I'm thinking about voting for Bush- talk me out of it

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO


Phew!! I was worried for a second! Thanks!

Your welcome

Oh, and remmebr those carpetbagger nukes heading your way.

[Ben Kenobi]

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security"

Yet,

"We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."

Franklin was not opposed to the use of state authority to maintain liberty in times of war.

The question is what one considers an essential liberty, and whether that liberty is really being bargained for temporary security.

[Ben Kenobi]

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

So why are you fighting the man who is standing up for America's liberties? To be free from nations that would otherwise wish to destroy your ideals?

Are you not being complacent, and self-satisfied that to think without action, that your own freedoms can be protected?

[Kuciwalker]

"We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."

Franklin was not opposed to the use of state authority to maintain liberty in times of war.

You didn't understand the quote at all. He was urging everyone to work together, not saying they should be compelled to do so.

[Velociryx]

The problem with the "Patriot" act is, for me, one of accountability.

What's wrong with requiring law enforcement to convince a judge that a search warrant is...well...warranted?

If they have suspicions about the possibility of a crime, then given our "innocent until proven guilty" mindset, should not they be required to furnish such evidence?

Ahhh, but not for the good "Patriots" among us. Now, law enforcement don't even need a reason.

Reason?

Who cares! Let's play with some of our high tech toys!

"Innocent until proven guilty?"

Bah! Let's just spy for a little while and see what dirt comes out in the wash. If it's anything suspicious...hell, if it's even something we don't agree with, we can always plant a little evidence and call it a day!

The government's freedom to pry into every corner of our lives makes them our jailors.

And what happens when a man with an agenda (:: cough:: Ashcroft) get his hands on such unfettered access to information?

Elimination of privacy is the first step down a slippery slope with a very dark ending.

No thanks.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

One good turn-in deserves another, I suppose.

Tattle on your neighbor, get law enforcement to do a bit of spying...hell, most *anything* passes for a "threat to national security" these days.

Better tell your grandma to mind that knitting circle she's a member of....closet commies, all.

Very dangerous.



-=Vel=-

Patact

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Velociryx
The problem with the "Patriot" act is, for me, one of accountability.

What's wrong with requiring law enforcement to convince a judge that a search warrant is...well...warranted?

If they have suspicions about the possibility of a crime, then given our "innocent until proven guilty" mindset, should not they be required to furnish such evidence?

Ahhh, but not for the good "Patriots" among us. Now, law enforcement don't even need a reason.

Reason?

Who cares! Let's play with some of our high tech toys!

"Innocent until proven guilty?"

Bah! Let's just spy for a little while and see what dirt comes out in the wash. If it's anything suspicious...hell, if it's even something we don't agree with, we can always plant a little evidence and call it a day!

The government's freedom to pry into every corner of our lives makes them our jailors.

And what happens when a man with an agenda (:: cough:: Ashcroft) get his hands on such unfettered access to information?

Elimination of privacy is the first step down a slippery slope with a very dark ending.

No thanks.
-=Vel=-

government is not a slope. change in government requires continual active change it doesn't just initiate and continue on its own. Government is also far more tempted to plant evidence after a crime is commited and the heat is on than it is before any crime has been comitted. If the patriot act is repealed there will surely be a hell of a lot more planted evidence and innocent people jailed than there would be with it remaining.

[Velociryx]

Geronimo...I hate to break it to you, but government DOES have inertia.

Open the door a crack, and before you know it....you get a deluge.

Look at our taxation system for proof.

Initially implemented as a "temporary measure."

Uh huh.

But there's always something to spend that money on.

Just like there's always a villain we need to spy on.

If not the commies, then the islamic fundies.

And when we've rounded them up, who next?

People who make movies disparaging our leaders?

People who write provocative books?

Anybody Ashcroft doesn't like?

How simple to declare a thing a "threat to national security" and with a bit of spin doctoring...oh my goodness, but they're right!

It is good that the Supreme Court has already ruled against portions of the so-called "Patriot Acts" - were it not so....fire up your BBQ....we'll have a good book burning party later...

-=Vel=-

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Geronimo


Nice thing about the patriot act is that rather than sacrifice freedom for security it sacrifices privacy.

That's rather intriguing notion given that the true mother of democracy and freedom, Britain, bases ideas about freedom around privacy and stopping the state from intruding on the private domain. That is why countries like Britain and Australia don't have constitutions or identity cards or Bills of Rights. We don't need them. Centuries of common law going back to Magna Carta sets out our rights and obligations in society. Our freedom is unfettered because it is a private domain, a domain unregulated or limited by the state - a man's home is his castle, if the law doesn't say you can't do something, you can etc.

I'm convinced that we Australians have far more freedom than Americans and that while most Americans bang on endlessly about freedom, they don't really know what it is. Freedom is based on privacy.

[Velociryx]

From the Horse's mouth!

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


That's rather intriguing notion given that the true mother of democracy and freedom, Britain, bases ideas about freedom around privacy and stopping the state from intruding on the private domain. That is why countries like Britain and Australia don't have constitutions or identity cards or Bills of Rights. We don't need them. Centuries of common law going back to Magna Carta sets out our rights and obligations in society. Our freedom is unfettered because it is a private domain, a domain unregulated or limited by the state - a man's home is his castle, if the law doesn't say you can't do something, you can etc.

I'm convinced that we Australians have far more freedom than Americans and that while most Americans bang on endlessly about freedom, they don't really know what it is. Freedom is based on privacy.

Maybe it would be possible to enjoy the best of both worlds. I think perhaps we should grant immunity from practically all government constraint and proscription within the confines of our own homes. The individual would be soverign in their private residence and within any direct extensions there of. Then the patriot act could not be used to police our home lives. The only use i want to see made of the patriot act is as a means of finding and preventing massive acts of violence in advance, especially domestic terrorism which seems to have been forgotten in the wake of the more recent itnernational terrorism.

[PLATO]

Outstanding Vel! Couldn't agree more! Amazingly, The Horse and I are on the same side of this one!

Geronimo, Once a path is chosen, it is hard to retrace your steps. The demise of privacy IS the demise of freedom.

[Alexander's Horse]

It's interesting that proposals for a constitutional Bill of Rights in Australia have been soundly defeated at recent elections. The logic being, and it's remarkable that ordinary Australians understand this, once our rights are written down, they are limited in a way that they are not limited without a bill of rights.

Similarly identity card proposals have been defeated on the basis that the state should not have the power to decide if I am who I say I am. I need no endorsement from the government to a be a citizen - a range of the documents - like birth certificates and passports - serve the purpose for establishing identity for legitimate reasons without the need for an identity card.

[Velociryx]

A hypothetical question for Geronimo:

What would your reaction be to the government proposing the following, "in the name of catching badguys" of course:

Everybody goes to the dentist, right? I mean, sooner or later?

So...let's get in league with the dentists and have them install a small tracking device in every person's mouth. With an on-board power supply, and a protective coating, figure they'd last 5-7 years (and by that time, you'd have returned to the dentist). Five minutes to tie said chip to your SSN.

Install proximity detectors (only a couple bucks each at the local radio shack, and bought in bulk for way less than that) in streetlamps on every corner.

Now, we can track you block to block from....well, most anywhere, really.

Add to that a new national ID card. One with a magnetic stripe. Easy to tie it in with your bank card. Technology exists right now to do that. This one card has all your info on it, AND it comes with the added bonus that the government can track your spending habits (more and more, a cashless economy, you see). So if you go buy anything of a "questionable" nature, we'll know.

And who defines "questionable"?

Why....the John Ashcrofts of our government, of course.

You trust his judgement, don't you?

Now I grant you, the Patriot Acts don't advocate anything of the sort mentioned above.

On the other hand, it's a really short walk from there to the place mentioned above....

Very short walk indeed.

-=Vel=-

[Alexander's Horse]

what is happening in the USA today is just plain scary

there is support for it because people believe its directed at someone else, "bad people", and they think "it can't happen to me"

people fail to grasp that their liberties are directly linked to "what happens to someone else"