House Limits Patriot Act Rules on Library Records

xerid writes "From CNN.COM: "WASHINGTON (AP) -- The House voted Wednesday to block the FBI and the Justice Department from using the Patriot Act to search library and book store records. Despite a veto threat from President Bush, lawmakers voted 238-187 to block the part of the anti-terrorism law that allows the government to investigate the reading habits of terror suspects.""

Comments

I know this will be repeated alot

[Dance_Dance_Karnov]

but they should man up and throw the whole damn thing out

Thank you, librarians

[Bimo_Dude]

Even though it's likely that Bush will veto this, I still am really thankful that we have such outspoken librarians in this country. They have really been helpful in trying to protect people's privacy, and have also done a lot to bring privacy issues to light in the eyes of the public.

Thank you!!!!!

Re:Thank you, librarians

[Bimo_Dude]

That's a good point. I always thought that there would just be another "terrorist" incident just before the 2008 enections, and martial law would be declared, thus keeping Bush in office indefinitely. I guess this is a cleaner, more permanent way to accomplish the implementation of [what I perceive to be] the new dictatorship of the USA. We really, really need to remove everybody in the House, Senate, and White House immediately, and restore the rights of the people.

A person I know who studied PoliSci told me that most dictatorships and other oppressive regimes start out as democracies or representative republics. The laws are changed slowly over time to consolidate the power and money into the hands of fewer and fewer people, as well as slowly eroding the rights if the average citizen. Eventually, this leads to a whole different type of gov't and the people never really noticed the changes until it was too late. They were too busy being distracted by bread and circuses (now it's Michael Jackson and Britney Spears).

/rant

Re:Nice

[justforaday]

If this goes on much longer it will be a simple matter to apply the "T" label to anyone for any reason at all under the strictest secrecy possible and they won't even have to tell you about it until it's too late.

I believe that's the whole point of this supposed "war on terra."

Surely it depends on context

[karzan]

What the Patriot Act ought to do is act as a signal that something has gone dreadfully wrong in the American system--and therefore must be changed. For one thing, the fact that so many Americans did not oppose it, and were so easily led into accepting a complete contravention of the constitution through a manipulation of irrational fear (what if the terrorists attack my house??) shows us that there is a deeper problem in American culture. No kind of democracy can really work if people are that uncritical and deferential.

Removing the Patriot Act is going to be incredibly difficult. Any process that does so, whether it is gradual or sudden, is going to first require a change in the whole political and cultural atmosphere, because there are so many people who genuinely believe measures like the Patriot Act are rational. So anything that removes the Patriot Act is going to do more than just remove the Patriot Act (it's not going to just be scrapped by a Democratic administration)

Whether you do it gradually or suddenly, if the Patriot Act were to be removed by representatives with little cultural change happening, then the deeper causal problems would still be there. But I think we can just as effectively remove it suddenly as we can slowly, if that process is carried out by just that--'We'. Because you're right--until the underlying factors are addressed, there is always the danger of this happening again ... and again.

But I'm not sure how much that has to do with the *speed* of removing it.

Re:Surely it depends on context

[Shajenko42]

What makes you think a judge is going to protect you from anything? Who controls the judges?

If judicial review is so worthless, why are many law enforcement officials so intent on ridding us of it?

Re:Still Payin With Cash

[SacredNaCl]

Considering all of the provisions that are in this, and how extremely overbroad almost every single one of them is and unneeded most of them are, that the only thing congress finds fault with is the library and bookstore provisions is quite disturbing.

I think we need to clean house. The white house, and both houses of congress.

Electronic communications provisions would have ranked a lot higher for me, as well as banking & financial provisions, and detention provisions, ability to issue "secret" warrants, sneak and peak... All of those ranked a lot above worrying about my library card book list.

Look at the Puppet!

[aluminumcube]

And with that, the Patriot Act II will pass with flying colors.

Sort of like globalization, the overwhelming majority of people who get their panties in a bunch about how evil the Patriot Act is really don't have a bloody clue about what the Patriot Act actually does. The 'Library Statute,' while hardly ever used, happens to be one of the most easily lambasted portions of the legislation because the academics and intellectuals on the left hold libraries to be sacred places of privacy.

The fact of the matter is, the Patriot act was hardly ever used to collect library records and the Patriot act supporters know it. Any prospective terrorist is far better served by looking up public records and using the internet. Seriously, if you are a well financed terrorist who poses an actual threat to this country, would you have EVER gone to the library?

By removing the Library bit from the Patriot act, Congress can look like they actually care while still allowing the meat of the Patriot act to be renewed, if not even adding a bit more to it.

Re:Look at the Puppet!

[harks]

I've heard this so often. "That part of the law is hardly ever used, why do you care so much?" (of course, if you don't need that part of the law then why have it?) Then, after a few years, they start using it. Then the pitch becomes, "But that's been part of the law for years now and has never been a problem. Why do you care now?"

Re:But...

[will_die]

If that is a really scare for you answer this question.
Why are you not upset that some government agency(library) or some private agency(bookstore) is recording your purchases, keeping them linked to your information, and not destroying them after they have ensure you have returned the book or your payment has been approved?
There is no library section of the US PATRIOT act there is only an area that allows the FBI to request from a business records under certain circumstations and only after approved by a judge, and that was an extention of when the same thing could be done with the same records, just not under thoses circumstances.

Re:Perhaps we shouldn't be so rash..

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not saying I like the Patriot Act, but I really think that we should be rational in our removal of this disturbance, as we weren't rational with our creation of it in the first place.

I strongly disagree! For three reasons:
1. Although enacted as an irrational response to terrorist threat, it has not been used to bring down one terrorist since enacted.
2. Despite all sorts of assurances while the bill was being discussed, the PA has been used against drug dealers, tax evaders and even the wayward Democratic members of the Texas legislature. This is not a "terrorist" bill; it is a bill that has been used almost exclusively against American citizens!
3. Now that Congress has actually grown a spine and won't be threatened with being unpatriotic to cram anything through, it is time to send a clear message to Bush et al that the Bill of Rights is more than just toilet paper!