Do We Still Need the PATRIOT Act?

 USA PATRIOT ACT is about providing security and safety to citizens of USA and to prevent any national r foreign criminal activity or terrorist attacks. Also, it was created in response to 9/11 which was a definitely a big reality and a threat to all citizens of America. As this law provides safe and secure life to the people of its country, i think it still need to be in state of law because terrorism has not reached to its end in USA and people living in America still have right to live their life freely without fear of being targeted by any terrorism attack. Also it is the responsibility of Government to make such anti terrorism laws which can assure citizens of their safe lives. In this case, it is definitely true that this law is the need of people because they want there secure lives and no one in USA want to see any other attack similar to 9/11 and no one want to loose lives of their loved ones. 

So in conclusion, i would say PATRIOT ACT should remain in the state of LAW as it promises secure lives of Americans and protects people from domestic or international terrorists.

The Patriot Act was put in place to protect and secure the American people, however, more than a decade later the act has not been altered to truly give back the privacy that the constitution promises Americans. While some sections of the Patriot Act are still very much a necessity, others can be altered or even removed to provide an up to date version of the act. In the place of these out of date sections new and , what should have been, required sections need to be inserted. Sec.101. Counterterrorism Fund, which serves as the introduction to the act, states that the fund is to provide finances to Federal agencies for a multitude of different reasons including reestablishing offices or facilities that have been damed or destroyed as a result of terrorism. Although this claus may be perceived as helpful we no longer have a direct and immediate need for this type of fund. To put it in perspective, other funds of the United States are severely lacking to say the least and Americans are suffering due to the misplacement of crucial money. 

In addition, the concerns of the Patriot Act should truly begin with the man in charge. "If an agent makes the required assertion that he or she believes information relevant to a terrorism investigation might be found, the court “must” issue the order without actually reviewing whether there is any justification for the agent prying into the affairs of someone who may not even be suspected of anything." - Susan N. Herman. This is where the trouble begins. With the amount of spying or "supervision" that agencies have the authority to conduct on any person(s) there need to be some serious revisions to make sure that authority is not being abused. 

​

             The Patriot act is just a pretty painted legal opportunity slowly striping away U.S citizen’s rights. The patriot does have its perks when the person that they are targeting is actually planning a terroristic act. The problem that the government might “run into” is targeting individuals who show no sign of being a terrorist.

             In my opinion the Patriot act is simply racial profiling behind wires. After the nine eleven attack the news and other sources that deliver our information to us put the idea in the peoples head that anyone from the middle east is a terrorist and we should be afraid if we see these people in garbs and near tall buildings. With that being said             when the act was passed everyone thought it was a fantastic idea because it would only focus on the people who attacked our country.

            The issue with that is this act not only takes away the privacy of the citizens but takes away the right for us to know when it is happening to us as well. It is too much power for the government to have. The government gets to define what enough evidence and how appropriate it is for a tap to be done on someone’s phone, search emails etc.

            I honestly do not believe that the Patriot Act is explained to the citizens enough for them to understand exactly what it means and how it will affect them. I also believe that the Patriot  Act not longer serves as its original purpose if more citizens within the country are under surveillance than the “terrorist” we are trying to stop and keep track of. 

Nathan A. Sales states that the Patriot Act is needed to protect America from terrorists. He also states that there will be some elaborated safeguard measures so the officers are not going to abuse this power. However, when I watched "Enemy of the State" I can't just say that this movie is not going to happen in real life. Someday -hopefully never, someone inside of the government or someone with power will use the tools for their own vain needs.  

"This tool can only be used to investigate international terrorism, not domestic. And it doesn’t apply to Americans, only to temporary visitors like tourists." - Nathan A. Sales

I have some slight dilemma in this statement because what if, just what if, someone inside US and that is a citizen started to work for the terrorists? Because to be honest, we can never trust everyone because everyone has their own needs. The Patriot Act will give us more problems than we already have. Great power comes with great responsibilities. And who define the word "appropriate"? Also, what are the necessary tools that we need to prevent terrorism?

And where will be our privacy go? Just like Susan N. Herman said in her article, "The Patriot Act is jeopardizing the people's values, freedom of speech, association and religion, privacy and dude process." Everything that is being recorded can backfire and ruin everyone. Privacy is the big problem in this law.

It's not that I am fully hating on the Patriot Act, I am just trying to voice my opinion that this topic needed more time and tweaking for it to be okay. There has to be a lot of thinking and debate when it comes to this kind of protection. Yes, we need protection but this protection can be our weakness in the future. 

America, being the top dog of the world, is not only a country with many hands to hold and many countries that are holding on with it. America is also a country with many guns pointed at it. Many envious hearts, and evil eyes. Though, America cannot stop the threats that people hold against, America can try to stop those actions that are have been and are being portrayed. One way that America has decided to help themselves and the citizens, is with the Patriots Act. There may be so much debate or whether the Act is good for us, or an invasion of privacy… what does one have to loose? Aside from if the Government uses this weapon as a way to "stop crime" , or if they use it as a way to block terrorism for the country. With my person opinion, a regular citizen should not care. The government does not have the time, space, or ability to care that your child may have stolen a dollar candy bar from a store and it calling all their friends about it. Rather, when there are physical and literal threats being announced to potentially bombing that family house. Now for a Mofia family, the privacy act may be a bit more threatening. So in result, only those objected to the act are those with something to hide. &Those who feel the act gives the government 100% lethal ability to override your life, don't understand that's NOT what it's for. I feel as if they could care less for the one individual, vs the millions around the country. If it's a way to protect us, then so be it. But if it's a way to get out of hand and ruin the lives of the people, then fight it. 

After considering the opinionated articles from the New York Times, there are definitely people for and against the USA Patriot Act. However it seems like there are more people who agree that the act is and/or will deprive the American public of privacy that they deserve. I have to be honest that I am in agreement with some major points on both sides. Personally I think that hearts behind the creation of the USA Patriot Act we’re in the right place. The purpose of the act was to create a greater sense of safety. This idea in itself is reasonable, the problem lies within the limitations that should be set. Some of the things that this act allows are unnecessary. For example the government is allowed to check what type of books a person is interested in through their library records. I think it is interesting how people who check out a certain book can be viewed as suspicious. What about though, the person who wrote the book in the first place? Are they also viewed as suspicious?

This act in itself has redefined what a terrorist is because the requirements of being a suspicious person are not specific enough. Terrorism is the main concern, however many feel that the focus is to take over the lives of Americans by invading their privacy. Certainly this would raise debate because privacy is something that Americans feel like they are owed. Americans want safety but not at the cost of losing their privacy. Something could and should be done to please them in both ways. Maybe the techniques that are allowed by means of this act could be change so that innocent Americans aren’t being interrogated, in a sense. If efforts to protect the U.S continue to be put in the wrong place it may turn out for the worst. One comment brought out that this issue may be leading us closer and closer to a dictatorship. Another said that essentially the terrorist have won because of this controversy. Both of these statement are exactly what we don’t want to happen so I think its best that the whole act should not be changed rather some pieces should be tweaked. If not, our reality will become the fiction of Tony Scott’s Enemy Of the State.

The power that the Patriot Act allows the government to yield is unnecessary to achieve the means it sets out to accomplish. For example, the pieces of the law that allow agents access to library records is completely bogus. The possibility of abuse of this law is far greater than it's ability to do good. Rather than actually taking a hard look at the consequences of our best idea- being national security- pride and patriotism or shaming others for lack thereof in questioning this law has brought us to hastily procured legislation that restrict basic freedoms set in our Constitution. 

The threat lies in the fact that most common citizens, let alone the Senate or House members, don't understand its provisions whether they be positive or negative. Rather than attempt to improve international relations thus making those suspected of terrorism less inclined to hate us on principle, we relinquish our freedoms from ourselves by letting the law go as it stands now without further dissection. I believe with the amount of corruption within the government and the judicial system, individual courts or FBI agents with NSLs should not be able to pick and choose who has their Constitutional rights taken away based on suspicion like what types of books they like to read. 

I am not saying in any way that we should not investigate possible terror plots, but the current standing of the Patriot Act puts the basic everyday rights of citizens in jeopardy when they are not the ones who should be suspected of terrorism. The position of, "well if you're doing nothing wrong then it shouldn't matter, right?" grinds my gears especially. So basically, you're not religious so you shouldn't have the right to practice any religion you want anyway. We all think you're guilty, so you don't need a fair trial anyway, right? 

The Patriot Act will remain a controversial issue for the days, months, and years ahead. The Patriot Act is looking to stop terrorists and make our country safer. We as people have safety concerns everyday and there's always a risk of getting hurt in some way. In the NYtimes article they say that although the threats from Al Queda have diminished that the Patriot Act is still necessary to protect the people from possible threats. It also said that the Act isn't only for terrorists and and Al Queda, but ordinary criminals that affect our everyday lives. The tracking of communications is what throws me off. But thinking about it logically if you aren't doing anything wrong, then there shouldnt be a problem with someone tracking your calls right? Yes that is a complete invasion of ones privacy but in the long-run it could be helpful to stop henious crimes. In my opinion this ACT should remain a law. It's helped us and who knows what's going to happen next it could be very prominent in the future.