Patriot Act renewal fails in Senate

[ThatReallyHurt]

Originally Posted by jBirch

What if you're blown up by one of those small groups due to an over-cautious approach?

James.

Hey, I'm not arguing. I'm all for protecting people; I also see the occasional news article where some two year old kid (or someone else unlikely) isn't allowed on a plane because he has the same name as someone who belongs to one of the aforementioned groups. I did say "occasional", too - I know there's still roughly a grillion people who fly or take the train or whatever daily with no problems at all.

Like I said, I'm all for protecting people. I'm utterly ignorant of the process used to select who gets watched, but I hope that there's a modicum of common sense applied.

[ThatReallyHurt]

Originally Posted by Slim

Then those monitoring my life will quickly realize that none of my actions or people I communicate with fit the high profile target catagories, and they will move on.

***Devil's advocate, bear with me***

But how would you feel if you were suddenly lying on the ground with some fellow pointing a gun at you because you'd decided to hold a family reunion and weenie roast out at the cottage... you drive a Smart Car, so you rented a truck to carry the ten propane tanks you bought for the weekend.

***Done***

People used to play with things (and get themselves hurt) all the time. Then, they started banning people from possessing or using certain things (if you find an old chemistry set from the 50's, try getting some of the empty vials refilled - they'll either laugh at you or call the cops). Lawn darts - another great example of that. People who weren't careful enough either in playing the game or in safely storing the equipment. Society as a whole was told, "sorry, but you can't buy those heavy pointy things anymore". Now, we're looking at moving slightly (and legally) towards banning things based on who you are, not what's being banned. Very very slightly, but it's still a move.

Is it a bad thing? Will it really help in the long run (or, for that matter, the short)?

I'm going to be very interested to read a history book in 25 years.

[keith]

Originally Posted by jBirch

Hey Keith,

Why the belief that the government is out to screw the citizenry?

James.

So some observations;

Governments don't tend to give back powers they have been granted (or granted themselves).

Powers granted for purpose A often turn out to be useful for purpose B and of course if you aren't doing anything wrong.......

On another front the Bill or Rights was written by people guilty of sedition - people who had a profound understanding of the consequences of searches of personal articles by the authorities. So the naming of the Patriot act has a certain irony methinks .


Now all that is of course the sign of incipient paranoia, the real problem is that the Patriot act solves a problem that doesn't exist. The FBI failed to stop 9/11 due to institutional failure not a lack of intelligence gathering.

[jBirch]

Why are democratic governments different from the citizens that make them up?

James.

[keith]

Originally Posted by jBirch

Why are democratic governments different from the citizens that make them up?

James.

They're not - and of course if you are part of the majority then the continuous imposition of the 'will of the majority' is perfectly reasonable, just even

Of course due to the accidents of circumstance one my find oneself on the wrong side of the 'will of the majority' or transferred there by an act of circumstance. Which is why post Enlightenment nations tend to make the reasonable assumption that while the majority should be allowed to make its opinions heard its ability to do so should be restrained - see the process of development of common law in a country like Britain that lacks a written constitution or the process for the amendment of the constitution in america.

[Slim]

Originally Posted by ThatReallyHurt

***Devil's advocate, bear with me***

But how would you feel if you were suddenly lying on the ground with some fellow pointing a gun at you because you'd decided to hold a family reunion and weenie roast out at the cottage... you drive a Smart Car, so you rented a truck to carry the ten propane tanks you bought for the weekend.

***Done***

Dont believe everything you read. It's going to take a whole lot more than renting some propane tanks and a UHAUL to get my family shindig raided by a SWAT team. Sounds like a great scene from a movie, but it just doesnt happen like that.

You went off on a tangent after this, and I'm sorry, I just couldnt make the connection.

[Slim]

Originally Posted by keith

The FBI failed to stop 9/11 due to institutional failure not a lack of intelligence gathering.

Absolutely wrong.

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by jBirch

Why are democratic governments different from the citizens that make them up?

In pure democracies, they aren't...but pure democracy is probably unworkable for a polity of dimensions much eyond the city-state.

Representative democracy becomes VERY different from the citizenry because of the corrupting effects of power and because of bureaucratic dysfunctions. That unfortunately is the sort of democracy with which we all have to deal.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

In pure democracies, they aren't...but pure democracy is probably unworkable for a polity of dimensions much eyond the city-state.

Not sure I agree, but it's a fine supposition.

Representative democracy becomes VERY different from the citizenry because of the corrupting effects of power and because of bureaucratic dysfunctions. That unfortunately is the sort of democracy with which we all have to deal.

The inequalities amongst people is tangential to the point I was trying to make: that government is made up of citizens and not seperate from them. Further, that the actions inacted by and through government agencies are, by necessity, designed to further the interests of the state and not any specific individual. The motives, as it were, of 99.9% of all government officials are pure.

The blanket statement that the government is something that is out to screw you out of your ethical earnings is false, IMHO. The fear that the government is simply looking for an excuse to lock you up and throw away the key is equally false.

The real danger is that there is not enough transparency in the process for the community as a whole to judge the difference between threat and fear. It is this lack of transparency, and not the fundamental motives and nature of "government", that needs to be addressed and brought to light, IMHO.

James.

[Feltan]

Well, I would split the difference between jBirch and Inq.

My point would be this: At any given point-in-time, a society gets EXACTLY the government it deserves -- nothing more, nothing less.

Regards,
Feltan

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by jBirch

Not sure I agree, but it's a fine supposition.

And one which does not originate with me, but with much more respectable social scientists. Essentially, the more people in a polity and the more complex its social, technological and economic life, the more daunting the sheer mechanics of getting everyone's vote on every single decision becomes. At some point it just can't be done any more, and some level of delegation to representatives has to be used.

government is made up of citizens and not seperate from them.

Not always. The agency for which I work employs a number of non-citizens, for example.

Further, that the actions inacted by and through government agencies are, by necessity, designed to further the interests of the state and not any specific individual.

Designed they may be, but they are not left unaltered for very long, and they are soon twisted to serve individual and interest group goals...which may be at rather wide odds with those of the polity in general.

The motives, as it were, of 99.9% of all government officials are pure.

Meh, idealists! You can't teach 'em anything!

The blanket statement that the government is something that is out to screw you out of your ethical earnings is false, IMHO.

Yes. It merely embodies the philosophy that it can use your earnings better than you can. So really it's only just and proper that it should have them...

The fear that the government is simply looking for an excuse to lock you up and throw away the key is equally false.

With occasional exceptions. For instance, if you were of Japanese extraction during WWII. Or if you were a "Communist" during the McCarthy era. Or if you were an uppity black under Jim Crow. Or...