Comments on: OVERHEARD BY NSA AGENTS UNDER RULES MANDATED BY DEMOCRATS

By: Melanie B.

Melanie B. — Sat, 24 Dec 2005 14:05:12 +0000

In response to Jason M.’s post:

I would argue that our Second Amendment rights have already been compromised in the same sense that the NSA’s actions compromise our Fourth Amendment rights.

The assault rifle ban of the Clinton administration restricted the ownership of guns with high capacity magazines on the basis that these were weapons used solely for malicious purposes. “You wouldn’t use an Uzi to hunt deer…” was the argument used by the gun grabbers on the Left. So, this ban restricted the rights of all gun owners in order to prevent bad behavior by a few–those who would aim their legally purchased machine guns, Uzis and the like at unsuspecting citizenry.

In the same sense, one could propose, the NSA is restricting the Fourth amendment rights of a few– those with ties to terrorist groups–in order to prevent bad behavior (bombings, biological warfare) which would pose a threat to the citizenry as a whole.

By: trentk269

trentk269 — Sat, 24 Dec 2005 12:57:25 +0000

Most liberals haven’t bothered to read the fourth amendment, which is exactly why they’re claiming suspension of same. Protection from unreasonable search is not the same as protection from any search. A very large body of case law from the Supreme Court as well as the appelate courts bear this out. (Katz v. U.S., 1967, U.S. v. U.S. District court, Truong v. U.S. , Hamdi v. Rumsfeld)

And while we’re on the subject, most libs assert that second amendment freedoms apply only to the establishment of a militia. Isn’t that tantamount to “suspending” an amendement? I guess suspending the parts of the Constitution that you don’t like only applies to those on the right.

By: Michael L. Cook

Michael L. Cook — Sat, 24 Dec 2005 02:18:04 +0000

Of course, this president and even Clinton well knows that even tinkering with the second amendment sets up a huge outcry. Cancelling the second amendment by executive decree would cause America to start resembling Iraq at its very worst within a matter of hours.

But the fourth amendment, well, most second amendment people do not place overseas phonecalls to suspected terrorists or send e-mails to them. If they could, they would be harassing the bad guys or sending hate mail to them. So this is one huge part of the American public that isn’t too concerned about being spied upon should they take up communicating with folks at Al Quaida.

Probably a lot of Americans are pretty indifferent about this type of spying and when it would ever matter in their lives.

By: Rick Moran

Rick Moran — Fri, 23 Dec 2005 20:01:59 +0000

Jason”

You presuppose the 4th amendment has been suspended which is incorrect. But I suspect you know that. Argument by hyperbole seems to be your SOP.

BTW - working on a post right now about that horrible incident where the FBI accosted that poor young, courageous liberal for taking Mao’s “little book” out of the library.

One thing about that story - it’s a lie:

http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=118168

OOPS!

By: Jason M.

Jason M. — Fri, 23 Dec 2005 19:58:15 +0000

Let’s suppose a President decides to ignore a different amendment to the Constitution.

This amendment guaranties the right to bear arms and the President based on his fear of losing power suspends it due to disorder in the country. The founding fathers felt this liberty was essential in case a tyrannical government was in place and a remedy was needed. When the President takes this action the people decry his motives, but he insists it is necessary and asks for all arms to be turned in.

A fundamental liberty has now been lost. By suspending the amendment isn’t the constitution suspended as well?

By: DocMartyn

DocMartyn — Fri, 23 Dec 2005 19:18:20 +0000

There is an awlful lot more information that can be gleaned from the phone call, than the spoken contents. You can know whom is in contact with whom, where they are calling from, what local time they phoned. What other calls were made by the caller and callie, and whom those calls were made to. You fleshout the communications of a suspect and findout not only that he calls his mum, sister and Ali in Pakistan, but who he calls at 4:30 every morning after he gets a call from Pakistan.