What will you do when this becomes a bill?

Question

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wJsovPRTEM

Watch this it's about a bill that will probably soon be passed. This bill makes it an act of terrorism to have an debate with someone. Just watch and tell me what you think?

Answer 1

Read the bill. You can download the entire text at the source below.

Answer 2

I didnt even have to watch the complete video to give my opinion, they are taking away our rights and freedom period. things are changing and fast, it sucks, its stupid, and with this new president coming into office God only knows what will happen....I dont really know what to say, but things arent going to get better we can count on that.

Answer 3

It'll never pass, but in the slim chance it does, be prepared for a mass migration to any other country haha.

Answer 4

left wing radicals

Answer 5

it will never pass

Answer 6

I didn't watch much of the video because the speaker's logic was flawed.  Indeed, there may be cause for alarm with such a resolution, however, I'm wondering if you read the resolution?  If not, you can go to http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?...

The rest of the link is d110:h.r.1955:

The flaw in the logic that turned me off was the argument that in legalese "or" means either this or that.  In fact, in legalese, "or" is frequently used to be inclusive.  Attorneys attempt to build in every possible word to describe something so that their intent is not lost when the law is applied.  For example, note the use of the word "or" from Amendment I of the Bill of Rights:  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.  Ironically, HR 1955 seems to conflict with the very passage quoted!  Anyway, the example I gave is not a great one, but look at any lease or mortgage contract you have or any contractual language and you'll find examples of what I'm talking about.  In a lawsuit, the very examination of the definition that the speaker was doing would cause the use of the term "force" (meaning logic) to be thrown out as that is protected by the Bill of Rights.

From the bit of the House Resolution that was quoted, I was not terribly alarmed.  I will go read the Resolution for myself & form my own opinion.  In the meantime, if you are opposed, you need to write to your Senator.

I do agree that our freedoms have been seriously impinged by the Patriot Act:

Here's an excerpt from a critique of the Act:  The Patriot Act increases the governments surveillance powers in four areas

The Patriot Act increases the governments surveillance powers in four areas:

Records searches. It expands the government's ability to look at records on an individual's activity being held by a third parties. (Section 215)

Secret searches. It expands the government's ability to search private property without notice to the owner. (Section 213)

Intelligence searches. It expands a narrow exception to the Fourth Amendment that had been created for the collection of foreign intelligence information (Section 218).

"Trap and trace" searches. It expands another Fourth Amendment exception for spying that collects "addressing" information about the origin and destination of communications, as opposed to the content (Section 214).

I didn't research long enough to know if the criticism applies to the revised Patriot Act or the PA #1, but you are absolutely right.  We need to safeguard our freedoms!  Powers assumed are rarely forfeited and freedoms lost are hard to win back.

You can go to the ACLU site & read up on all this & see if you are interested in following their "take action" suggestions.

It is our freedom, in my opinion, that once made this country the greatest country.  

HR 1955 is very troubling - from the little I read - because the current administration has moved too far toward curtailing our freedoms and when government does not serve the people, the people need the ability to restrain the powers of government.

Answer 7

cheer! yeah!

we live in a world where the US has enemies that live in it's borders...this bill is to protect the country from those who wish harm its citizens...you...me...

if someone goes mouthing off that they want to committ some terrorist act then we must take action

yes i know freedom of speech blah blah blah...that was written over 231 years ago...let's worry about our safety then worry about our rights

Answer 8

I doubt this bill will pass into law. However by it's own definition the law would be unconstitutional... and I would hope the Supreme court and the people will have a lot to say about that.