Abuse of Patriot Act?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Yes because shooting a plane with a laser pointer is the equivalent of accessorizing with dynamite.

 

If it blinds the pilot and brings the plane down is there really a difference?

[Texsox]

If it blinds the pilot and brings the plane down is there really a difference?

 

Pilots have said it is about the same as if someone flashed their brights at you in a car. Their worry, at least the two that I heard interviewed was that the laser was part of an aiming device and a missle was coming next. That is what pissed them off, and it would me also.

 

What I object to is the Patriot Act was to fight terrorism. This clearly wasn't an act of terrorism, just a Dad showing off to his daughter. F

[FlaSoxxJim]

Pilots have said it is about the same as if someone flashed their brights at you in a car. Their worry, at least the two that I heard interviewed was that the laser was part of an aiming device and a missle was coming next. That is what pissed them off, and it would me also.

 

What I object to is the Patriot Act was to fight terrorism. This clearly wasn't an act of terrorism, just a Dad showing off to his daughter. F

 

Well said.

[YASNY]

Pilots have said it is about the same as if someone flashed their brights at you in a car. Their worry, at least the two that I heard interviewed was that the laser was part of an aiming device and a missle was coming next. That is what pissed them off, and it would me also.

 

What I object to is the Patriot Act was to fight terrorism. This clearly wasn't an act of terrorism, just a Dad showing off to his daughter. F

 

 

That's the key. There are, I'm sure, other laws on the books they could use to prosecute this guy. Laws that do not preclude this US citizen's right to a fair and speedy trial, the right to have an attorney, so on and so forth. This Patriot Act was passed off as a tool needed to fight terrorism, but in reality it the beginning of the whittling away of the US Constitution.

[mreye]

Pilots have said it is about the same as if someone flashed their brights at you in a car. Their worry, at least the two that I heard interviewed was that the laser was part of an aiming device and a missle was coming next. That is what pissed them off, and it would me also.

 

What I object to is the Patriot Act was to fight terrorism. This clearly wasn't an act of terrorism, just a Dad showing off to his daughter. F

 

Agreed.

[Texsox]

IMHAOIO, next will be the ACLU petitioning an "Activist Judge™" to throw out the case. Of course the GOP Radio Nation will be up in arms that the liberal commies are trying to protect terrorists by weakening the Patriot Act. :headshake And the band plays on, and we are no safer today than 4 years ago, just more fearful and with less rights and freedoms.

 

What I would like to see is for our nation's best interest the DEMs and GOPs drop the partisan b.s. and private agendas.

[mreye]

What I would like to see is for our nation's best interest the DEMs and GOPs drop the partisan b.s. and private agendas.

 

 

While I like I good debate and think it's counterproductive to agree on absolutely everything, I couldn't agree more, Tex.

[Texsox]

 

While I like I good debate and think it's counterproductive to agree on absolutely everything, I couldn't agree more, Tex.

 

The built in balances have been, IMHO, our best tool for growing into and staying a Super Power. And I do apreciate that in some areas both parties have been willing to compromise. I would just like to see more.

 

I keep praying for a McCain - Lieberman ticket in 2008. I'd be going door to door for that one. There are probably a couple other GOP_DEM tickets that could be made and embraced. What would really make it interesting is if it was an independant ticket not a DEM inviting a GOP or vice versa

[Rex Kickass]

Do you know how difficult it is to blind someone with a laser beam from several thousand feet through a refracting windshield? The answer is, pretty damn difficult. Even if one of the pilots would be temporarily physically blinded, there is a second person on board who can take the controls. There are also other guides and controls which can easily be used without sight to stabilize a plane. In 2002, there were over 50 separate incidents in the Las Vegas area of errant lasers "blinding" pilots from casino light shows. Why weren't the special effects directors given the same penalty?

 

Pure and simple, this is a weak administration propping up a weak approach to a war on terror by strongly prosecuting someone with no connection to actual terror. It's the laser pointers we should be afraid of, not the frightening availability of shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles. Weak.

[Texsox]

Do you know how difficult it is to blind someone with a laser beam from several thousand feet through a refracting windshield? The answer is, pretty damn difficult.  Even if one of the pilots would be temporarily physically blinded, there is a second person on board who can take the controls. There are also other guides and controls which can easily be used without sight to stabilize a plane. In 2002, there were over 50 separate incidents in the Las Vegas area of errant lasers "blinding" pilots from casino light shows. Why weren't the special effects directors given the same penalty?

 

Pure and simple, this is a weak administration propping up a weak approach to a war on terror by strongly prosecuting someone with no connection to actual terror. It's the laser pointers we should be afraid of, not the frightening availability of shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles. Weak.

 

50?! I'm not going to go so far as to blame Bush and anything much higher than a regional FBI office. But we will see.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Pilots have said it is about the same as if someone flashed their brights at you in a car. Their worry, at least the two that I heard interviewed was that the laser was part of an aiming device and a missle was coming next. That is what pissed them off, and it would me also.

 

What I object to is the Patriot Act was to fight terrorism. This clearly wasn't an act of terrorism, just a Dad showing off to his daughter. F

 

 

Fair enough, but does that mean we should not use it in other cases where it can be applied? If we have a tool in the toolbox to deal with something we should use it.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Do you know how difficult it is to blind someone with a laser beam from several thousand feet through a refracting windshield? The answer is, pretty damn difficult.  Even if one of the pilots would be temporarily physically blinded, there is a second person on board who can take the controls. There are also other guides and controls which can easily be used without sight to stabilize a plane. In 2002, there were over 50 separate incidents in the Las Vegas area of errant lasers "blinding" pilots from casino light shows. Why weren't the special effects directors given the same penalty?

 

Pure and simple, this is a weak administration propping up a weak approach to a war on terror by strongly prosecuting someone with no connection to actual terror. It's the laser pointers we should be afraid of, not the frightening availability of shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles. Weak.

 

It's funny you should call this administration weak when you're one of the ones whining about how heavy handed it is all the time. The Patriot Act is far from a "weak" approach to fighting the war on terror. This was designed to put more tools in the toolbox of Law Enforcement to track these people down and if that bothers some people then oh freekin well. The perception that our freedoms are eroded by this act is exactly that. When I see an FBI agent or 3 parked across from my apartment building because I clicked on one of LCR's wacko leftist website links then I'll worry about it. When this act took effect day did not immediately turn to night, storm troopers in brown shirts with armbands that read "W" didn't start appearing in the street kicking in people's doors.

[Texsox]

Fair enough, but does that mean we should not use it in other cases where it can be applied?  If we have a tool in the toolbox to deal with something we should use it.

 

To be able to keep the tool, it must be properly maintained and used in the proper manner. If you keep using a tank to go to the corner and pick up lunch (which seems like fun at the drive-thru) eventually it's going to be taken away. When the public sees an obvious miscarriage, there is a problem. Plus, we really cannot allow our government to get out of control.

 

The one nod towards winodj's comments is this could be used to up the Patriot Act scorecard. See we successfully prosecuted someone.

[Texsox]

It's funny you should call this administration weak when you're one of the ones whining about how heavy handed it is all the time.  The Patriot Act is far from a "weak" approach to fighting the war on terror.  This was designed to put more tools in the toolbox of Law Enforcement to track these people down and if that bothers some people then oh freekin well.  The perception that our freedoms are eroded by this act is exactly that.  When I see an FBI agent or 3 parked across from my apartment building because I clicked on one of LCR's wacko leftist website links then I'll worry about it.  When this act took effect day did not immediately turn to night, storm troopers in brown shirts with armbands that read "W" didn't start appearing in the street kicking in people's doors.

 

Again we are admitting to the world that our way of life in pre-9/11 wasn't working and we needed to curb our freedoms to make it work. We must have had too many freedoms. I wonder, when we are finished, if we will be closer to the freedoms that Iraq had. The freedom to praise the government. The freedom to praise the military. The freedom to allow 24/7 searches without probable cause (hey what do you have to hide?). The freedom to spend 25 years in prison for pointing a laser pointer at a plane.

 

Imagine if Hussein locked up a dissident for 25 years for pointing a laser at an airplane. It would have been justification of how he abuses his people.

 

Sorry, the give up some of your rights because you are innocent, argument is weak and anti-American.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

To be able to keep the tool, it must be properly maintained and used in the proper manner. If you keep using a tank to go to the corner and pick up lunch (which seems like fun at the drive-thru) eventually it's going to be taken away. When the public sees an obvious miscarriage, there is a problem. Plus, we really cannot allow our government to get out of control.

 

The one nod towards winodj's comments is this could be used to up the Patriot Act scorecard. See we successfully prosecuted someone.

 

 

I dont like it when the government calls an apple an orange, I'll concede that point but that doesn't make it wrong to use what we have and it doesn't make the law itself wrong either.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Again we are admitting to the world that our way of life in pre-9/11 wasn't working and we needed to curb our freedoms to make it work.

 

 

Obviously something was broken if something like this was allowed to happen. Measures needed to be taken and they were and despite all the "they're coming to take me away!" hysteria I think we're better off for it.

[CubKilla]

It's funny you should call this administration weak when you're one of the ones whining about how heavy handed it is all the time.

 

[Texsox]

Obviously something was broken if something like this was allowed to happen.  Measures needed to be taken and they were and despite all the "they're coming to take me away!" hysteria I think we're better off for it.

Nuke, I hear what you are saying but consider this . . .

 

If we are looking for safety and protection from criminals we could go even farther. Take away every gun and lock anyone up who possesses one. Automatic, no appeal. Buy too much fertilizer, go to jail, no questions asked. Complain against America or our government, get locked up. Have strict laws on who can get on an airplane.

 

Some people would be willing to outlaw guns in the interest of national security. They probably don't own one.

 

Some people would be willing to outlaw fertilizer, they don't grow crops.

 

Some people think "America Love it out Leave it". So giving away their right to criticize the government makes sense.

 

But of course these are too extreme. So we start to draw the line. Is probable cause something we want to keep? If you have nothing to hide, you don't mind the government knocking on your door and coming in at 3 am do you?

 

Yes, something went wrong on 9/11. Something goes wrong when a kid is gunned down in Houston in cross fire between two gangs. Something goes wrong when a gay kid is tied to a post and beaten. Something goes wrong when a black man is tied to a bumper and dragged to his death. Something goes wrong when Enron can implode and leave thousands without a job, insurance, or retirement. But we don't always need to erode our freedoms to fix them. Applying what we already have may work. An automatic forfeiture of our freedoms is not the right approach.

 

BTW, kudos on Arizona and being warm this winter.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Nuke -- when the PATRIOT Act was passed, we were given the guarantee by Ashcroft and Co. that it would be use to go after terrorists. Now when the Act is used in anti-obscenity cases (like the prosecution of Extreme Associates), that's wrong. Producing movies like "Sucking Cock Is Good For Your Health" may be a stupid film but it is not terrorism.

 

Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, one of only three Republican lawmakers to buck the House leadership and the Bush administration to vote against this legislation, is outraged not only by what is contained in the antiterrorism bill but also by the effort to stigmatize opponents. Paul tells Insight, "The insult is to call this a 'patriot bill' and suggest I'm not patriotic because I insisted upon finding out what is in it and voting no. I thought it was undermining the Constitution, so I didn't vote for it and therefore I'm somehow not a patriot. That's insulting."

 

Paul confirms rumors circulating in Washington that this sweeping new law, with serious implications for each and every American, was not made available to members of Congress for review before the vote. "It's my understanding the bill wasn't printed before the vote at least I couldn't get it. They played all kinds of games, kept the House in session all night, and it was a very complicated bill. Maybe a handful of staffers actually read it, but the bill definitely was not available to members before the vote."

 

And why would that be? "This is a very bad bill," explains Paul, "and I think the people who voted for it knew it and that's why they said, 'Well, we know it's bad, but we need it under these conditions.'" Meanwhile, efforts to obtain copies of the new law were stonewalled even by the committee that wrote it.

 

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040405-121346-4789r.htm

 

Bob Barr: "I don't care if there were no examples so far. We can't say we'll let government have these unconstitutional powers in the Patriot Act because they will never use them. Besides, who knows how many times the government has used them? They're secret searches."

[Rex Kickass]

Obviously something was broken if something like this was allowed to happen.  Measures needed to be taken and they were and despite all the "they're coming to take me away!" hysteria I think we're better off for it.

 

Something like what? People playing with laser pointers means that the system is broken? Oh my, I saw someone running with scissors earlier today, somebody get me a warrant!

 

This kind of approach is weak. Weak-minded. To use a sledgehammer when when a rubber mallet is required is weak-minded. To use an act like this for reasons from which it wasn't intended is weak. To have a "war" we're fighting without a comprehensive policy to fight it is weak. This is just another example of an administration that's weak where it counts, in the head.

[EvilMonkey]

"He could get up to 25 years in prison and fines of up to $500,000."

 

 

Not he WILL get 25 years, but that line merely describes the maximun penalty. Stop taking things to the extreme all the time.

[southsider2k5]

Now this gets more interesting as a Boston street gang has been linked to Al Qaeda.

 

http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional...articleid=61903

[JUGGERNAUT]

Well Duh! For those keeping score the biggest impact the Patriot Act has had on terrorism is funding. The PA makes it much harder to donate dollars to terrorists & for terrorists to move & launder $. So when the belt tightens the terrorists naturally will seek new sources of funding. Given their locales & their powerbases as warlords in most agricultural sectors drugs were a natural choice.

 

Now that they are firmly planted as drug suppliers they can now increase their reach & influence over drug dealers. Essentially they just found a means to purchase tough street smart mercenaries.

 

Which gets back to the argument I've been waging on this board ever since 9/11. Why does Jihad Internatial exist? What do they want? Is it because they want power & are aggressive or is it because they want the US to stay out? Do they really want to destroy Israel or do they just want to contain it? Does the US refuse to stay out because of national security concerns or because of capitalistic profit concerns?

 

If you ask people around the world why the US is now looked upon in a negative way it has little to do with Bush or Clinton & everything to do with American companies & American practices. They see the Nikes, Gaps, & Disneys of the world set up shop in their regions & essentially run sweat shops. They see how these same companies use tactics to prevent the formation of unions in those regions.

 

So what has happened during the last 20 yrs is that the world has come to see America as a country that says one thing & then does another. That's how you continue to lose credibility. It's not just Bush. It's the Disney's of the world as well.

 

To most in this world America represents the greediest nation on the planet. It's rheteoric does not match his deeds.

[Rex Kickass]

No argument there. It is, at least partially, a manifestation of watching a "culture grab" of sorts... but this has different effects, depending on the region, Western Europe - where the local economy is less likely to be affected by it - tends to regard with a quiet disdain. In less well off circumstances, the reaction tends to be more violent - because this culture grab affects their economy more directly and less appetizingly.

 

Like most omnibus reform bills, there are things in Patriot which contain value. Unfortunately, there's a lot that is contrary to the principles of freedom on which we stand.