Police State?

[securitybreach]

We are now officially a police state. I just saw at 9AM 2 motorcycle policemen stopping every vehicle and ordering the person out and searching the vehicles. They literally ordered people out of their cars, then asked for license and searched vehicle. They could only pull over 2 at a time but as soon as one car left, the officer step into the road and order the next car to pull over. This is like Nazi Germany and they are acting like the gestapo. The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution ensures citizens' right to "be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. Good thing I was on foot and not in a car. I know the USA has been going down the tube as far as rights but this hits home, literally 1 block away. Must be something like a Amber Alert (for the non-americans that means that a child has been abducted)Thanks

Edited December 20, 2007 by securitybreach

[Guest LilBambi]

Yes, there are real concerns about all of that. And in many cases it's a real catch 22. Like the Amber Alerts. You wouldn't want some maniac getting away with a child either.Has to be a better way for the Police to do that without being uncaring of Citizen's rights. Ordering people out of their cars, "papers please" and search the vehicle really does have a bad feel to it, doesn't it?I am reinserting my earlier posting about those those Bills here since I misinterpreted Jeber's words later in this topic:lewmur, I hear ya. But when you see that things like this are going on...FOUR separate versions of the following are in the works in Congress!!! Here's just two. One has already passed the HOUSE and already had a couple readings in the Senate.H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007S. 1959: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007Google Search on Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007'Thought Crimes,' HR 1955 Passed With 404 Votes - Submit, Ye Citizens, Silently to State Murder:More in the article. You don't have to be a Republican or a Democrat to know in your heart that this is suicide for our country and totally contrary to the Constitution.Actual text of HR1955Actual text of S.1955NOTE TO ALL: This is not a great topic for Scot's Newsletter Forums due to it's political nature. SO: Please remember to debate the issues without going after the the Scot's Newsletter Member's views -- Or this topic will be closed to further discussion.

Edited December 21, 2007 by LilBambi

[lewmur]

We are now officially a police state. I just saw at 9AM 2 motorcycle policemen stopping every vehicle and ordering the person out and searching the vehicles. They literally ordered people out of their cars, then asked for license and searched vehicle. They could only pull over 2 at a time but as soon as one car left, the officer step into the road and order the next car to pull over. This is like Nazi Germany and they are acting like the gestapo. The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution ensures citizens' right to "be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. Good thing I was on foot and not in a car. I know the USA has been going down the tube as far as rights but this hits home, literally 1 block away. Must be something like a Amber Alert (for the non-americans that means that a child has been abducted)Thanks

An Amber Alert wouldn't justify random searches and wouldn't require people to get out of their cars and allow a complete search. You either have a legitimate reason to search every car or you have no justification to search any car.

[lewmur]

lewmur, I hear ya. But when you see that things like this are going on...FOUR separate versions of the following are in the works in Congress!!! Here's just two. One has already passed the HOUSE and already had a couple readings in the Senate.H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007S. 1959: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007Google Search on Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007'Thought Crimes,' HR 1955 Passed With 404 Votes - Submit, Ye Citizens, Silently to State Murder:More in the article. You don't have to be a Republican or a Democrat to know in your heart that this is suicide for our country and totally contrary to the Constitution.Actual text of HR1955Actual text of S.1955NOTE TO ALL: This is not a great topic for Scot's Newsletter Forums due to it's political nature. SO: Please remember to debate the issues without going after the the Scot's Newsletter Member's views -- Or this topic will be closed to further discussion.

I see nothing in this that would allow random searches of automobiles. I don't know the facts of what happened in Fl., but if it was as reported, then it was unlawful and nothing in the Patriot Act or MCA would change that.Do you find that investigating the proselytizing of violence against the American people to somehow undermine our liberties? As far as I can see, despite the rhetoric, that's all these bills are authorizing.

[Gary]

To compare The United States to Nazi Germany is not only ludicrous , it is outright wrong.

[securitybreach]

To compare The United States to Nazi Germany is not only ludicrous , it is outright wrong.

Sorry if I offended you but you have to see how it all started with the Nazis. It was not like all the bad things happened at once. It is like anything, you do it slowly instead of all at once.THanks

[Jeber]

In my experience, when there's a car to car search like this it's either because of a jail or prison escape in the immediate area or because a felon is known to be in the area.I would hope and expect there is a legitimate reason for these actions.On the other hand, LilBambi, there's no justification for those bills you posted. I'm hoping rationality prevails and those just disappear.

[Guest LilBambi]

I disagree with that Jeber, but I removed them non-the-less.

[Gary]

Sorry if I offended you but you have to see how it all started with the Nazis. It was not like all the bad things happened at once. It is like anything, you do it slowly instead of all at once.THanks

You did not offend me, I just strongly disagree that The United States could be compared to Nazi Germany. A regime that exterminated well over 6,000,000 people. My opinion is and was not a slam against you or anyone else. As a former police officer I can say that the police acted well within the law. As Jeber stated, there must have been a valid reason for such a search.

[Jeber]

It seems I wasn't very clear.My last sentence was in reference to those proposed bills. They should never have been introduced, and I would hope before they get any further someone with a bit of common sense and an appreciation for the Constitution will ensure they disappear.Our national paranoia over terrorism is going to lead to more of these types of bills if we aren't careful.

[Gary]

It seems I wasn't very clear.My last sentence was in reference to those proposed bills. They should never have been introduced, and I would hope before they get any further someone with a bit of common sense and an appreciation for the Constitution will ensure they disappear.Our national paranoia over terrorism is going to lead to more of these types of bills if we aren't careful.

In my experience, when there's a car to car search like this it's either because of a jail or prison escape in the immediate area or because a felon is known to be in the area.

The above statement is yours. Paranoia is a false reaction to something. Over three thousand people died on 9.11.2001. We have not been attacked since, so the government must be doing something right.

[Guest LilBambi]

It seems I wasn't very clear.My last sentence was in reference to those proposed bills. They should never have been introduced, and I would hope before they get any further someone with a bit of common sense and an appreciation for the Constitution will ensure they disappear.Our national paranoia over terrorism is going to lead to more of these types of bills if we aren't careful.

Thanks Jeber! So glad you clarified that! I totally misread that!

[lewmur]

Yes, there are real concerns about all of that. And in many cases it's a real catch 22. Like the Amber Alerts. You wouldn't want some maniac getting away with a child either.Has to be a better way for the Police to do that without being uncaring of Citizen's rights. Ordering people out of their cars, "papers please" and search the vehicle really does have a bad feel to it, doesn't it?I am reinserting my earlier posting about those those Bills here since I misinterpreted Jeber's words later in this topic:lewmur, I hear ya. But when you see that things like this are going on...FOUR separate versions of the following are in the works in Congress!!! Here's just two. One has already passed the HOUSE and already had a couple readings in the Senate.H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007S. 1959: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007Google Search on Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007'Thought Crimes,' HR 1955 Passed With 404 Votes - Submit, Ye Citizens, Silently to State Murder:More in the article. You don't have to be a Republican or a Democrat to know in your heart that this is suicide for our country and totally contrary to the Constitution.Actual text of HR1955Actual text of S.1955NOTE TO ALL: This is not a great topic for Scot's Newsletter Forums due to it's political nature. SO: Please remember to debate the issues without going after the the Scot's Newsletter Member's views -- Or this topic will be closed to further discussion.

Before anyone condemns these bills, I suggest you read the bills themselves and not just the "Thought Crimes" article. That article appears to intentionally distort both the wording and the purpose of the bills. They are not about policing thought but about finding those that are teaching sedition. There are right wing groups teaching their children that it is time for armed insurrection as well as Muslim Amans teaching children jihad against the entire Western World.Investigating this reality in no way endangers our civil rights. Edited December 21, 2007 by lewmur

[Guest LilBambi]

I agree, that was just one person's opinion. But it's one opinion that certainly gives pause to check out for ourselves what is in the actual Bills.Everyone should be checking out the S.Bills and H.R. Bills for themselves.The intent of the law may be good, HOWEVER, the carriage of the law may go way beyond and actually do damage to Citizen's constitutionally granted rights, liberties and freedoms. AND as such could be abused to the Citizen's danger...like so many other laws have been actually.

[lewmur]

I agree, that was just one person's opinion. But it's one opinion that certainly gives pause to check out for ourselves what is in the actual Bills.Everyone should be checking out the S.Bills and H.R. Bills for themselves.The intent of the law may be good, HOWEVER, the carriage of the law may go way beyond and actually do damage to Citizen's constitutionally granted rights, liberties and freedoms. AND as such could be abused to the Citizen's danger...like so many other laws have been actually.

One opinion certainly does give pause. It should give pause to suspect the motives of the one who wrote it. These bills do nothing more than set up yet another Congressional committee to investigate a problem. It grants no additional power to anyone and doesn't even involve the executive branch. So just who is so afraid of the investigations that they would viciously attack the bills? Yes, that should give one pause.

[Guest LilBambi]

It does much more. or at least could do much more, than create a committee for investigation....depending upon which version is ULTIMATELY PASSED.It's not very long for a Bill. Here's word for word the version of this that was passed in the House (H.R.1955 IH):

Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)HR 1955 IH110th CONGRESS1st SessionH. R. 1955To prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes.IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESApril 19, 2007Ms. HARMAN (for herself and Mr. REICHERT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concernedA BILLTo prevent homegrown terrorism, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007'.SEC. 2. PREVENTION OF HOMEGROWN TERRORISM. (a) In General- Title VIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 361 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new subtitle:`Subtitle J--Prevention of Homegrown Terrorism`SEC. 899A. DEFINITIONS. `For purposes of this subtitle: `(1) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. `(2) RADICALIZATION- The term `radicalization' means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically-based violence to advance political, religious, or social change. `(3) IDEOLOGICALLY-BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically-based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs.`SEC. 899B. FINDINGS. `The Congress finds the following: `(1) The development and implementation of methods and processes that can be utilized to prevent homegrown terrorism in the United States is critical to combating domestic terrorism. `(2) The promotion of ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism exists in the United States and poses a threat to homeland security. `(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating ideologically-based violence and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens. `(4) While the United States must continue its vigilant efforts to combat international terrorism, it must also strengthen efforts to combat the threat posed by homegrown terrorists based and operating within the United States. `(5) Understanding the motivational factors that lead to homegrown terrorism is a vital step toward eradicating these threats in the United States. `(6) The potential rise of self radicalized, unaffiliated terrorists domestically cannot be easily prevented through traditional Federal intelligence or law enforcement efforts, and requires the incorporation of State and local solutions. `(7) Individuals prone to ideologically-based violence span all races, ethnicities, and religious beliefs, and individuals should not be targeted based solely on race, ethnicity, or religion. `(8) Any measure taken to prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism in the United States should not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents. `(9) Certain governments, including the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia have significant experience with homegrown terrorism and the United States can benefit from lessons learned by those nations.`SEC. 899C. GRANT PROGRAM TO PREVENT IDEOLOGICALLY-BASED VIOLENCE AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES. `(a) Establishment- Subject to the requirements of this section, the Secretary shall establish a grant program to prevent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States. `( Grants Authorized- The Secretary may award grants to States to enhance homeland security by preventing radicalization and homegrown terrorism in at-risk populations, as determined by the Secretary. `© Purpose- The purpose of the grant program is to prevent, disrupt, and mitigate the effects of radicalization and prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism in the United States. `(d) Grant Eligibility- Any State shall be eligible to apply for a grant under the program referred to in paragraph (a). `(e) Use of Funds- Grants awarded under this section shall be used by the States to award to agencies and organizations, including but not limited to, social services agencies, community-based groups, educational institutions and non-governmental organizations as sub-grantees to address radicalization and homegrown terrorism by-- `(1) developing best practices, standards and protocols to conduct outreach to various populations that are at-risk for radicalization and homegrown terrorism; `(2) assisting with educational outreach, social services, and integration into society; `(3) program planning and management and strategy formulation and strategic planning; `(4) promote civic engagement and community outreach programs; `(5) any other uses determined by the Secretary to be necessary to prevent radicalization and homegrown terrorism. `(f) Prohibited Uses- Funds provided as a grant may not be used-- `(1) for law enforcement activities, except for programs that include outreach activities; `(2) to supplant State or local funds; `(3) to construct buildings or other physical facilities; `(4) to acquire land; or `(5) for any State or local government cost-sharing contribution. `(g) Application for Grant- `(1) IN GENERAL- A State may apply for a grant under this subsection by submitting to the Secretary an application detailing how requested funds would be used to achieve the purpose stated herein and containing such other information the Secretary may reasonably require. `(2) DEADLINES FOR APPLICATIONS AND AWARDS- All applications for grants must be submitted at such time as the Secretary may reasonably require for the fiscal year for which they are submitted. The Secretary shall award grants pursuant to all approved applications for such fiscal year as soon as practicable, but not later than March 1 of such year. `(3) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS- All funds awarded by the Secretary in a fiscal year shall be available for obligation through the end of the subsequent fiscal year. `(4) MINIMUM CONTENTS OF APPLICATION- The Secretary shall require that each State include in its application, at a minimum- `(A) the purpose for which the applicant seeks grant funds and the reason why the applicant needs the grant to meet the capabilities for preventing radicalization and homegrown terrorism within the State; `(:'( a description of how the allocation of grant funding proposed in the application would assist in fulfilling the capabilities for preventing radicalization and homegrown terrorism; `© a description of how the State plans to allocate the grant funds to local governments and Indian tribes; `(D) identification of the subgrantees that will expend grant funds; and `(E) a capital budget showing how the applicant intends to allocate and expend the covered grant funds. `(h) Prioritization of Grant Applications- `(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall evaluate and annually prioritize all pending applications for grants based upon the risk and degree to which they would, by achieving, maintaining, or enhancing the capabilities of the applicants on a nationwide basis, mitigate the threat of radicalization and homegrown terrorism. `(2) BASIS- Such evaluation and prioritization shall be based upon- `(A) the most current relevant information available, including, but not limited to threat assessments generated by the Department of Homeland Security Office of Intelligence Analysis, the Department of Homeland Security Office of Strategic Plans Radicalization and Engagement Working Group, and products generated by the Center for Excellence for the Study of Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism established under section 899C; `( criteria, which shall be made publicly available and reported to Congress, that identifies the characteristics, qualities, and standards that groups or organizations should meet in order to serve as partners with the United States Government in fulfilling the purpose of the grant program; and `© information contained within State applications for grants, including sub-grantees identified in such applications. `(3) REQUIREMENT FOR SUB-GRANTEES TO MEET CRITERIA- The Secretary may deny a grant under this section to any State that submits a grant application that identifies a sub-grantee that does not meet the criteria referred to in paragraph (2)(. `(4) PENALTIES FOR USING NON-APPROVED OR NON-DISCLOSED SUB-GRANTEES- Any State that allows grant funds to be used by a subgrantee that has not been disclosed to and previously approved by the Secretary, shall be ineligible for any further grant funds under this section for two fiscal years. `(i) Certifications Regarding Distribution of Grant Funds to Local Governments- Any State that receives a grant shall certify to the Secretary, that the State has made grant funds available for expenditure by local governments and other local groups. `(j) Report on Spending- Each recipient of a grant under this section shall annually submit a report to the Secretary not later than 60 days after the end of each Federal fiscal year that contains-- `(1) an accounting of the amount of State and local government funds spent on activities aimed at preventing radicalization and homegrown terrorism; `(2) an accounting of the administrative costs incurred by sub-grantees; `(3) information regarding the use of grant funds by the sub-grantees as required by the Secretary; and `(4) progress of the recipient and sub-grantees in achieving the purpose of the grant program. `(k) Government Accountability Office Access to Information- Each recipient of grant funds under this section and the Department shall provide the Government Accountability Office with full access to information regarding the activities carried out under this section. `(l) Reports to Congress- The Secretary shall submit an annual report to Congress that provides-- `(1) an evaluation of how states and local governments are making progress in achieving the purpose of the grant program; `(2) the total amount of funds provided to the States as grants under this section during the preceding year; and `(3) an accounting of how such amounts were expended.`SEC. 899D. CENTER OF EXCELLENCE FOR THE STUDY OF RADICALIZATION AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM IN THE UNITED STATES. `(a) Establishment- The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish or designate a university-based Center of Excellence for the Study of Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States (hereinafter referred to as `Center') following the merit-review processes and procedures and other limitations that have been previously established for selecting and supporting University Programs Centers of Excellence. The Center shall assist Federal, State, local and tribal homeland security officials through training, education, and research in preventing radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States. In carrying out this section, the Secretary may choose to either create a new Center designed exclusively for the purpose stated herein or identify and expand an existing Department of Homeland Security Center of Excellence so that a working group is exclusively designated within the existing Center of Excellence to achieve the purpose set forth in subsection (. `( Purpose- It shall be the purpose of the Center to study the social, criminal, political, psychological, and economic roots of radicalization and homegrown terrorism in the United States and methods that can be utilized by Federal, State, local, and tribal homeland security officials to mitigate radicalization and homegrown terrorism. `© Activities- In carrying out this section, the Center shall-- `(1) contribute to the establishment of training, written materials, information, analytical assistance and professional resources to aid in combating radicalization and homegrown terrorism; `(2) utilize theories, methods and data from the social and behavioral sciences to better understand the origins, dynamics, and social and psychological aspects of radicalization and homegrown terrorism; `(3) conduct research on the motivational factors that lead to radicalization and homegrown terrorism; and `(4) coordinate with other academic institutions studying the effects of radicalization and homegrown terrorism where appropriate.`SEC. 899E. PREVENTING RADICALIZATION AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM THROUGH INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE EFFORTS. `(a) International Effort- The Secretary shall, in cooperation with the Department of State and other Federal Government entities, as appropriate, conduct a survey of methodologies implemented by foreign nations to prevent radicalization and homegrown terrorism in their respective nations. `( Implementation- To the extent that methodologies are not impermissible under the Constitution, the Secretary shall use the results of the survey as an aid in developing a national policy in the United States on addressing radicalization and homegrown terrorism. `© Reports to Congress- The Secretary shall submit a report to Congress that provides-- `(1) a brief description of the foreign partners participating in the survey; and `(2) a description of lessons learned from the results of the survey and recommendations implemented through this international outreach.`SEC. 899F. PROTECTING CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES WHILE PREVENTING IDEOLOGICALLY-BASED VIOLENCE AND HOMEGROWN TERRORISM. `(a) In General- The Department of Homeland Security's efforts to prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism as described herein shall not violate the constitutional rights, civil rights, and civil liberties of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents. `( Commitment to Racial Neutrality- The Secretary shall ensure that the activities and operations of the entities created by this subtitle are in compliance with the Department of Homeland Security's commitment to racial neutrality issued in an Department-wide Memorandum on June 1, 2004. `© Auditing Mechanism- The Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Officer of the Department of Homeland Security will develop and implement an auditing mechanism to ensure that compliance with this subtitle does not result in a disproportionate impact, without a rational basis, on any particular race, ethnicity, or religion and include within its annual report to Congress required under section 705.'. ( Clerical Amendment- The table of contents in section 1( of such Act is amended by inserting at the end of the items relating to title VIII the following:`Subtitle J--Prevention of Homegrown Terrorism `Sec. 899A. Definitions. `Sec. 899B. Findings. `Sec. 899C. Grant program to prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism in the United States. `Sec. 899D. Center of Excellence for the Study of Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism in the United States. `Sec. 899E. Preventing radicalization and homegrown terrorism through international cooperative efforts. `Sec. 899F. Protecting civil rights and civil liberties while preventing ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism.'.

But there are 4 DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THIS BILL currently in circulation. ONLY of which has as a large part, the commission that lewmur is talking about. All four have very similar titles and all are a variant on H.R.1955 as shown on this page at the Library of Congress (thomas.loc.gov).

There are 4 versions of Bill Number H.R.1955 for the 110th Congress1 . Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1955.IH]2 . Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Reported in House)[H.R.1955.RH]3 . Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.1955.EH]4 . Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Referred to Senate Committee after being Received from House)[H.R.1955.RFS]

If you have trouble getting to the links above, just go to the main search page and put in homegrown terrorism in just the House Bills for this congress and you will come up with the exact same four I got earlier:

512 Bills from the 110th Congress ranked by relevance on "homegrown+terrorism ". 4 bills containing your phrase (or variants of its words) in the same order. 0 bills containing all your search words (or their variants) near each other in any order. 2 bills containing all your search words (or their variants) but not near each other. 506 bills containing one or more of your search words (or variants).Listing of 4 bills containing your phrase (or variants of its words) in the same order.1 . Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1955.IH]2 . Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.1955.EH]3 . Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Referred to Senate Committee after being Received from House)[H.R.1955.RFS]4 . Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (Reported in House)[H.R.1955.RH]

My point is this. Which version will be finally passed? And why are they not simply enforcing the laws in place? Why do they need to spend our tax dollars on this commission? or to set up a task force that would be under the department of homeland security and is that after the Commission has done it's job. That depends on the version passed wouldn't it? If you read the wording of the other versions floating around out there, it tends to make one wonder which one will ultimately be passed. Their names are SO CLOSE!BTW: the temporary search results at thomas.loc.gov apparently are very temporary so you will likely have to do the search yourself to get the full results for the homegrown terrorism results that yield the four results. If you include both House and Senate, you get 5 rsults including the current one in the Senate (that is also a Commission): [S.1959.IS]BTW: What's the current iteration of TC, TCG, LaGrande, NGSCB, Palladium / TCPA -- and do you remember all the flowery words used to remake it over and over and try to get away from it's roots? I just think that we need to be far more discerning about all that could potentially adversely affects our lives.

[Gary]

My point is this. Which version will be finally passed? And why are they not simply enforcing the laws in place?

Good Point

[lewmur]

Good Point

I don't see why. None of the bills create any additional police powers. They are all based on Congressional investigation and don't involve the executive branch. Congress already has the power to investigate anything it pleases. These bills are nothing more than rhetoric and haggling over committee assignments.Are they a waste of taxpayer money? Maybe. But so is 90% of the BS that Congress passes. But they are certainly no danger to our civil liberties.The LOST treaty is a far greater threat and nobody seems to care about it.

[Gary]

I don't see why. None of the bills create any additional police powers. They are all based on Congressional investigation and don't involve the executive branch. Congress already has the power to investigate anything it pleases. These bills are nothing more than rhetoric and haggling over committee assignments.Are they a waste of taxpayer money? Maybe. But so is 90% of the BS that Congress passes. But they are certainly no danger to our civil liberties.The LOST treaty is a far greater threat and nobody seems to care about it.

What has this Congress done except trying to put Bush down in any way possible. They spend more time on investigations which are useless, than doing their job, which is to legislate.

[Guest LilBambi]

OK, now we have gotten WAY off topic.The only reason that the Bills I mentioned were even somewhat relevant is due to the nature of wording in most of those bills, and that they could potentially exacerbate the type of situation that securitybreach had started this topic with.We need to stay on topic here. Thanks!I totally agree that there was likely a very good reason for the search, as noted above, possible prison break, Amber Alert/child snatched and need for timely search, but the main thing that always worries me is whether these types of searches need to be handled in a particular way to make sure that people's constitutional rights have not been trampled.You as a Citizen have to waive your right (albeit temporarily) and submit your vehicle to be searched in order to get on a ferry in this country right now. Yes, I did say that. You must waive your right by submitting to the 'random' tertiary search or take another route to your destination. Even if you are a commuter and they see you come and go and wave to you every morning and night, day after day, month after month, year after year.

[lewmur]

OK, now we have gotten WAY off topic.The only reason that the Bills I mentioned were even somewhat relevant is due to the nature of wording in most of those bills, and that they could potentially exacerbate the type of situation that securitybreach had started this topic with.We need to stay on topic here. Thanks!I totally agree that there was likely a very good reason for the search, as noted above, possible prison break, Amber Alert/child snatched and need for timely search, but the main thing that always worries me is whether these types of searches need to be handled in a particular way to make sure that people's constitutional rights have not been trampled.You as a Citizen have to waive your right (albeit temporarily) and submit your vehicle to be searched in order to get on a ferry in this country right now. Yes, I did say that. You must waive your right by submitting to the 'random' tertiary search or take another route to your destination. Even if you are a commuter and they see you come and go and wave to you every morning and night, day after day, month after month, year after year.

Same thing is true if you want to access the arrival/departure gates at an airport. You have the right to refuse the search and airport security has the right to deny you access to the area.But in both those cases, the searches are granted for the specific purpose of preventing attacks. IOW, bomb and/or weapons. If the searches found evidence of any unrelated crime, I doubt the evidence could be used against you in court. Edited December 21, 2007 by lewmur