Quote:
Originally Posted by zerospinboson
You forgot "warrantless wiretaps" there....
|
Hm, without debating the merits of The Patriot Act, you really do not see a difference between:
(a) someone downloading a "pirated" mp3, and
(b) someone
specifically believed to be affiliated with a terrorist group, who is receiving communication from a foreign country, where such communication is considered a threat to national security?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sony_fox
"aimed" Yeah right.  There is no legal basis for "aimed" or "intent" once the powers are granted they get used for anything. Cf for example UK (legal) marches - suddenly the police are using anti-terror legislation: stopping searching and detaining without charge, ditto for journalists taking photos.... |
Kind of a broad brush there.... Generally, courts in the US do not take the view, that "once the powers are granted they get used for anything." And parts of The Patriot Act, such as the use of NSLs, are a prime example of this.