Are you worried about your civil liberties being taken away?
155589
I am somewhat hopeful that america will wakeup. But we are on a slippery slope \n\nThe most direct way to authorize preventive law enforcement is to redefine liability broadly so that authorities can sweep up large numbers of people without having to prove that individuals have engaged in specific harmful conduct. In our history, this has been accomplished in two principal ways—by targeting people for what they say before they act and for their associations. \n\nFrom WWI to the japanese internments in WWII , mccarththyism, vietnam era fbi files on anyone who opposed the war, we have a history of allowing the government to restrict our civil liberties and interfere with protected free speech. Each time we recover to relaize the dangers , restrict the governments abilities anfd each time we forget and let history repeat itself. Perhaps if the midterm elections result in a republican loss of the House or Senate, we will be able this time to nip it in the bud. The longer that Bush & Co. remain in power, the more damage will be done.\n\nIn the immortal words of Ben Franklin - THOSE WILLING TO GIVE UP FREEDOMS FOR SECURITY WILL HAVE NEITHER.
638339
It's kind of a false dilemma.  Security and freedom can coexist, it just makes it a little harder.  I personally would rather be able to read, write, think, or say whatever I want without sanction than feel secure under surveillance.
833412
There never was a such thing as privacy, Mack. The government has all kinds of information about you and I. As long as we have a social security number, the government can literally bring up a whole mountain of information on anybody in an instant. So, really the bill of rights protects civil liberties to an extent. You can say what you want as long as it is true, otherwise it's slander and you can be sued, and you can have the right to an attorney paid for by the courts, but you only get a public defender.
966542
Benjamin Franklin, one of the smartest American to ever stand on this soil said: "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."  What holds true at the founding of this country holds today.  I think you should rethink your ideas with less emotion and fear of 911.  You have the courage enough to face countless attacks without giving up any of the Rights that were written for you in the Bill of Rights of your Constitution.  Once you give up these rights...the tyrants win.
450094
i'm being discriminated against by this question.i'm retired.it's a good thing i don't know who you are or i'd sic the ACLU on you.
227961
Yes I do think identity cards will infringe people's civil liberties. In my view the government is making Britain more like a police state than ever before.
73018
A severe blow to the civil liberties our forefathers worked so hard to get 230 years ago, that modern day Americans have seem to forgotten about.\n\nBush is guiding us down a path that will be very difficult to return from.  The Patriot Act with it's various inroads into our private lives, is a scary start.  Some people would argue that we are safer, but none said it better than Benjamin Franklin:\n\n"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
65837
Not at all. You should always have your personal freedom.
1016083
I agree with you.  Just one question, are you a smart Democrat that figured that out or a good Republican?  I'm only partially kidding there.  We are moving towards a socialistic society and loosing our freedoms.  Every time we vote in a new law that restricts our freedoms, and every time we initiate a new program encouraging people to rely on our government to do our work for us.  It is scaring the hell out of me!
1077933
i think that everyone is entitled to their own views, and we in the UK have been kept in the dark about so many things, its unbelievable.Only recently has the world opened up to us, essentially because of globalisation and migration. Alot of the press on the television to do with politics and this sort of thing is mainly propaganda, eg when they mention things like the new anti-terror laws and such, without anything actually haveing taken place, it is to sway public opinion, its spin. i do not wish to live my life censored, and what is life if it is not free? do we really want to go back to a time when people give up their rights for personal safety?! I think that Human Rights is of utmost importance, because if you were stopped in the street and searched for being black or for wearing traditional muslim clothes, i'm sure you would be in favour of human rights. Or if you were shot at because you were suspected of being a terrorist. However, everything has its boundaries, and if you are under attack its only right that you fight back. sad but true. My opinion, from Birmingham UK.
23409
Very doubtful today, what with the Patriot act, Homeland Security, Governments fear of new and alternative life styles, things, and people striving for need or greed in general everyday life. If we tried to be Utopian, Washington would shut us down. I know, I know I am a paranoid, but look around your world.
370171
Of course.\n I think it is a terrible idea to trade off civil rights for an ILLUSION of security... no one in this country is even a tiny bit safer than we were before the so called Patriot Act, just more fearful.\n\nBesides that, if we surrender our freedom in an effort to thwart terrorists, they win without even trying.
226920
Yes. I'm very upset at how the Bush administration has perverted the English language. "Patriot Act" takes away civil liberties. "Clean Water Act" allows companies to dump as much crud as they please in the water, and so on. \n\nThe Patriot Act allows the government to know which books you take out of the library. It denies the library the power to tell YOU that they they've been forced to tell the government which books you've checked out. \n\nStand up for your rights, kids. Once they're gone, they're gone.\n\n(And in response to another answer on this page: you don't have to wait until someone files a suit against a stupid law to know that it's wrong).
929278
It is conservative in the sense that it prevents certain actions which some consider risky, and requires behaviors and conformity that many consider important for security.\n\nThe Patriot Act is a messy piece of legislation in some areas, but it doesn't actually reduce any civil liberties. It just reduces privacy in areas where people interact with businesses and other organizations. That's not friendly, but it's not unconstitutional.\n\nThere are plenty of laws passed in the past year or three that are unconstitutional, including the Military Commissions Act. Those are the threats to civil liberties, because those deliberately and systematically say the constitution can be ignored at will.\n\n{EDIT} ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \n\nAnd for those who keep asking what civil liberties we've lost, here are the most recent. Denial of right to counsel. Denial of due process. Abrogation of the confrontation clause. Denial of the right against self-incrimination. Denial of the right to assemble. Denial of the right to petition for redress of grievances. Loss of habeas corpus. \n\nThose were MY rights that were taken. Just because I've never had a need to invoke them doesn't make them any less mine. And just because you haven't needed them yet doesn't make them any less yours.\n\nAs a society, we only have those rights we choose to defend. Only those rights we can defend. And if we do not defend them, we lose them. Once, and for all of us.
925753
I agree.  The government has gotten too big and intrusive.  They have manipulated many into thinking that questioning the government is "unamerican."  \n\nTaking away the right of habeus corpus goes against centuries of democratic law.  The absolute worst argument in support of removing our privacy rights is that if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't care.  This makes no sense.  Many innocent conversations and behaviors can be taken out of context and subhect an innocent person to a trial.   Anyone that has ever been falsely accused of a crime can tell you how hard it is to prove that you are innocent.  \n\nHopefully, we are going to see a backlash against this and a return of the power to the people.
532009
It is just a small part of a big problem. Since 9-11 the govt has been taking more and more of our freedoms from us,(the American People). We have the patriot act, warrentless spying on the American people, no more habeas corpus, it is called FACISM. Very scary.
715944
it's not, \n\nIf the ACLU or some real constitutional lawers would step up to the plate and challange it, we could get somewhere.  \n\nand for the guy who said we don't have a right to privacy, how about you read the bill of rights.  \n\n"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."\n\nso "sneek and peek" wouldn't exactly be constitutional.