Conspiracy

Response by Capt Richard I P. made May 24 at 2015 10:33 AM

Capt Richard I P. — Sun, 24 May 2015 10:33:36 -0400

I stand for liberty and the constitution in accordance with my oath.

Response by 1LT William Clardy made May 24 at 2015 11:26 AM

1LT William Clardy — Sun, 24 May 2015 11:26:57 -0400

The only reason I chose the "reviewed line by line" option was because there might be something in there that actually is both useful and compliant with the Constitution.

But for the most part, the Patriot Act has not ventured from from its roots as a long-standing wish list of surveillance powers opportunistically thrown together as a "this will make a difference" proposal totally lacking in any objective way to measure its effectiveness (or lack thereof).

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 7:17 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 19:17:57 -0400

I say review it, but don't eliminate it. The first time we can't hear a terrorist planning an attack because of that terrorist's "right to privacy" (as a presumed U.S. person), we'll be very sorry we don't have that part of the Patriot Act in force.

I'm more than willing to give up some privacy rights for the greater good. If we tie the hands of our intelligence and law enforcement agencies, we give the terrorists a leg up, and I am 100% against that.

Response by PO1 Nathan Watts made Apr 4 at 2016 3:25 PM

PO1 Nathan Watts — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 15:25:58 -0400

This is one aspect where I am a complete and utter hypocrite - and not only do I not apologize for it, I embrace it. I'll break my answer down so people understand my train of thought.

Let's say I live in an apartment building of 200 people.

In apartment 2A, Freddy gets his Freaky Friday on - perv that he is.

In apartment 10D, Samantha is filling jugs full of fertilizer - getting it ready for a big "bang."

You know what?

Screw Freddy, screw his privacy, and screw yours too. I don't give a shit about it. My right to *staying alive* supersedes Freddies little whiney feelings that Big Brother knows he likes to get it on with two chickens and his neighbors cat. I don't care.

There is a common quote everyone loves to lean on like a crutch, from Benjamin Franklin - it goes "Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither." (There are different versions of this quote floating around - whose to say how it was worded verbose - but they all amount to the same meaning and they are all contributed to Ol' Ben.)

That always makes me laugh - and I respond with my own, "Watts Original,"

"Those who constantly look behind them in history to rely on the *colloquialisms* of people now dead for over 200 years as a compass for guiding their actions in current society are doomed to always trip over what is front of them and ignorantly wonder why they keep getting a bloody nose."

In our Military Service, we all took urinalysis - all of us. It was a matter of policy - not based on an active investigation to find out who should take one - it was simply a blanket policy and that was that.

Know who was worried about it? It wasn't the "Freddies" - although his poor little feelings might have been uncomfortable - it was the Samanthas.