The Wall Street Journal has a good piece that defends the PATRIOT Act from attacks against it. The WSJ is quite correct, PATRIOT has become a bugaboo for the left, most of whom have never read it and do not understand what it does.
For instance, take the infamous Section 215 which allows law enforcement to look through business records such as library records without notifiying the suspect. Civil libertarians have cried foul over this provision, despite the fact it takes a court order to do so, no library records have ever been searched, and such provisions have already been used in other criminal cases. Library records were searched in the hunt for Andrew Cunanan, the man who shot fashion designer Gianni Versace in 1997, and to hunt down the Zodiac killer in New York in 1990. Yet no one raised a fuss about these searches. It is clear that there is a direct double standard at play, fueled by ignorance of the law.
The provisions in the PATRIOT Act are balanced by the need to report to Congress and the need for a court order to perform searches. Critics of the PATRIOT Act have yet to come up with any alternate scenario that would preserve both the “privacy rights” they want to defend and the absolute need to protect this country against terrorist attack. A system in which the rights of a few are based upon the deaths of thousands is not an acceptable outcome. The right to privacy does not trump the right for the government to fufill its most basic obligation – the protection of its citizens. Individual rights are important, but there is no right that says that your library records are sacrosanct. Civil liberty is not an absolute good. A perfectly libertine society would be anarchy, and the very notion of civil government is based on the idea that the individual gives up certain freedoms in order to gain the protection of the state. The protections that exist in the PATRIOT Act are common-sense policies that deal with a very real threat and must be renewed. The threat won’t end what the PATRIOT Act expires, and if we tie the hands of law enforcement in dealing with terrorism we irresponsibly endanger millions.
UPDATE: In a related piece Mitch Berg unleashes a devasting Fisking on the St. Paul City Council for their asinine attack on the PATRIOT Act. Guess what guys – a little thing called the Civil War pretty much ended the idea that localities can arbitrarily nullify federal law. So, if you think it’s brave to oppose the PATRIOT Act in such a way you’re also conceding that a town that thinks that segregation is wonderful has a right to ignore the Civil Rights Act. Federal law is supreme, and last time I checked the left thought that was a good thing…
So, the fact that PATRIOT is being used to hand down sentences in drug cases ten times longer or more for relatively tame crimes doesn’t faze you?
Personally I’m against legislation that lends itself to misuse, but I guess I’m crazy like that.
Here’s a story you won’t see on jayreding.com:
Senate panel’s GOP staff pried on Democrats
That would be news to me… care to cite a source for this?
That would be news to me… care to cite a source for this?
Happy to – here’s several:
http://www.jointogether.org/sa/news/summaries/reader/0,1854,567051,00.html
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2003/Nov-05-Wed-2003/news/22521283.html
I’d heard a story about a guy running a meth lab, a crime that usually earns a sentence of a few months or years, getting life under a charge of “manufacturing chemical weapons”. But upon research that turns out not to be a misuse of PATRIOT but rather of a similar state law. Nonetheless I think the articles above speak for themselves. The PATRIOT act isn’t being used for just terrorism. Liberals aren’t concerned about cartoonish fears of our library records being searched. We’re concerned about a very real-world trend of PATRIOT being used for investigations that have nothing to do with terrorism.
On the first article, we know that money used in drug traffic is being used for terrorism as we’ve already intercepted drug shipments with al-Qaeda operatives.
As for the second, I’ve already talked about that misuse of the PATRIOT Act – however, the individual was not charged under the PATRIOT Act – the actual press release on the indictment is here – he was charged under the same RICO statutes that has been used in organized crime cases for decades. Furthermore, Garaldi pled guilty in federal court to these charges.
My only beef in that case is that the money-laundering provisions of PATRIOT should have been passed seperately – it’s a matter of perception rather than substantive law. Also, there nothing new in the PATRIOT Act in this case, it simply made the procedures easier for law enforcement, there’s nothing in the case that they couldn’t have done had the PATRIOT Act not existed.
Jay, I am so glad to see someone else defendng the Patriot Act. We’re a small club amongst bloggers, and I’m heartened by your strong argument.
I would have to offer you an minor quibble, however. The “Zodiac killer” operated primarily in the San Francisco area in the early 70s. If investigation of him commenced in New York in 1990, that would be news to me. Perhaps you were thinking of someone else.
Keep up the good work.
That’s what I thought at first, but apparently there were two "Zodiac killers" – the second presumably being a copycat of the first…
Call me crazy, but I have a hard time believing that knee-jerk legislation passed on the heels of a culture-shaking national tragedy can be air-tight and proof against misuse. I mean, when was the last time that happened?
What are your thoughts on the use of the PATRIOT Act out in Las Vegas? Obviously that has nothing to do with terrorism.
Very many thanks for a good work. Nice and useful. Like it!
Is this message little enough to be one of… lost idea