measuring the true impact on personal freedoms

I agree with you and I bet we hear some whining!

How do you know that you haven't been monitored?

See, that's kind of like asking ME what freedoms I lost as an individual when assault weapons were banned. That didn't affect *ME* one bit. So, does that equate to a loss of freedom or not?

The point is, concerning wiretaps or other monitoring is that now it is a WARRANTLESS procedure. If I was to be monitored via a wiretap of any sort, I at least had the FREEDOM to be privvy to that information. I could request the warrant. This warrant would also have a justifiable reason, clearly written, describing why I was monitored.

Now, I cannot. Telling me that I was monitored now would impact "national security". I could be monitored for ANY reason whatsoever (think political opponents here), and never know about it. Furthermore, this evidence would be held back in a court of law.

Of course the INSTANT response to this is "You aints no tur'rist!". No, I am not... however because there doesn't NEED to be a warrant for wiretaps (translation: REASON), that means I don't have to be a tur'rist to be monitored. So, if I don't really need to be a terrorist to be monitored, nor does due process need to be applied... well, that's a pretty damn slippery slope.

Remember... your big ol assault guns were taken away to protect the children! If they can get away with taking your guns away for that reason, who knows why else they'd do to take your preciouses. Same concept.

Our glorious leader was in town a few days ago. Now, suppose I called my g/f and joked around... "Oh, Bush is in town... I'd better get to the grassy knoll!"... that could possibly land me in the box for being an "enemy combatant", talking about an assassination plot. Now, how they came to this information is a matter of "national security" and cannot be used in court. Of course now that they have tagged me as an "enemy combatant", my rights are all stuffed in the Gitmo toilet and flushed down the drain.

What freedoms have *I* lost? The ability to say what I want, when I want, how I want without fear of being heard by the World Police. You know... the FREEDOM of speech thing...

The issue isn't what freedoms have we lost NOW, it's whether or not the measures put in place have the potential for abuse in the future (and actually, they've already ben abused in a myriad of cases).

If Hillary Clinton becomes president (god help us), and has a democratic congress, do you feel secure in the idea that she will NOT use Patriot Act provisions to investigate conservative and second amendment advocacy groups? What reason has the federal government....no, ANY government EVER given you to trust them? History has demonstrated that any power ceded to government WILL be abused, and any rights not defended against government intrusion WILL be lost (see assault weapons bans and the DC handgun ban compared to Amendment II).

You haul water for neocons because you believe that criticizing the current security regimes is "liberal". I PROMISE you, has Willie Clinton signed ANY of these laws, you'd be calling for impeachment, or maybe even armed insurrection. These issues go beyond parties, but you just can't seem to accept the fact that you CAN be conservative and anti-government (in fact, you MUST be anti-government to be a true conservative (instead of liberal use of government force.....get it?).

Just the same, here's a story from my own life:

My sister goes to UT as a grad student and recieved a bogus speeding ticket from an Austin bike cop. She called me up, I told her to plead not guilty, get a court date, and demand trial by jury (as is guaranteed under the US Constitution (Amendment VI specificially)). She got a court date, and in court the judge told her he would "let her off" with six months probation, and if she didn't get another ticket during that time, the current citation would be dismissed. Following my advice she refused the offer, stating that the cop was WRONG (he was, the guy overshot her car, got in front of her, paused, slowed down to get behind her, and ultimately pulled her over some 3 miles from is alleged radar position......and he was on a bike), and further demanded a trial by jury. The judge stated that she was not entitled to one under Texas law (Constitution trumps all contradicting state laws so's ya know), and said he would "allow" her to argue the case before him. She's still awaiting her court date, but my law student chums are helping me draft a motion for a change of venue, since the judge in question doesn't know dick ****.

Now.....imagine if this were a class A misdemeanor and she was in jail. An INNOCENT person would be IN JAIL because a judge failed to respect the rule of law and the rights of citizens. **** like this is WHY we need checks on government power, not for what HAS happened, but for what COULD happen.

so then basically you don't have anything but fear?

Is living in fear of one's government truly freedom?

Saddam's people lived in fear of THEIR government.

I'm not afraid of the government at all, I exercise my Second Amendment rights in such a way that I will be able to defend myself should the day ever come that the government needs to be changed forcibly.

You didn't address my point, at all. Hillary as president, do you trust her with the ability to wire-tap without warrants, arrest people without charge, or investigate whoever the hell she wants? You support these measures because your PARTY holds the executive branch right now. Here's the bad news, the RNC WILL NOT hold the White House in 2009 (unless Ron Paul is the 2008 nominee), so you're offering all of this power to gun-grabbing, centralized authority-loving, socialist-sympathizing ULTRALIBERALS. It's irresponsible, and will become a pain in the ass.

Moreover, here in America, EVERYBODY has rights under the Constitution, and real American patriots subscribe to the ideas of the founders. Just because WE haven't been locked up without charge doesn't mean we should allow it to happen. Just because WE haven't had our phones tapped, doesn't mean we should accept it. And just because the government DOES it, doesn't mean it's LEGAL, MORAL, OR CONSISTENT.

You call yourself a conservative, but you really seem to love big government. Aren't you a member of the wrong party?

I didn't address your point because it's off topic

THE topic is: Have you noticed any change in your freedoms no "do you trust Hillary"

i believe benjamin Franklin said something like "The government is supposed to fear it's people not the other way around!"

or was it jefferson?

I don't want any Muslims in political power. Sorry. I don't want that. This isn't an attack. It's just what I don't want. Is that okay?

It was a valid question to qualify YOUR support for the draconian security measures employed by our government. Don't worry about answering it though, your silence is noted.

i saw something on the history channel about this stuff.

basically, printers = patiot act.

new printers print out their serial number in a couple random microscopic ink blots. so if you print something, it can be traced back to the purcahser.

what if they were good at their job? Should you refuse them because of their personally held beliefs? Isn't that discrimination?

He has a right to discriminate. As a voter, you can vote based on anything you want.

You can but you're not supposed to, but once the guy is already voted in you can't refuse him based on his religious beliefs!

It isn't off topic at all. You being disingenuious if you'd have us believe that you are fine with the powers inacted by BushCo in the hands of an ultraliberal executive branch simply because "the .gov knows best".

it's all the same

You're against the patriot act because it will invade on your freedoms, even though it hasn't and it's been 7 years. But it might one day! So be afraid!!

If 30 years from now President Chelsey Clinton does something to infringe on your fears would you still blame Bush?

if you print something they can trace it back to you? Who cares? Are you upset because you're planning something so illegal that you don't want anybody to know you printed it? Anybody who isn't a career criminal or a terrorist really shouldn't care

Your freedoms haven't been affected and this thread shows it. It's fear mongering, plain and simple.

How do you know?

Seriously, given the ability to keep information and evidence a national secret tied with the fact that warrants are no longer needed, how do you know?

That's easy. You don't.



Two words: The Federalist.

I know because nobody on this board has been able to provide one example of a freedom they have lost since 911, your daily life has gone uninterrupted. You are free to do whatever you were free to do before. Therefore your freedoms have not been infringed upon...

When assault weapons were banned, my daily life went uninterrupted.

Does that mean my freedoms were not infringed upon?