[Ramius]

You claim that these organisations oppose the act. OK. What do YOU oppose about the act?

I'm honestly not merely being obtuse here. I'd really like to know what you find objectionable in the act.

[MagnusMaximus1]

Once again, details, with which I concurr, are posted at:

http://www.checksbalances.org/index.php

Also, NOTHING in the so-called "Patriot Act" would have prevented "9/11". And certainly no one with functioning brains in our current government has presented any real evidence which contradicts my premise. :-)

[infidel29]

I'd need to review the section, but there is a portion that supposedly allows police and federal agents to search your home by writing their own search warrant on site, without the signature of a judge. All they need to do is prove probable cause after the fact. In addition, you don't even have to be home for this search to take place. And it is a punishable offense to even mention the search afterwards.

Now some might say "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to worry about," but I'd rather they provide a reasonable cause for a search before they do it instead of inventing one after the fact.

I heard Judge Napolitano on the radio a few months back (on Jim Quinn's show, www.warroom.com) he was talking about how different parts of the Patriot Act desperately need to be removed and/or reworked. This (above) was one of the specifics he cited. Some folks here don't give Judge Napolitano a lot of credibility, but I don't see what's wrong with him.

[Shermy]

"What do YOU oppose about the act?"

For one, it's not limited to terrorism, as it had been sold.

[Radioactive]

Does it not bother you that the government wants a national ID card...and yet delcares the Minutemen down on the border as outlaw vigalantees and yet leaves the border wide open so terrorists can enter and attack.

We must have an open discussion about the warnings that were given by people in this government which other people in this government ignored that allowed 9/11 to happen.