Group items tagged

To avoid activist conflict and keep consumers unaware, the ALEC is working to pass laws that make reporting factory farm abuse and act of terrorism. ...This law has actually passed in some states and I am amazed.

Congress faces midnight deadline as it rushes to renew anti-terror USA Patriot Act Congress is rushing to extend the life of three anti-terror tools, including the use of roving wiretaps, before they expire at midnight Thursday.The Senate was set to start voting on the legislation, including possible amendments, Thursday morning.

This article talks about how police in Sacramento let minors consent to DNA testing without their parents permission. It also veers into NDAA briefly which is why I chose it.

This article is about how Facial recognition over steps our civil rights when it is used in a public setting tracking unaware citizens.

The USA Patriot stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. This Act came into affect after September 11 attach.

This article explains what the NDAA legislation is all about. Explaining that the president can in fact detain anyone accused of terrorism or terrorism affiliation with out due process.

The problem with legislature like this is the government will have permission to detain anyone without actual proof. Your cousin Steve could be locked up and there's nothing you can do about it. Not everyone accused of a crime is guilty, and under the NDAA, it won't matter. Guilty or innocent, you can be detained. Not only is this a violation of your Constitutional rights, it's one step close to Fascism.

I agree with Erika. It's a slippery slope. The government can define a terrorist as an extreme Muslin organization today and the Tea Party tomorrow.

This article speaks of a post 9/11 America that walks a fine line of social profiling in the name of stopping terrorist acts. It speaks of both the injustice of many Japanese-Americans during WWII in the past and the challenges of keeping America safe from terrorism in the present without making the same mistakes of racial inequality.

Should racial profiling be illegal and the alternatives that could be affective like ID cards

It is against this historical backdrop that we encounter post-9/11 efforts to combat terrorist acts on American soil, and examine the role that race should play in an effective effort to deter future attacks. But before assessing whether our government's response to the events of 9/11 betray a pattern of racial profiling, I first want to identify what it is.

This article brings up a good point, should we allow an act of terrorism to force us to give up our own rights. If someone points a gun at someone on the street their first instinct is to protect themselves, so they will do anything. They will give up their hard earned money, their possessions, even their dignity by begging for mercy.

In this article shows the fight between internet security and internet freedom. It shows how much security we get when it comes to our internet freedom.

Both liberal and conservative groups alike have criticized the U.S. Patriot Act, passed in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, because they say it violates probable cause and due process rights protected by the Constitution of the United States. The Patriot Act significantly expanded the power of U.S.

The USA Patriot Act was signed into law with little debate or congress review only 43 days after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. This article describes some of the pros and cons, and how this Act was created to aid in the War against Terrorists.

Terrorism is testing our nation's collective resolve to maintain the freedom, openness and diversity that defines and enriches our society.

The revelations that Obama administration secretly collected phone records and accessed the internet activity of millions of Americans have raised new questions about the public's willingness to sacrifice civil liberties in the interests of national security. Since 9/11, Americans generally have valued protection from terrorism over civil liberties, yet they also have expressed concerns over government overreach and intrusions on their personal privacy.

Between the 9/11 terrorists attacks and Edward Snowden's whistle blowing, American's have been debating over whether it is against our constitution to collect massive amounts of data on our citizens through internet uses and phone calls, or it our country's security is more important.

Years after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and two years after Edward Snowden's revelations about extensive U.S. government surveillance of phone and internet data, Americans have mixed and conflicting views about government surveillance programs. On the one hand, a majority of Americans oppose the government collecting bulk data on its citizens, others believe there aren't enough limits on what types of data can be collected.

Terrorism certainly created more fear in the west and Americans wanted to feel more safe. Even if it means sacrificing some personal freedoms so that the government catches the crimes before they happen. Recently, it's been seen that it has gotten out of control more than anticipated.

Americans are divided over whether or not the U.S. government has gone too far in using surveillance practices that infringe on citizens' privacy, an NBC News online survey found. While 38 percent of Americans say the government's surveillance program has gone too far in infringing on people's privacy, 35 percent say the government's program has been relatively balanced between privacy concerns and fighting terrorism.

The war on terror is not a war like World War II. The enemy is not a state and it is not clear how victory will be reached. This means any loss of privacy will be open ended and may last for many years.