Should it or shouldn't it be extended? OK, with some tweaking?

__________________
Sure you did

I don't believe that's correct, Moondawg. Back in 2005, NRA-ILA announced that it, among other conservative groups, had formed an alliance with the ACLU "to wage a high-profile fight against it," because of mutual concerns about national security letters, delayed search warrant notifications, the ability to arbitrarily strip citizens of their gun rights, the right to snoop without a warrant into your medical, financial, library, and other records, and so forth.

I can't locate anything recent on this. Does anyone know what the NRA's current position is on the reauthorization of this very bad piece of legislation?


Bullseye

__________________
Five screws and 3-1/2 inches.

AFAICR, the NRA is opposed to SOME elements of the PA regarding 2nd A issues and NOT the whole PA. The NRA generally stays neutral regarding any laws unless they affect the right to bear arms. They may be fine with a "tweaking" of the law.

Edited: Then again, the NRA supported members of Congress who are wrong on everything else besides guns.

__________________
Sure you did

If you look @ the Patriot Act as a whole, IMHO, it is un-constitutional. If Congress can use this to subvert as many guaranteed freedoms as it does, the 2nd amendment could be ignored just as easily. My 2 cents.

No extension.

If there are elements that are considered essential within the PA let them stand on their own merit and create specific legislation for each. Anything called 'Patriot Act' is likely to be filled with anything but.

It's called "Never let a good crisis go to waste." Saw it coming 9/12/01. The left aren't the only ones who want to control your lives...

A act passed when our heated emotions were directed at those who attacked our nation-now it is used against the citizens. Under an administration dedicated to the Consititution-I would keep it.

Repeal the entire law.

My vote too
Seems like any Act I have seen can easily and more truthfully be described better when you add ANTI to the front of it thus: Anti-Patriot Act which more truthfully sums up the entire thing.

Let the act die....

__________________
SW40VE AF
2000 rounds so far

Let time run out on the Patriot Act. It's a poor excuse for legislation that should promote National Security. Personally, I'd like to see a little less government in my life - and would ask that Congress spend less time on creating new laws that cater to special interests, and more time on legislation that helps our citizens as a whole. My interest as a citizen, and as a veteran, is for Congress to concentrate on our Federal Budget, Border Security, Immigration reform, and general infrastructure. I feel no safer today than I did on Sept 10th, 2001.

Let it die. It's unconstitutional.

And that reminds me.... A few weeks ago the Department of Homeland Security officially scraped the "Virtual Fence" project. Took several years to build a mere 50 miles of Virtual Fence on the AZ/Mex border for the price of a $BILLION. It's amazing how much you can't accomplish when you really don't want to do something.

+1 and +1

As it is, it's unconstitutional.

Now with the uncertainy in egypt and the rest of the arab nations, they better sit on things awhile to see which way things are going to go.

I thought the SCOTUS decides what's unconstitutional.

__________________
Sure you did

The states have, or should have, that power (See the Kentucky Resolutions, written by Thomas Jefferson and the Virginia Resolutions, written by James Madison). SCOTUS, under John Marshal, usurped that power.

Nowhere does the Constitution empower the federal government to decide for itself what powers it has. The epitome of the fox guarding the chicken coop!

I agree. Doesn't need to be to be repealed, it has to be renewed. So do not pass it again.

The government is afraid of it's citizens and we're afraid of it. Poor state of afairs.

so let it die in other words. admin dedicated to the constitution, ha, thats a thing of the past my friend

The only ACT we need is from 1776, or so. We don't need this one!
Thanks for bringing it up, it needs to be talked about.
Be well
TB

__________________
frontsightnsqueaz

well it looks like the house just voted to extend it

Thanks for the info, looks like we've been on the wrong path for 213 years or so.

__________________
Sure you did

Right on Phil. As with most other edicts, the devil is always in the details.

Since this thread seems to be surviving the moderator's political smell test, I will add my opinion with those who think the Patriot Act is an unpatriotic farce that should never have been passed.

Reactionary legislation is almost always bad. The Patriot Act is no different.

__________________
Insert short witty words here

This is my opinion also.

Looks like there were an insufficient number of patriots in the US House to prevent the extension from passing. If the enumerated powers are not enumerated powers, but merely examples of the many POTENTIAL powers of the federal government, then why were they listed in the Constitution to begin with? What it SHOULD take to add powers to the government is not a simple majority of the chambers, but a Constitutional amendment. Oh but that would be bothersome and the Constitution is an outdated document.

They made it difficult to amend for a reason, but unfortunately they did not make it difficult enough to ignore. Trying a few Congressmen for treason would be a good start.

I never thought it would last this long . . . . the thread, not the law.

__________________
Georgia On My Mind

They are, indeed, the last stop on determining the constitutionality of our laws. Unfortunately, the SCOTUS has nothing to do with ensuring laws are constitutional when passed by Congress. Without getting into all of the troubling provisions, if anyone is concerned with their constitutional/individual rights, they should be very concerned with this 'Act.'

I do resent that they used the term "Patriot" in naming these laws, it is an insult to all those brave people that have sacrificed for this country. There needs to be much more transparency, and accountability in the law making process. Sometimes I wonder if our lawmakers truly understand the laws they are voting for...?

As someone else said, the devil is in the detail. On it's surface, I would want to fully support this "Patriot Act," and for laws that help our law enforcement agencies catch terrorists. In knowing some of the details of these laws, this is scary legislation, that flies in the face of many of our rights. The fact that both Dems and Republicans voted for this legislation speaks to the deep concerns we had following 9/11, and also to the fact that nobody would want to be accused of voting against an 'anti-terrorist' bill; and hey, these folks live to get re-elected/have power. Of course, this is a very challenging balance. Our freedoms and rights do make it much easier for terrorists to be successful in this country. So, what do you do, take away/reduce/restrict some of these rights? Only target these infringements on 'the bad guys.' Sounds good to me, until somebody wants to call you a terrorist (I know, if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to worry about, right...?). Things that erode our rights have a way of creeping up on those of us that enjoy the many of the freedoms that we have in this country.

I know most people know this, but remember, the only thing that really separates us from all of these repressive governments, dictator regimes, etc is our constitution. This bad stuff does not happen over night, in this country, it would take a long, slow slide to get there, but we could certainly get there. We are all humans on this planet, and humans tend to want to do bad things to other humans, especially ones that get in the way of what they want. Just some fun stuff to think of. Again, difficult stuff we are dealing with these days...

__________________
NRA Life Member

The problem with this law, and others like the stimulus, is that they were written well before hand, waiting on a "crisis" to get them passed by Congress and signed by the President. They are obviously someone's agenda, simply tweaked slightly and given a name to gain public support. Kind of makes one wonder if the conspiracy theorists might be on to something. You know, the ones who purport that the "crisis" was caused by or allowed to happen by the powers that be simply to pass the legislation?

__________________
Insert short witty words here