TIME/CNN Poll: 61% of American's won't give up civil liberties to fight terrorism

Thankfully we have bills like the Patriots Act & the NDAA. Who knows what kind of terrorist someone would've been without those bills in our trusted peers hands. I know that without them, it wouldn't have been legal for the officials to detain the Boston bomber without reading his Miranda rights. I mean, why does any citizen need their rights read to them?

 

Sure you stick to that theory. If you have not heard of any issues with the act since it introduction nearly 12 years ago, it is not for me to do your reading for you

 

Every law has is problems. But I dont see thousands of people in jail over it, hundreds of doors havent been kicked in. Peoples rights have not evaporated.

 

And what were some calling for? That he be held as an "enemy combatant" so they could strip him of all the rights guaranteed to him under the law. Great precedent to set.

 

Simply judicial process. The law doesn't want to go to court and find out the defendant was not aware of his/her rights. And of course anyone facing a strong case against them is going to grab at any straw they can

 

All of my statements have been sarcasm, I disagree with both bills. I don't believe he should've been held as anything other than a US citizen, given his rights read to him, and proceed from there.

I tried showing it with the rolling eyes, as I know it's hard for words to be determined without any expression or voice tones. However, I definitely wanted to clear this up, as I clearly don't support either of those bills and don't wish to give the government any more power than they already have.

 

What difference does that make? I don't care how guilty the person was and we have every known evidence in the world against him. His rights should've been read to him and he needs to be given a trial so he can defend himself. Whether or not he's guilty or not, that doesn't matter as his peers will make that determination in a trial.

Secondly, as I've stated to stekim, I was being sarcastic in all of my posts. I'm the one who started this thread, why the hell would I defend the Patriot Act & NDAA when they clearly take our rights away? Whether or not folks wish to claim they are against foreigners or not, the Boston bombing is proof that they can strip US citizens rights. Of all people, I'm not the one whose supporting those bills, you can find me on the corner of 'Abolish Them' and 'Burn Them'.

 

I knew that. You are a Libertarian, so it would be totally contradictory for you to believe anything else.

 

Of course they don't, they simply can legally tap into all of your communication and see what you're doing. They don't have to come busting down your door, they simply build up a case against you, legally. There is no longer due process, there is no longer 'innocent until proven guilty', everyone is on watch, and once they garner enough information on you, they come & get you.

Some of the provisions expired, because of the sunset provision, but Obama reenacted some of them in 2011.

 

I fear you are missing my point. I am agreeing with you

 

My apologies, your last statement made it seem like I was defending my stance against stekim and I was grabbing at straws. I misread it and see your point now. Again, my apologies.

 

Ben Franklin never said that , or any version of it.


Fact

Now you know.

 

Absolutely no problem

 

Well why we are quoting, the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of tyrants and patriots alike.

 

Of all things, that's what you provided? I guess you're going to claim that Richard Jackson actually authored it right? I could troll and say 'prove it', but it's truly a futile point, as no one knows for sure, but continue as you may.

However, this is the version that derived itself into the fore-mentioned quote: Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power. Care to say that wasn't by Benjamin Franklin either?

 

I dont have a problem with their national security exception or whatever they call it. I believe 72 hours where they gather evidence to prevent other attacks as opposed to gathering evidence to prosecute them.

 

What you have to think about though is this can happen to anyone, not just terrorists, but everyday American citizens. That's the point of my disagreement, this exception included.

 

Really? Wellllll then, I guess I better not say anything bad or they may "make a case" against me.
Dont be paranoid.

 

Maybe more people are realizing that terrorism is a farce?

 

Take it for what you want, but I've address your points. I'm not paranoid but I do watch what I do on public forums & any outlet I use as a communication medium.

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe, but I definitely like the fact that folks are starting to come to their senses that they'd rather not give up their liberties for more legislation to fight terrorism that takes from their liberties. We need more on that side and any bit that can go on that side, it's for the better.

 

Especially when terrorism is not a great threat.

Five people died in Boston. Which is terrible. But how many people have choked to death since then? A hell of a lot more than five.

- - - Updated - - -

The state terrorism committed on the part of the United Stated has killed fifty times more innocent civilians than the terrorists have us.

I mean, really.

Open your eyes people.

 

The unfortunate part that it seems like these type of things are too little too late. By the time the clamor stops for wanting change, a bill is passed that strips liberties away from everyone, that doesn't do anything to prevent these attacks. As I've stated, the Patriot act was meant to prevent these type of attacks. Maybe it prevented some, maybe it prevented none, I do know that this was a failure as they've clearly known about this family. In yet, our liberties were given up so that folks could be killed and many more injured. If this is the thanks, then just give us our liberties back, since it isn't going to help prevent terrorism anymore than if we don't have them.

 

So. Do you really think you have a right to have something stated to you? do you think 72 hours in custody is going to suck any less because an officer read you your rights off an 8x5 card?

 

I have a right to my rights and not talking to the police without a lawyer present is one of them. 1 second in custody is going to suck, regardless if an office reads my rights off an 100x100 card or not, that's why I refrain from getting into trouble. However, if something does occur, my rights should be read to me, even though I know what my rights are.

If they're not read to me, then anything I say can't be used against me in a court of law. I think this quote says it best: If law enforcement is silent and suspects are not, we might advance the war. But if domestic suspects have no rights, especially in terrorist cases, then those seeking to destroy democracy itself and replace it with a radically fundamental theocracy will have obtained one of their objectives. - http://www.azcentral.com/opinions/articles/20130429miranda-and-the-boston-bombing.html

 

You have no "right" to have your rights read to you.