Um, I kind of like the Patriot Act. I don't see the big deal of it if you have nothing to hide. If you stop being an ACLU bleeding heart for a second and look at it pragmatically, it's a good thing.

I'm not a terrorist or a criminal, so I'd actually prefer the government to listen in on other people's dealings and root out the cancers of our society, especially since my ass in on an airplane from London to Chicago every single summer.

Really? People can be targeted and arrested simply because the government doesn't "like" them? We still do have a legal system in the US, right?

RICO was specifically designed to take out groups of criminals like the mafia. If there is a group where one or two people are running a criminal enterprise, the other people in that group may be complicent in those activities and may also be prosecuted if they are proven to be so. That's not abuse, it's how the law works. It's unconstitutional to prosecute criminals?

You really think the government has the time or resources to tap the phone lines of innocent people just so they can listen in on scintillating chats with their family or masterbate while you talk dirty to your girlfriend? Seriously?

The government has no interest in locking up innocent people. That's what ignorant alarmists fail to understand about the Patriot Act or any other Act. The government likes taxes, right? They want to get paid. Throwing innocent people behind bars because they've decided not to "like" them loses them money because people in prison don't pay taxes, and instead are a drain. Not only that, but when those people prove their innocence in a court of law (a right we all have), they can then sue the government for wrongful prosecution causing Uncle Sam to lose even more money.

The Patriot Act isn't being abused to randomly pick on innocent Americans for no reason. It's used to root out domestic terrorism and other criminal enterprises. If you're not a terrorist or criminal, then shut the fuck up about it because they don't want you. They want your taxes.

Nekkoru wrote:

I wonder how much people that stand behind the patriot act would still do so after (wrongfully, for the sake of this argument) being named a suspect in, let's say, a terrorist attack.

Yeah, that doesn't happen in real life. You're only a suspect if the police or government have a reasonable doubt to your innocence. And if it did happen for the sake of arguement, and I was investigated as a suspect, I know I'd be fine because I had nothing to do with the attack, nor do I have any ties to any terrorist organizations. Thus, there's no proof in existence that could possibly convict me.

In fact, I want the Patriot Act in this instance in order to exonerate me. If they have footage of me in a supermarket or tapped phone calls I made while the attack was happening, that proves my innocence.

It's strange that so many people seem to think the only thing standing in the way of them being sent to prison is a government official with a grudge. No, they still need to prove in a court of law, using real evidence, that you willingly participated in said attack or criminal activity beyond a shadow of a doubt. No amount of recorded phone calls of me chatting with my mother-in-law is going to meet that end.

@Nihilisticglee I'd be fine with most searches or whatever as long as they were done respectfully and in a friendly manner, and had a purpose. If my home is left the way it was before they came, then they can go sick - I have nothing to hide and I welcome it if it helps them find the real criminals they're after. I don't do drugs, I don't beat my kids, I don't have weapons hidden under the bed, I don't possess any stolen property, etc so have nothing to worry about.

I'm pretty far to one end when it comes to "if you have nothing to hide then you should be fine with it" arguement. In fact, I feel the only people worried about their "privacy" are those who feel they have something to hide.

I'd like to see some sources (reputable ones, not personal conspiracy sites like the one you linked before) to back up those fallacies Jack, especially ones that detail how much profit can be made from each state prisoner.

You're wildly incorrect and misinformed about what it costs to house a prisoner in the US. In Florida, each inmate costs the taxpayers about $20,000 per year (http://www.dc.state.fl.us/oth/faq.html) to be looked after in a public institution. Prisoners do not pay for their own room and board nor do they work in sweatshops manufacturing plastic toys for the government to sell. ANd if you want to talk about private institutions, those costs skyrocket. You're simply delusional or wildly misinformed about what goes on in prison. I urge you to go visit one of Arizona's state prisons so you can see for yourself what goes on there.

Prisoners work on the grounds of the prison, work in the laundry rooms, cut hair, and other completely contained jobs that make no money for anyone on the outside world. They even stopped having prisoners make license plates a long time ago.

No, I've never been in the criminal justice system because I'm not a criminal. Thus, the government has no interest in me. They want my taxes which come to a whole lot more per year than they can squeeze out of me in a fantasy "prison sweatshop". You don't seem to get that that applies to everyone; the government would rather you just quietly pay your taxes every year than live in a prison on their tab.

Quote:

The government does not lose tax money imprisoning people. If they did, they wouldn't have so many laws that carry jail time.

WHAT?! Really? You really believe that laws that carry jail time only do so because the government can make more money from people in jail? There are so many things wrong with that, I don't even know where to begin.

1) How else is a government supposed to punish and rehabilitate those who break the law? What would you do with one convicted of murder? Execute him on the spot? What about burglary or manslaughter? If not jail time, then what would you use to punish and deter?

2) Incarcerated prisoners no longer have jobs and thus no longer pay taxes. Depending on that person's employment record, that could be a lot of money lost. Do you really think the government is making more money from Bernie Madoff in prison than they did when he was paying 33% of his income in taxes? What about millionaire celebrities who go to prison (Mike Tyson, Paris Hilton, Michael Vick, Robert Downey Jr, etc)? You're telling me their slave labour is worth more than the millions of dollars per year they paid in taxes before their incarcerations?

3) If the government could make more money from people in prison, wouldn't they put as many people in prison as possible? Why isn't there a prison on every corner then? Why even employ people in the IRS to audit and collect taxes when it'd be easier to just fabricate crimes and imprison innocent people for revenue?

Think about it logically before you get all of your information from conspiracy sites based on heresay. Just because it's on a website doesn't make it true.

@Nekkoru - I wouldn't call that "abuse". If you follow the NYTimes links at the bottom of the page, you get a less alarmist take on the audit which really accounts to nothing more than, "the program lacks effective management, monitoring and reporting procedures." Basically, the FBI is just lazy and sloppy when it comes to filing the necessary paperwork which happens in every large company and bureaucracy. The most damning thing contained in the audit is that the FBI used the Patriot Act to collect information (names, addresses and phone numbers which by the way, for most people are out there on the internet for free) without first filing the appropriate paperwork. Big deal.