Patriot Act cuts into library privacy

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by Brickboy240

Yep...right to privacy is nowhere to be found in the Constitution.

The comparison to me owning a gun is moot. Why? Because THAT is in the Constitution.

You have the right to view those books but you should also know good and well that your public interest in them at a public library might come under scrutiny. If we looked the other way...then others would be crying if someone learned how to build a dirty bomb at the public library and we sat back and did nothing.

Didn't we all know that these Arabs were here on expired visas and some took flying lessons...and we did nothing? Didn't INS know that John Lee Malvo was in the USA illegally and could have deported him but chose not to and he and that other guy became the DC snipers?

Whats wrong with heading it off at the pass? I know...we're not very good at it but think of what we could have thwarted if we had just been a little more careful.

- Brickboy240

Sorry, but to me, our borders and our politicians are a much greater threat than a list of freak'n books that got checked out.

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by AZXD

I really love how I am told to stay in my house if I want any privacy.
I can't wait until the day arrives when we have cameras on every street corner, the guns have been confiscated

As someone already pointed out, there is not a right to privacy in the public square in the constitution, but there is a right to bear arms. So your comparison doesn't make any sense.

Originally Posted by AZXD

Bring on our version of Tinneman Square. Perhaps New York will do. They already have a Times Square. Maybe we should shoot the dissidents who question the actions of our illustrious leaders.

Oh, It's just a library card!
WTF is so special about a book in the library ?
Why, if such a book is so oriented toward terrorist activity, that it must be monitored ..... Why don't they just shoot those who attempt to look at it. Forget checking the darn thing out .... Shoot those who dare cast an eye opon the evil thing.

God save the queen

Nobody is advocating shooting anyone. I am suggesting that it is ok for the government to check our library records if they have a warrant and there is reason to believe that someone is intending on committing a terrorist attack.

Frank

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

As someone already pointed out, there is not a right to privacy in the public square in the constitution, but there is a right to bear arms. So your comparison doesn't make any sense.



Nobody is advocating shooting anyone. I am suggesting that it is ok for the government to check our library records if they have a warrant and there is reason to believe that someone is intending on committing a terrorist attack.

Frank

That's the key, right there "if they have a warrant and there is reason to believe that someone is intending on committing a terrorist attack". Kind of like the reasons we were spoon fed as we entered Iraq!
No thanks!

How far do we let them reach ???
What is considered to far ???

I fully expected to see the destruction of this country after the FISA thing went away. The cries of us not being protected because, if our own government needs to follow the law, it impeeds the gathering of information is/was a scare tactic. But in retrospect, I guess that's the real reason for this story. It reminds people of just how much we have/will give up to feel protected from the boogie man.

As for rights .... Perhaps a few more people who are willing to give up neither liberty or freedom is what will eventually be required!

The power has always been with the people.
Don't forget it!

[FrankRizzoXD40]

Originally Posted by AZXD

That's the key, right there "if they have a warrant and there is reason to believe that someone is intending on committing a terrorist attack". Kind of like the reasons we were spoon fed as we entered Iraq!
No thanks!

So, according to this logic, the government can NEVER be trusted every time it believes that someone might be intending to commit an act of terrorism, because they were wrong on Iraq

I wrote that we should have a warrant first, which means that a judge or a court must approve the research into someone's library records.

After all, it's a public library. The government can search a house with a warrant, why can't they look at library records.

As far as I can tell, no constitutional rights would be violated if the government looks at library records, even if they do not have a warrant, unless you consider looking at library records to be an unreasonable search or seizure--which is why I advocate getting a warrant first.

Frank

[Judge]

Then you must love the constitution, because that's all the protection it gives... public acts are not and never have been protected from observation.

Originally Posted by AZXD

I really love how I am told to stay in my house if I want any privacy.
I can't wait until the day arrives when we have cameras on every street corner, the guns have been confiscated and we are once again under the rightful rule of the queen. But I really think with todays dynamics, we need to go a step further ...
Perhaps a nation that rewards the good citizen for turning in a neighbor. Yes that's it!
Our own little place where we can all live in harmony. Afraid to venture out! Afraid to say what we think! Afraid of our government and the control we gladly give to them.
Bring on our version of Tinneman Square. Perhaps New York will do. They already have a Times Square. Maybe we should shoot the dissidents who question the actions of our illustrious leaders.

Oh, It's just a library card!
WTF is so special about a book in the library ?
Why, if such a book is so oriented toward terrorist activity, that it must be monitored ..... Why don't they just shoot those who attempt to look at it. Forget checking the darn thing out .... Shoot those who dare cast an eye opon the evil thing.

God save the queen

[Krackels]

Originally Posted by Brickboy240

...
I don't know if I have a problem with this. In the end...if you're REALLY not planning something illegal...you probably have nothing to worry about.

- brickboy240

I'm sure that was the rationale that fueled many 'unlawful searches and seizures.'

I don't like the "if you're not doing anything illegal" then you shouldn't have to worry about it rationale. It's basically guilty until proven innocent.

[Krackels]

Originally Posted by AZXD

But hey, this is a really old story. I wonder what caused it to be dredged up again ??
Did a librarian finally get locked up for shredding checkout receipts

I'm not entirely sure. I saw it scrolling across my RSS newsfeed, and clicked on it. I hadn't heard about it until I saw it.


I know the library thing is stretching. Can someone tell me: Are libraries federally subsidized? If so then I guess it's not too big of a problem, maybe. But if not and they're privately/state funded then shouldn't the government have to follow the same rules they'd have to abide by if they wanted records from a private business?

I'll shut up now, and let this thread die.

[Krackels]

Originally Posted by Judge

Straw man...

I never implied or stated that checking out library books or communicating over the internet was constitutionally protected (I don't think they are.) But gun ownership is. I don't think though, in the gun process, that the gov't keeps those records, and I would argue that while I support checking criminal backgrounds, I don't think the records should be preserved by the gov't due to 2A concerns.

I've also never argued anything about 'feeling' safer.

Yeah, you're right.

I brought up the 'feeling' safer part because I'd be very surprised if any arrests; convictions; or leads come out of looking into people's library records.

Most libraries I've been to don't have the Anarchist Cookbook anyway; I already checked.

However, I'm not far off from my assertation that it's not a far jump from the library to Amazon or your local gun store or whatever.

Platt said the records of not only libraries and bookstores are affected but any business under the act originally approved in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and recently reauthorized.

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by FrankRizzoXD40

So, according to this logic, the government can NEVER be trusted every time it believes that someone might be intending to commit an act of terrorism, because they were wrong on Iraq

I wrote that we should have a warrant first, which means that a judge or a court must approve the research into someone's library records.

After all, it's a public library. The government can search a house with a warrant, why can't they look at library records.

As far as I can tell, no constitutional rights would be violated if the government looks at library records, even if they do not have a warrant, unless you consider looking at library records to be an unreasonable search or seizure--which is why I advocate getting a warrant first.

Frank

Iraq, Afghanistan, Ruby Ridge, Waco, The Northwoods Documents, CIA involvement in many third world countries ... Etcetera ... Sorry, they lost my trust a long time ago.

Good point though about needing a warrant. If one was required, shouldn't one be required now ?? Perhaps that is why when this story first broke about 5 or 6 years ago a lot of people were upset and librarians started shredding the records as an act of opposition to a system that did not ensure things were above the law. Hey maybe that's part of the reason some fought so hard to safegard the telecom industry from legal action. Maybe they knew the telecom's were not actively destroying the trail of outside the law actions this administration condones.

I'm not a lawyer, but I'd bet a lot of money that no conviction would ever occur because someone checked out a book.
But you go ahead and condone actions and laws that have a low ROI. Also, remember your argument when they claim that FFL and all their records are public information, or at least required to be turned over so the confiscations can begin. Life is a conspiracy!!!

Did you know that a twinkie can be hazardous to your health ?? Perhaps we should start a database on those who consume this food item.
Then again, crystal draino, tin foil, and ................. Forget it! That's domestic terrorism, and gasoline was a cleaning fluid long before it became a fuel.

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by Krackels

I'm not entirely sure. I saw it scrolling across my RSS newsfeed, and clicked on it. I hadn't heard about it until I saw it.


I know the library thing is stretching. Can someone tell me: Are libraries federally subsidized? If so then I guess it's not too big of a problem, maybe. But if not and they're privately/state funded then shouldn't the government have to follow the same rules they'd have to abide by if they wanted records from a private business?

I'll shut up now, and let this thread die.

It will not die until it dies
But it is an old story. Heck, I remember watching CNN when they talked to librarians who were shredding cards and records while stating "arrest me". The story broke right after PATRIOT 1 and fell off the radar as other more urgent items replaced it.
I do find it interesting how the little things can be condoned without thought for where they might lead.
Like I said, if a particular book is so bad, so all encompassing as to snare an individual into a life of terrorist activity .... Take the book off the shelf!

Of course why stop there ... Shut down the Internet, or limit access (Can you say CHINA) to those things deemed ONLY appropriate for trustworthy individuals. Make all monetary transactions via digital transfer, that will stop the illicit traffic that we are told funds terrorism. Of course if that is to much, just have some bozo monitor it like your library card