Founding Fathers burned Tree

SmarterThanYou said:
that wasn't the question. please just answer the question.
Click to expand...
You appear to be insinuating something about the Patriot Act that doesn't exist, so I answered your question in that context. In times of war, the President has broad powers. If citizens are conducting war business with non-citizens, then the government should have the ability collect evidence of those transactions unabated.

Now I ask you again, name one citizen whose rights have been violated.
 
Southern Man said:
You appear to be insinuating something about the Patriot Act that doesn't exist, so I answered your question in that context. In times of war, the President has broad powers. If citizens are conducting war business with non-citizens, then the government should have the ability collect evidence of those transactions unabated.
Click to expand...
I insinuate nothing. I'm strictly talking about American citizens, not non citizens. Not citizen to non-citizen relationships. strictly American citizens.

Southern Man said:
Now I ask you again, name one citizen whose rights have been violated.
Click to expand...

Now, I ask you again, what part of the constitution, specifically the text, does it say the president can bypass the 4th amendment during a time of war?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
I insinuate nothing. I'm strictly talking about American citizens, not non citizens. Not citizen to non-citizen relationships. strictly American citizens.



Now, I ask you again, what part of the constitution, specifically the text, does it say the president can bypass the 4th amendment during a time of war?
Click to expand...

Article I, Section 8, paragraph 11.

Now name one citizen whose rights have been violated under the Patriot Act.
 
Southern Man said:
Article I, Section 8, paragraph 11.
Click to expand...
This does not authorize any branch of government to bypass or ignore the 4th Amendment requirement for approaching a judge to obtain a warrant in order to seize and/ or search an American citizen. This is the authorization to declare war, submit papers for seizing assets, and then seizing said assets or persons.

Southern Man said:
Now name one citizen whose rights have been violated under the Patriot Act.
Click to expand...

again, this is irrelevant.

So i'm going to ask again, is there a part of the constitution that authorizes the federal government to ignore the 4th Amendment of can I assume you do not have an answer?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
This does not authorize any branch of government to bypass or ignore the 4th Amendment requirement for approaching a judge to obtain a warrant in order to seize and/ or search an American citizen. This is the authorization to declare war, submit papers for seizing assets, and then seizing said assets or persons.



again, this is irrelevant.

So i'm going to ask again, is there a part of the constitution that authorizes the federal government to ignore the 4th Amendment of can I assume you do not have an answer?
Click to expand...
It is entirely relevant, since your insistence that the Patriot Act denies citizens rights cannot be backed up with an example.

In times of war the government has not only the right but the duty to seek out our enemies, foreign and domestic.
 
Southern Man said:
It is entirely relevant, since your insistence that the Patriot Act denies citizens rights cannot be backed up with an example.
Click to expand...
It has zero relevance. Your insistence on asking for 'one single person' who has had their rights violated is BS, plain and simple. It's the exact same thing as having a law that states GOP posters are banned, and yet nobody has been charged with vioating it so there is obviously no violation of a right.

Southern Man said:
In times of war the government has not only the right but the duty to seek out our enemies, foreign and domestic.
Click to expand...

there are only two places in the US constitution and Bill of Rights that state when a right, freedom, or liberty can be denied and wartime isn't one of them.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
It has zero relevance. Your insistence on asking for 'one single person' who has had their rights violated is BS, plain and simple. It's the exact same thing as having a law that states GOP posters are banned, and yet nobody has been charged with vioating it so there is obviously no violation of a right.



there are only two places in the US constitution and Bill of Rights that state when a right, freedom, or liberty can be denied and wartime isn't one of them.
Click to expand...
Poop analogy. It is relevant because it shows that your interpretation is wrong.

When an individual commits acts of war he has rescinded his citizenship.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
prove it, please. Until you can, you are wrong.

totally incorrect. I'm starting to think you really have never read the constitution. you might want to go over that 5th Amendment to the BoR again.
Click to expand...
You're the one who has failed to find a single person who's rights have been violated. The burden of proof is on you.
 
Southern Man said:
You're the one who has failed to find a single person who's rights have been violated. The burden of proof is on you.
Click to expand...

negative. plain reading of the constitutional text compared to the plain wording of the patriot acts provisions clearly stand at odds with each other. My analogy was spot on and you're hemming and hawing over it while clinging to a very bad USSC precedent that stated that all laws written by congress will be assumed to be constitutional. I take it that you think this mandatory insurance purchase will then be constitutional?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top