Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:59:07 -0800 From: Brad Templeton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [IP] more on much of PATRIOT is neutral legislation for civil liberties To: Dave Farber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 05:08:23PM -0500, Dave Farber wrote: > Much of what I see about the Patriot Act is what I claim is opinion, > or at most unproven allegations.
There may be people out there doing that but we try to be very dilligent. I'm not sure why that earlier observation that much of the Patriot act is not so harmful caused much debate. The act was a huge document, if everything were wrong about a law that large it would be a failure of epic proportions. The statistic about what percentage of this law or any law is bad or good is not relevant.
As for facts, we have had them up on our web site after our lawyers examined the act in detail.
Go to:
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism/PATRIOT/
For our analysis of the sections that relate to cyberspace in particular, with links to highly detailed studies, as well as other studies on the act, including the ACLU which deals with non-cyberspace issues in a way we don't.
Love or hate the Patriot Act, however, there is one thing about it everybody should hate. It was passed in anger. You should never make life-changing decisions when you are wracked with anger and grief, and that applies to individuals and to governments as well.
If we need changes in our justice system which alter the balance of
rights and freedoms in order to make it easier to apprehend criminals,
then this should be a matter of serious, and unemotional debate, with
no participate afraid they will be considered disloyal, unpatriotic
or unmutual because they are on one side or another of that question.
------------------------------------- You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
