<p>I’m writing a big research paper on the Patriot Act. I won’t say which side I’m on so no one turns this into a debate. I want to have some unofficial survey answers to think about and if you would answer these questions or statements, I would be very happy! Simple answers would be great.</p>
<li><p>Are you a) very familiar b) somewhat familiar c) not familiar with the Patriot Act?</p></li>
<li><p>Do you think the government needs more power or has too much power to fight terrorism?</p></li>
<li><p>Should the government be allowed to violate the Constitution if necessary to fight terrorism?</p></li>
<li><p>Your age: </p></li>
</ol>
<p>1) somewhat familiar…i do know that talking about how crappy the Patriot Act is, is a violation of the Patriot Act…haha</p>
<p>2)I think they need power to fight terrorism that have done something to us(Afghanistan, not Iraq). But, you really cant fight an idea. The government has the power they need, they need no more.</p>
<p>3)Nobody should be allowed to violate the Constitution for any reason. I dont see how they would have to go against it to fight terrorist</p>
<ol>
<li>A</li>
<li>has too much</li>
<li>hell no!!! as Benjamin Franklin said “any man willing to sacrifice liberties for security deserves neither…” (or something to that effect)</li>
<li>18</li>
</ol>
<p>bump…everyone who posted, thanks, but I need more opinions to have survey results! it’s okay if you don’t know anything about the Patriot Act - that’s one of the choices.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Are you a) very familiar b) somewhat familiar c) not familiar with the Patriot Act? Very familiar</p></li>
<li><p>Do you think the government needs more power or has too much power to fight terrorism? It needs way more. We should be fighting terrorism with words, not with bombs though</p></li>
<li><p>Should the government be allowed to violate the Constitution if necessary to fight terrorism? Definitely, why not? I’m not afraid of the government because I have nothing to fear.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>1.A
2.Too much power, in some areas, and too little in others. What our government is doing now is McCarthyism-lite, in terms of its dealings with civilians. How well did that fight communism way back when? Exactly. I have no qualms with the government using its power effectively, but what’s going on now is a farce. Terrorism, by nature, cannot be stopped. There will always be a lunatic fringe. Fighting terrorism means fortifying national security, not waging war (Fighting a group of terrorists is another thing entirely, but it’s not really a great idea in most cases). The approach is wrong.
3. No, if it was really such a great idea to add a clause to an amendment then there is a formal process to… change the constitution. Wonder why that’s there.
4. 17</p>
<ol>
<li>Are you a) very familiar b) somewhat familiar c) not familiar with the Patriot Act? somewhat familiar</li>
<li>Do you think the government needs more power or has too much power to fight terrorism? too much in some areas (internal surveillance), too little in others (international targeting of funds)</li>
<li>Should the government be allowed to violate the Constitution if necessary to fight terrorism? No, the Constitution must be followed at all times; it is the base law of the land. Violating it means destruction of democracy and the building of a dictatorship.</li>
<li>Your age: 16</li>
</ol>