Slashdot Mirror
Justice Department Proud of Patriot Act Slippery Slope
frank_adrian314159 writes "Yahoo News is reporting that the DoJ has been using its increased powers under the US PATRIOT Act to pursue common criminals. DoJ Officials have been holding seminars on how to use increased wiretap powers against (non-terrorist) money launderers and drug dealers. One example in the article is the guy running a meth lab who's now up for a life sentence for 'manufacturing chemical weapons' instead of the much shorter sentence he would have been facing under the current drug laws. Wonderful, huh? Who didn't see this coming? Of course, you're a law-abiding citizen, so you have nothing to worry about, right?" Patriot Act II will allow any Federal agent to demand records from anyone who interacts with you, with no judicial oversight whatsoever.
Crowd plays the "Imperial March" from Star Wars as Ashcroft enters building: story
And while I can't find it there was also, at a Patriot Act "whoo-ha!" rally, a protestor that directly addressed Ashcroft and said "You're fired" and told him that what he was doing was wrong. You didn't see any of that in the liberal media, however...
From the article:
This legislation allows us to go after the real criminals, namely the tobacco companies, and their weapons of mass destruction. It would be easy to argue that cigarettes fall under this loose definition. If a successful case were built against the tobacco companies, their executives would serve time in prison. Even if there wasn't a conviction, the case would bring to light the vague definitions proponents of the Patriot Act use to abuse its power. Tobacco companies may think twice about financing a president which pushes for legislation which could be used to convict them of serious offences against the state.
ian
Most meth people make today is based on the so-called nazi recipe and is much harsher. However when you get down to it speed is speed.
Oh, and dexies can also be prescribed to adults with ADD or in some cases of obesiety. Which is how people usually get them.
Agreed. And remember, Congress voted 357-66 in the house, and 98-1 in the senate. Which means, despite the rhetoric of Democratic presidential candidates - at least 69% of Democratic representatives (and 96% of Democratic senators) voted for it as well. So be sure to print off this sheet as well (pre-emptive google cache: here)
Give all these assholes the boot: vote against the incumbent!
This is the problem. Look around. Just about everything we use in day to day life could be considered a chemical weapon.
It give the prosecutors way too much power to selectively apply terrorist laws to situations that don't demand them in order to increase the penalties.
Think the sentances for meth are too low? Raise them, don't try to apply terrorist laws.
you've already got one, m'lad. they're called the project for a new american century - the think tank that came up with the whole notion of making u.s. foreign and domestic policy more "pc" (patriotically correct). it's all on record here:
official pnac site:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
analysis site 1:
http://www.pnac.info/
analysis site 2:
http://pnacrevealed.com/
read 'em and vote.
2 1337 4 u!
The only person in the entire congress to vote against the USA PATRIOT act was Senator Feingold of Wisconsin (my home state). If he ever runs for president he can count on my vote for that fact alone, never mind his excelent track record.
From the Federal Bureau of Prisons (PDF, 4.8 MB), median sentences in months for various classes of offenses.
207. Continuing criminal enterprise
135. Homicide, aggravated assault, kidnapping
121. Robbery (use of violence or the threat of violence to deprive another of property)
92. Sex offenses
85. Drug offenses
76. Weapons, explosives, arson
67. Burglary, larceny, property offenses
51. National security
38. Immigration
30. Courts or corrections
27. Extortion, fraud, bribery
19. Banking and insurance, counterfeit, embezzlement offenses
Noting that these figures are for federal prisons only (YMMV locally), it seems to suggest that drug offenses are usually punished relatively harshly. If the guy was running a meth lab, and the prosecution actually had a strong case, he would face a significant prison sentence. Possession of 5 grams (about a sixth of an ounce) of methamphetamine carries a federally mandated minimum five-year prison sentence--if it is his first offense. Quite frankly, any prosecutor that has to resort to "weapons of mass destruction" claims to incarcerate a guy running a meth lab for a significant period of time is either lazy or incompetent.
~Idarubicin
Well, I can only speak for B.C., since that's where I live. Vancouver has a tech website called bctechnology.com that has job listings and, more importantly, a directory of tech companies here. So far as I can tell, though, Toronto is the place to be, but it's also a much larger city (Greater Vancouver has somewhere around 1.5 million people, Toronto is, what, 4 million?)
Otherwise, check monster.ca and so forth, not so much for specific postings, but to get a feel for what's available. Really, if you want to move here, you should show up in a city and start looking around in person - I honestly don't know what my boss would do if he got a resume from some guy in the U.S. that wasn't immediately available for an interview. Come here, check out the city and the employment situation, and talk to some companies. I think moving to a whole different country is a big decision, and Canada is more different from the U.S. than you might realise.
So far as the legalities of working here, it's pretty easy for Americans with skills and so forth, especially if you have a job offer. I know several Americans that have come here with zero problems. The site to visit is http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/ (sorry, too lazy to make the link.)
Anyway, I hope that helps.
- Democrats spend LESS and want to INCREASE personal/social freedoms
- Republicans spend MORE and want to DECREASE personal/social freedoms
Democrats want to decrease personal/social freedoms as well. It was the Democrats who told Hollywood to "Clean up your act, or we'll clean it up for you." It was Democrats who came up with Political Correctness & speech codes.
The correct answer is:
- Democrats spend LESS and want to DECREASE personal/social freedoms
- Republicans spend MORE and want to DECREASE personal/social freedoms
And that includes social programs, too. Bush's is INCREASING social program spending 50% faster than Bill Clinton did, and 40% faster than Bill Clinton did in the two years he had a Democrat congress. And that doesn't include the prescription drug bill.
And Senator Feingold was one of 67 members of Congress to vote against the USA PATRIOT Act, but the only Senator to do so.
"Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."
James Madison - 1788
The truth about Scientology, Xenu, and you: Operation Clambake
I think what he was actually saying, was that when the events of September 11th happened, the world was kind of shocked. They dropped most of their hatred for the U.S. and actually felt sympathy.
Then, Dubya decided to do everything that you've listed above and fscked all of that up.
Please read the entire post before responding.
Rather than repeat, and possibly misstate, the positions of the candidates I'd suggest you take a look at each of the candidates issue statements.
Most of the candidates have answers (or ideas) for each of these questions posted on their page. There is no single unified platform for the democratic party at this point.
Get a load of this.
-Hentai [in vita non pacem est]