Slashdot Mirror
ACLU Campaign Challenges Patriot Act
Nept sent in a pointer to this story about the ACLU starting a media campaign challenging the PATRIOT Act. Good to hear.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
The ACLU is also challenging the involvement of the US military in the DC sniper case, as reported by CNN. The "depend the Constitution" ad campaign mentioned is $3.5M large, which includes a million dollars worth of TV ads in 10 markets
Whoot! Keep it up guys!
Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
Since the name is an acronym for "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism", it should be called the USAPATRIOT act.
All uppercase, no space (because "U SAP AT RIOT" is just as good a decomposition).
That quote is taken a bit out of context. Depending on how you read into it, he may actually be saying that he believes its his job to ensure freedoms such as free speech endure (which the ACLU is exercising.)
The whole quote is:
Props to these representatives for voting against the Patriot Act.
The "Campaign for Freedom" public service announcements were produced by the Ad Council; you can view the PSAs online at http://www.adcouncil.org/campaigns/campaign_for_fr eedom/.
wired is also reporting the same story. click here to read it.
If you find a shell casing, often it will tell you nothing other than the caliber.
.300 Savage which fires great, it's not going to be in a Database since all the databases proposed are for licenced gun sales and new weapons.
AKs use a shorty 7.62 or 5.45 caliber round, there are about 45-70 million AKs world wide, so if you find that casing, you are still dealing with a haystack. Some American makers are switching to the AKs 7.62 beacuse the rounds are cheap.
ARs typically use a 5.56, as do other NATO standard battle rifles and Isreali made rifles. I'm going to ballpark a number here and say there are 15-35 million rifles out there firing a 5.56.
The shooter in the DC area is using either a 5.56 or a 5.45 caliber rifle, I've heard both on the news and the police have shown both an AR and an AK on the news as the weapon being used.
Now, a bullet will get you more information, but with the sheer numbers of weapons out there in the US-Canada-Mexico pushing the 300-400 million range, even if you get a bullet that you can run ballistics on chances are high than they won't be using something in your Database.
An example, I have a 54 year old Remington Model 8 in
As for the arguement that cars are licenced but guns aren't, well cars aren't meantioned in the Constitution now are they? If the 2nd Amendment is going to be infringed on, then why shouldn't we licence printing presses or computers? Both are capable of being used against the common good of the people.
Unfortunately for your premise, you are misinterpreting the term 'regulate' as 'controlled, restricted, or governed by law or rule'. The Random House College Dictionary (1980) gives four definitions for the word "regulate," which were all in use during the Colonial period (Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, 1989):
The first definition, to control by law in this case, was already provided for in the Constitution. It would have been unnecessary to repeat the need for that kind of regulation. For reference, here is the passage from Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, granting the federal government the power to regulate the militia:
The third definition is also inappropriate, because regulation for accuracy or function is somethiing that is done to the arms, not the militia.
Alexander Hamilton, in the Federalist Paper No. 29, described clearly what a well-regulated militia entailed:
The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, (1989) defines regulated in 1690 to have meant "properly disciplined" when describing soldiers:
The text itself also suggests the fourth definition ("to put in good order"). Considering the adjective "well" and the context of the militia clause, which is more likely to ensure the security of a free state, a militia governed by numerous laws (or just the right amount of laws [depending on the meaning of "well"] ) or a well-disciplined and trained militia?
He's a modem designer, or was before he was illegally deported.
Remarkably little content given the length of your post. You do manage, however, to:
- Roll out the usual scare words like `far to the right' (used, laughably enough, to describe the Heritage Foundation, which is about as mainstream a conservative group as there is)
- Attempt to smear the Olin Foundations philanthropy by pointing out that Mr. Olin made his money in explosives manufacturing -- I suppose you must be terribly opposed to the Nobel Prize, then, eh?
- Attempt to smear the IJ's record by micharacterizing their position on a number of issues
- Question the support for school vouchers in the minority community, despite the fact that it is poor inner city communities who are most hurt by having their children trapped in failing schools -- one reason that groups like the
Black Alliance for Educational Opportunity are some of the firmest supporters of School Choice
- Describe opposition to affirmative action as `racist' -- a dirty smear, and one that fails to explain how it could be racist to oppose race-based preferences.
So, in short, I'd have to say that your post tells us a lot more about your narrow biases and (amusingly) about how threatened you feel by groups like the IJ which are doing actual work for civil liberties then it tells us about the IJ itself.