The Patriot Act may be controversial but what do ordinary, law-abiding citizens have to lose in order to maintain their freedoms? This new “act” of congress has been one of the most controversial, opposed, and celebrated forms of legislation ever produced by the United States Government. The Patriot Act was meant to give the FBI/CIA a better chance to fight against terrorism in the United States and overseas. This is still labeled as controversial because, while many Americans feel like this will help to stop terrorism, there is also fear that it will infringe upon their civil liberties. I think differently because not only has the Patriot Act been important for national security, it has also allowed authorities to prevent many acts of terrorism while many Americans have misconceptions about it.
The Patriot Act is meant for terrorists, not for the law-abiding, every day citizen. There are many reasons why the Patriot Act is important, but the bottom line is that it’s meant to give the Government authority to stop terrorism without taking away our civil liberties. The issue with terrorism is that it is very hard to find and fight, making it extremely dangerous when it’s given a chance to succeed (usually resulting in deaths of hundreds or thousands of people, especially this country and other countries). If the FBI/CIA had to maintain the same protocol of waiting a while to get a warrant, the damage inflicted by terrorism could be fairly substantial if not stopped in time (think. September 11th, 2001). Actually, there was recently a book published from an American operative that knew of the incoming attack, but it was really hard for this person to bring the information up to other authorities.
The Patriot Act also gives the Federal Government more power to stop money laundering from foreign terrorists, allows for authorities to search a suspected terrorist’s house and belongings, and allows wire-tapping of their communication devices if terrorism is suspected. The government had this power for decades but it was dedicated for investigating the mafia and other forms of organized crime (drug runners and sex trafficking). Since these government agencies were so effective in tracking down organized crime, the federal government decided to dedicate more efforts towards terrorist activities. The Patriot Act gave these agencies more power to require resources to hone in on terrorist activities in the U.S., it has protected many Americans living/visiting abroad, according the Department Of Justice. In other words, the Patriot Act prevented American deaths overseas from our own “home-brewed” terrorists, by removing the wall between foreign intelligence and criminal law enforcement.
Since many of these powers have been in place for decades, authorities had no problems in regards to the mafia, but terrorism was another story. Terrorism has been deemed very difficult to fight against in the homeland due to the amount of freedoms we have in this country, which I am VERY grateful of but this is a very different story. I not saying, by any means, that the government should hinder our freedoms to protect us but to hinder the freedoms of ONLY suspected terrorists. I will make this very clear…. It can be very hard to stop a terrorist because of the ways they were trained in evading authorities and investigators by blending in with the normal populace. To fight against this, The Patriot Act allowed the use of a roving wiretap that could be used to follow a terrorist and all of their electronic devices instead of one at a time per warrant. This technology is important because as technology changes, so do the tactics involved in terrorist activity.
If the Patriot Act was passed nearly unanimously in Congress, seen constitutional by the Supreme Court and caught many alleged terrorist, then why are people so opposed to it? The answer lies within the 4th Amendment of our constitution and how this amendment protects citizens from the government when authorities decide to search your house without a warrant or any act of invading your privacy. The Patriot Act may very well let federal agencies spy on unassuming Americans and invade their privacy. This has been argued by lawyers in the ACLU but none of them could stop the Patriot Act, mainly because the Supreme Court has ruled that it was constitutional. If the Patriot Act is abused and government authorities listen to my conversations, then shame on them! If they listen to a probable terrorist, etc; then I could care less….
What prices must we pay in order to preserve what freedoms we still have? I believe it would be unwise to banish the Patriot Act because it protects our freedoms overall from being killed, maimed or disabled from terrorist activity. This almost happened in Portland, Oregon where thousands of people were watching the Christmas tree lighting downtown, unknowingly in the middle of a would-be terrorist plot. If it weren’t for the FBI using powers from the Patriot Act, thousands of people could have died that night. The FBI agent that was acting like a terrorist figured out how to manipulate Muhammed Mohammed in thinking he had the parts for a bomb. With the intentions to kill a few thousand Portlanders, the FBI seized his opportunity. Who knows what will happen to that little punk. All I can think about now is how many lives were saved because of this form of government intervention. Usually, Liberals, Libertarians and some Conservatives are opposed to this type of government intervention because it may “hinder” their civil rights or privacy rights. But what if saves a few thousand people from death?
The Act is meant solely for terrorists in America but it is possible that an American may have their rights infringed if they are caught affiliating themselves with a terrorist accidently. For an ordinary American to be suspected of terrorism means they would probably have the phones wire-tapped and possibly, their home searched while they’re away. This is the worst aspect of the Patriot Act if the person was innocent because it would obviously infringe upon their 4th Amendment rights. However, the government is not allowed to simply spy on its citizens but only for reasons regarding drug trafficking, having ties to the mob, racketeering and now terrorism.
You are more likely to die from a heart attack, car accident or colon cancer than you are to die of a terrorist attack. This is absolutely true, depending on where you live of course. Here, in America, we have luxury of saying just that. Statistically speaking, this is very true but over-simplified because a terrorist will kill multiple people and even thousands if they desire, instead of just having one person die from disease or a vehicular accident of some kind. Some people state that these few deaths from terrorism shouldn’t be the reason for taking away our privacy or civil rights, but what’s the point of having any civil liberties if someone wants to take them away from you in the first place? Face it, terrorist organization want us dead for multiple reasons (you can read some Chomsky on his perspective of how it’s mainly our fault) but why not protect the homeland better but within the homeland?
Everyone must understand that when terrorists succeed in their plans, they often kill many people along with themselves. If the government didn’t do much to stop terrorism, citizens would still complain as their fellow countrymen lay dying in the streets from suicide bombers. As we speak, there are terrorists in the U.S., Canada, Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Palestine, Iran and Africa that are training and influencing young minds to become terrorists. If this is not true than why are there still terrorists being fought from soldiers in some of those countries? I understand there are countless Muslim organizations condemning terrorism but it’s not enough to stop them from influencing younger minds into becoming our enemy!
What’s even more troubling is that terrorists don’t just commit typical forms of crime and typically cause mass murders around the world. A few examples are Spain, England, Russia, Israel, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Yemen, Philippines and Thailand. These are just a few examples of the many countries that are affected by terrorism in the past and present. After the 2004 terrorist bombings in Madrid, the Spanish government set a “zero tolerance” policy against terrorism, thwarting many would-be attacks on their homelands. The question remains how effective the Patriot Act could be if it were to be implemented into other countries, who are having worse problems with terrorism than the U.S.?
If a citizen is suspected of terrorism and the government cannot have the power to stop them in time, what would happen? This question is the very reason why it can remain feasible to allow the government to have certain powers to protect us. The government should have absolutely no business interfering with somebody’s life, unless they’re suspected of terrorist activity…doing so without their knowledge may be controversial but I would rather have my hide protected and the plane I’m riding in…. A terrorist can easily grab a hold of devices and ingredients to make a bomb out of ordinary household goods. The trouble is how can anyone stop them if the government has no idea what they’re doing? We live in a country surrounded by a sphere of liberty and what choices we make, or what choices the government makes, can affect other citizens and their liberties. To what means must we allow the government to maintain that fine balance between our freedoms and our safety?
Work Cited:
Seamon, Richard H., and William Dylan Gardner. "The Patriot Act and the wall
between foreign intelligence and law enforcement." Harvard Journal of Law &
Public Policy 28.2 (2005): 319+. Academic OneFile. Web. 24 Jan. 2011.
"What Is the USA Patriot Web." The United States Department of Justice. United States Federal
Government. Web. 22 Jan. 2011. .
