yes, security is much different than the economy. security is almost the only thing i actually want the gov to do. when i say "you" i mean the plural, like anyone. i am speaking to the world. like i said: "i would really like to hear one person with an actual complaint". right, i dont give a damn about either of those issues, thats why i am not complaining about them. for all i care they can ban straight marriage. i have been in a long term relationship before, and we didnt need to fill out any forms for it to matter. marriage (gay or straight) is a non-issue. if you care about it you are stupid. the same is almost true about abortions. i dont care either way. so your point is not valid, i do not care about those issue, because they do not affect me or anyone with a brain. similarly, you shouldnt care much about the patriot act, because it doesnt really affect you, or anyone. your privacy isnt being violated.
My traveling experiences have been greatly affected. I've had to wait in long lines at security checkpoints and customs and I've had to be searched on nearly every occasion that I travel. It's very disheartening, really. I think I liked it better when it was easier for them to hijack airplanes.[/end sarcasm]
There are plenty, as I have posted some before in similar conversations. Great attitude. Hey, Jim Crowe laws wouldn't affect you, so I guess you wouldn't care if they reinstated those. No, I care about the preservation civil liberties and personal freedoms in the United States. If you don't care about that, then you, my friend, are the ignorant one. It most certainly is. You just can't argue against it. Saying that we should not care about issues that don't affect us directly is completely short-sighted, selfish, and delusional. It's ok. I know it's just your way of taking things to the extreme in some wild hopes of defending your outlandish argument. It might be. I'll never know, if it is. Don't you understand that? The Patriot Act states that they never have to tell you that your property was searched or seized, and they have expanded the definition of 'terrorism' WELL beyond its reasonable limits.
you missed the point. people would be justified to worry about jim crow laws. they are not justified to worry about gay marriage. or the patriot act. because it doesnt really affect anyone. and even if it did, it would be worth it so we could catch bad guys. so who has been violated. and how? did they search my library records? oh no! i am not sure what that sentence accomplished. pay attention, i mean issues that really don't affect ANYONE directly. not just me or you. people are inventing something to care about. we both know the partiot act is not affecting either of us. it isn't. i will tell you. the government isnt in your closet rifling through your things. they dont care about you. for the sake of argument, lets say some innocent people get their stuff searched. too bad. sometimes innocent people are put in jail. should we close down jails? there may be a price to pay for justice. deal with it. i am not worried. you shouldnt be either. the government is not out to get you. they dont care what you are doing. security is important. people want to kill us both.
but to what extent? You could be very safe in North Korea, as long as you do everything that nutty midget tells you to do. VERY secure. So what percentage of Constitutional rights can be infringed in the name of security and still be palatable?
i will start worrying when people's rights are getting violated to the extent that they actually notice or are affected negatively in any way. as of now, my life hasnt changed, neither has yours, or anyone you have ever met or will meet. i dont feel that violated. do you?
I don't understand why our government felt the need to institute the Patriot Act when it could just racially profile all Muslims and Arab-descended individuals entering the country or already in the country on visas. They aren't citizens, so they don't have the same rights.
The ACLU would have been all over that one. See New York and the child molesters. Also reference Gitmo and the terrorist being held there.
Yeah, namely those pesky drafters of the constitution. They're always whining about something or the other. Pay attention, no we do not. Do I need to repeat it once again? What an absurd analogy. The proposal here is not to eliminate all factions and methods of security. Americans have paid the price for security for years. Degradation of civil liberties for 'security' is self-defeating. There is no proof that any terrorist attack could have been prevented had the Unpatriot Act already been implemented. It's a way for law enforcement to gain information on any individual for any reason, so long as they can somehow tie it to 'terrorism.' I guess this means even the waiter going to buy a dimebag after work, since Ashcroft decided that even recreational drug use supports terrorism. What's next, the Thought Police?
