Science Leadership Academy Learn · Create · Lead

Blog Feed

Room for Debate

The U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act is a rather large update to America's Government on the investigation and capture of terrorists. It is mean to secure America from dangers lurking in our midst, not thousands of miles away. Through roving wire taps, bank records and much more. It meant to protect the whole of the public while finding the dangers. The most important part of this bill arguably is the title that lets different agencies share information with each other. Allowing for more support and different takes on issues.

Now to the matter of privacy. The Government now has access to roving wire tapes, which they can follow a person if they switch companies. Before they would have to get another warrant, for the different company. To the average american it means nothing to you because you first must be behaving suspiciously. Not too much to worry about. The Government now has access to library records. This, I feel, is does not help the government at all and so vague. Just because someone reads a book about Osama Bin Ladin does not make them a terrorist, or researching explosives because you have an interest in become a bomb technician. It is highly speculative and doesn't, to me, provide any real benefit. Plus, if there is freedom of the press, what's the point if what you read can mark you on there list. Some where on that law says an officer can seize any "tangible" thing that can be used, without a warrant. This is too much power, an invasion of privacy and a perfect setup opportunity. 

Finally, the NSL's (Nation Security Letters: a demand for information, not needing a judge) gives the government too much power. There is no checks and balances here, which makes it a bit of a wild card. Other than the things listed above it is a fitting update to America's security.

Be the first to comment

Patriot Act Editorial

            The Patriot Act is probably one of the most complicated laws passed in American history; it was a necessity. America was in danger- with events leading up to attacks- something needed to be done. Reactions of the government were straight to the point, under immense pressure, they needed to ensure the people’s safety which lead to the law being passed so quickly. Some may say that we give the government too much power, but I believe it suffices our safety- better safe than sorry.


            On September 11, 2001 two planes crashed into the Twin Towers, leading the citizens of America into chaos. There was never an Act allowing the government to tap into services of anyone to stop any danger. Once 9/11 happened the vision of safety for America changed dramatically for the better. Anti-terrorism safety precautions are necessary even today, with all the new technologies out in the world we may even need to “fine-tune” the act.


            The government’s ability to tap into anyone’s services may be upsetting to some people, but we do need to consider that citizens of this very country can be high-risk criminals. There are countless benefits of the Patriot Act applying to anti-terrorism conditions and other organized crimes within the country, for example, gang violence.


            Overall, the Patriot Act should remain a law in the United States of America to ensure the safety of citizens. The government must have all the power when it comes to keeping their citizens in safe, if not, then all chaos would break loose and there would be no support for the country.


Be the first to comment

"Is there still a need for the Patriot Act?" Don't Care

Do we still need the Patriot Act? How about No? How about Yes? Does it really matter? Seriously have US citizens really noticed the patriot act over the last 11 years. I know I really haven’t noticed it in my life, and apparently it’s been there for the last 11 years. That’s the majority of my life. It’s not going to hurt us by having it, and its not going to hurt us by not having it. If terrorist want to attack the USA the Patriot act won’t stop them. I think the Patriot Act is being used so the country can get complete control of its citizens. I think that’s good for the country and the citizens.

Lets just say a group of citizens are on a 4-way call planning to attack the white house or a city hall. With the Patriot Act the government may be able to pick up on that call and nip it in a bud as soon as possible. Without the Patriot Act the government would be clueless, and one of those places would go down. Or would it? Didn’t the government know what we were doing at all times before the Patriot Act? I think so. The Patriot Act just may be in order so nobody complains about his or her rights because the patriot act is a law. There is really nothing we can do about it.

If that is not the reason why we have the Patriot Act then I think it still needs to stay in place. Because without the Patriot Act Pearl Harbor was Bombed & the Twin Towers were attacked. Since the Patriot Act has been put in place I can’t recall any terrorist attacks on the country, but I can recall some attacks to the country’s citizens. I’ll just name two of those attacks; “The V-Tech Massacre” & “The Dark Knight Massacre”. Could the Patriot Act have prevented these citizen attacks?  I’m not sure, but if it could have I’m pretty sure they would have.

Is there still a need for the patriot act? My answer is I don’t care. It stops the big things from happening but the little things still happen, so I don’t think it really matters. "That's the bottom line cuz Stone Cold said so."

Be the first to comment

The PATRIOT Act Editorial

​The USA PATRIOT Act is certainly not flawless, but has been a successful process for preventing terrorism and other criminal activity. According to the Heritage Foundation since 9/11 30 terrorist plots were foiled including the shoe bomer and the underwear bomber. Anyone of those 30 terrorist plots could have caused mass hysteria similar to the 9/11 attacks, however with the help of the Patriots act these plots were nothing more than nefarious ideas.
It can be argued that out of thousands of people under investigation only a small percent are actual terrorist, but these investigations could help stop other crimes.  According to the "Surveillance Under The Patriot Act"  info graphic of the 3,970 sneak and peeks  peeks (secret searches of Americans' homes and offices) in 2010,  76 percent were drug related and less than 1 percent were terrorism related. These sneak and  peeks did find about 3 people who could be involved in terrorism plots, but even better the sneak and  peeks found a considerable amount of drug crimes. Meaning the Patriot Act could also decrease blue collar crimes like drug dealing. 
The Patriot Act can not find every terrorist in existence, but it has increased the probability  that America does find a terrorist. America could be considered safe since the Act and will only remain safe with the the Patriot Act  being enforced. 
Be the first to comment

P.A.T.R.I.O.T Act

The Patriot Act was a response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. It allows the government to track things such a personal communication for the purpose of the government. What the government is not understanding is the passing this act would stop privacy and freedom rights. Yes the Patriot have numerous reasons to improve the security expense of privacy, but people are having trouble with the Act. This law gives people to believe the U.S is going to have a bad reputation. People who are from different countries that want to come to America, it would change their perspective because now the United State are under surveillance. Especially for people that come from the middle east that are muslim.

We are not saying that the government can't investigate terror plots, but taking it as far as protecting the rights and lives of the people. Interfearing with the personal lives of the American People. The Patriot Act should focus more in cracking terrorist plots and pontential attacks, then spying on Americans. This shows that the Act has to much power over the people.

Be the first to comment

CSheridan; Room for Debate - Patriot Act

​Cyndi Lynn Sheridan

American Government – D

September 18, 2012

Patriot Act: Battle of the Beliefs

Approximately three thousand innocent lives were taken on September 11th, 2001.1 The government immediately took action by establishing a law called the “Patriot Act.” The main purpose of this law was to prevent attacks like 9/11 from occurring again. However, this law has been considered a controversial issue because in order to protect the citizens the government has to invade their privacy. Stop and think for a moment what's more important to you, your life or your privacy.

The government only investigates potential terrorists, meaning if you don't associate yourself in illegal actions you should not be intimidated by their capabilities. You have access to all your constitutional values if you behave in a proper manner. In society, technology continues to advance making it easier for terrorists to target America, therefore it is necessary to take precautions before the damage happens. I definitely believe the Patriot Act is imperative for the safety of the citizens in the United States.

1September 11 by Numbers." New York Magazine. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Sept. 2012. <

Be the first to comment


Do we still need the Patriot Act? This question brings up many different emotions/responses. Some people may think it is too late for the PATRIOT Act. Some think we need it and have always needed it. I think that we can live without it. It is making the government be able to do almost anything if they even think that you are a "terrorist". It also was brought up very suddenly after 9/11. This gave it more of a chance to be passed. 
I agree with Jefferey Rosens article, "Too much power" because of how many newspaper articles back up what he is saying. Alot of the potential "terrorist" that the government spied on and traced weren't part of terroristic attacks or plans. 
The PATRIOT Act has many pros and many cons to it. But in my eyes the cons outweigh the pros by far. 
Be the first to comment

USA-Patriot Act Editorial

The United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism is an Act that promises a better national security in America. Few Americans are still questioning what the act means for them and the future of America. Congress spent a brief time debating and discussing what the outcomes of signing the act would precede to in our future. Thus result in little information about the topic. Most citizens, representatives and even yours truly barely knows what the act stands for in our lives.

From reading all the articles and comments, from New York Times, there are still debates playing between being for or against the Patriot Act. I believe that my government is doing everything in their power to prevent another 9/11. 9/11 was a wake up call to America, that our government was slacking off. Because of the Patriot act they are now fighting the War Against Terror by hacking in to the accused dangerous people's records and history. Now our government can seek another attack before it happens. Statistics have shown that at least 15 terrorist plots have been tampered since 2002. And normal citizens should not worry because unless they are doing something illegal then they have nothing to worry about. I believe this law has the potential to be and continues to be a game changer.

Although this law is a pivotal moment in our recent history, there are still many controversies surrounding it. I understand perfectly why American citizens should be upset. Although I did mention that normal citizens should not worry because unless they are doing something illegal they have nothing to worry about, sometimes the information the government receives can be misleading. For instance, if a college student wanted to do a paper on the Manhattan project and he needed information on Atomic bombs and how to make them. The government could misinterpret what the student wanted to do. Because the evidence is against the student he might get life in prison. (The scenario is fake and made up) Other scenarios that could be mislead the government would be  like if an American-Arabian brought 3 guns for protection but was arrested because someone thought he wanted to engage in terrorism. American citizens do have rights to the first Amendment and should have their privacy protected. Also in a way government will become enraged with power. The affect of that will result in corruption. The corruption could ruin what America has fought so hard to become. If that is the case then America will lose the value of what it once was and as a country we can not allow that to happen.

With those scenarios in mind along with the statement I made before I'm going to believe what one of the comments made in the A Vital Weapon article. The Act should remain and stay as is but there should be a fine line between what should be looked into and what should be considered terrorist. Every American should have the right to do what ever without being questioned by the government. Unfortunately to do that at this point peoples privacy will remain tampered but for the greater good America will be safe.

Be the first to comment

Blog Post 2- Room For Debate

After reading the editorials I agree that we do not need the PATRIOT Act anymore. The PATRIOT Act has been in the spotlight of many International debates. The PATRIOT Act was something to make the American people feel safer, more secure in times of need. Now, The PATRIOT Act is just something there that is completely unnecessary in most senses. 

In the right, liberal place we are in now, most people are already against the PATRIOT Act because many believe it is a violation of privacy. I, too believe that, but I also feel as though we never needed the PATRIOT Act in the first place. In class, we discussed things like the NSA, CIA, and FBI. Those are agencies that are here to gather intelligence and try to prevent things from happening like 9/11. Can we seriously say that there was no surveillance before 9/11 or the PATRIOT Act? The United States already measures in place that could of stopped 9/11, strong measures but they didn't work, not because of the lack of surveillance but by the lack of execution in our part. 

Many liberates have been taken away since the PATRIOT Act has been in play. Once could even argue that the PATRIOT Act hurts democratic ideals in a sense. Democratic ideals are such things as: self-entrepreneur, self-liberties and most importantly, patriotism. You might be wondering, why patriotism, isn't the PATRIOT Act supposed to be something that makes you want to be an American? Well, for must it us, but for others who don't have blond hair, blue eyes it could be something that deteriorates someone's moral in this Country. After 9/11, muslims became the face of terrorism. Many muslims feared for their lives. Sikhs had been targeted most because of their appearance. 9/11 and the Patriot Act directly effected 2 religions. Thus, hurting their patriotism towards this country. 

As the PATRIOT Act hurts democratic ideals, they can also strengthen them. Egalitarianism is something that has benefited from this. After the PATRIOT Act, many people had thought their privacy and rights were not being respected, they began adopting a moral of negativity against the United States and the Bush administration.  Making the Bush administration considered one of the failures among the other administrations in the past. John Locke had wrote this as "natural" rights, well, if someone's privacy is being threatened, they think their natural rights are being threatened as well. This in a direct contradiction to what many in the history of this Country wanted.

As you read many arguments about the PATRIOT Act, one can only adopt their view on it. In times of social liberalism, progressivism, and libertarianism, one could even argue that the PATRIOT Act is something even a communists nation could adopt. Let's hope our liberties will be reinstated if this bill ever falls apart.

By, Mohamed Marzouk

Be the first to comment

Room For Debate: Patriot Act

The USA Patriot Act is the gateway to a medley of possibilities. It secures our citizens with a safe future whilst slicing down the baddies, and only the baddies, down to size. This law gives the government the opportunity to hand out a ticket of justice to those who are harmful to the nation and allows the many intelligence agencies to move freely throughout the country in their effort to clean up the nation.

If only it were that peachy.

Correct me if I'm wrong but, the regulation permits tons of leeway, giving government agents the opportunity to delve deep into the personal and private information of visitors and Americans alike, provided that they are suspicious. After gathering up some potential evidence and presenting it to a judge, bank records, wire tappings, library history are up for grabs as means to finding out just what have people been doing with their time. Treating people like criminals in secret when they have not necessarily done anything yet seems a tad overbearing.

However, it is not realistic to just be rid of the whole entity altogether. The whole reason for this enactment being put into place for the security of American people. The once bill received an overwhelming approval in 2001 because the Representatives, the Senate and so on believed that it could prevent from such devastating attacks again. That the was the plan was to play it smart, to be shielded, to protect what we still had.

All the while, though, breaching beyond the boundaries of trust and text messages to catch a glimpse of a disaster in the making might equally be on the menu. Either way, something of paramount significance is lost. The government is trying to save America from itself. The only question that remains is how will they will go.

The act is good at heart but, goes about tackling the terrorists in the wrong manner. So the verdict of the course our America should take is beyond this clueless teenager, in all honestly.

​Annisa Ahmed
B Band

Be the first to comment

Patriot Act

Do We Still Need the PATRIOT Act?

 USA PATRIOT ACT is about providing security and safety to citizens of USA and to prevent any national r foreign criminal activity or terrorist attacks. Also, it was created in response to 9/11 which was a definitely a big reality and a threat to all citizens of America. As this law provides safe and secure life to the people of its country, i think it still need to be in state of law because terrorism has not reached to its end in USA and people living in America still have right to live their life freely without fear of being targeted by any terrorism attack. Also it is the responsibility of Government to make such anti terrorism laws which can assure citizens of their safe lives. In this case, it is definitely true that this law is the need of people because they want there secure lives and no one in USA want to see any other attack similar to 9/11 and no one want to loose lives of their loved ones. 

So in conclusion, i would say PATRIOT ACT should remain in the state of LAW as it promises secure lives of Americans and protects people from domestic or international terrorists.

Be the first to comment

Patriot Act Needs an Update

The Patriot Act was put in place to protect and secure the American people, however, more than a decade later the act has not been altered to truly give back the privacy that the constitution promises Americans. While some sections of the Patriot Act are still very much a necessity, others can be altered or even removed to provide an up to date version of the act. In the place of these out of date sections new and , what should have been, required sections need to be inserted. Sec.101. Counterterrorism Fund, which serves as the introduction to the act, states that the fund is to provide finances to Federal agencies for a multitude of different reasons including reestablishing offices or facilities that have been damed or destroyed as a result of terrorism. Although this claus may be perceived as helpful we no longer have a direct and immediate need for this type of fund. To put it in perspective, other funds of the United States are severely lacking to say the least and Americans are suffering due to the misplacement of crucial money. 

In addition, the concerns of the Patriot Act should truly begin with the man in charge. "If an agent makes the required assertion that he or she believes information relevant to a terrorism investigation might be found, the court “must” issue the order without actually reviewing whether there is any justification for the agent prying into the affairs of someone who may not even be suspected of anything." - Susan N. Herman. This is where the trouble begins. With the amount of spying or "supervision" that agencies have the authority to conduct on any person(s) there need to be some serious revisions to make sure that authority is not being abused. 

Be the first to comment

Patriot Act

             The Patriot act is just a pretty painted legal opportunity slowly striping away U.S citizen’s rights. The patriot does have its perks when the person that they are targeting is actually planning a terroristic act. The problem that the government might “run into” is targeting individuals who show no sign of being a terrorist.

             In my opinion the Patriot act is simply racial profiling behind wires. After the nine eleven attack the news and other sources that deliver our information to us put the idea in the peoples head that anyone from the middle east is a terrorist and we should be afraid if we see these people in garbs and near tall buildings. With that being said             when the act was passed everyone thought it was a fantastic idea because it would only focus on the people who attacked our country.

            The issue with that is this act not only takes away the privacy of the citizens but takes away the right for us to know when it is happening to us as well. It is too much power for the government to have. The government gets to define what enough evidence and how appropriate it is for a tap to be done on someone’s phone, search emails etc.

            I honestly do not believe that the Patriot Act is explained to the citizens enough for them to understand exactly what it means and how it will affect them. I also believe that the Patriot  Act not longer serves as its original purpose if more citizens within the country are under surveillance than the “terrorist” we are trying to stop and keep track of. 

Be the first to comment
Edit Delete

9/11 Short Film Response

After watching the different films based on the event of 9/11, I'm oddly conflicted.

In this film, a deaf woman has an intense argument with her boyfriend. At the end of the argument, the boyfriend storms out of the apartment and leaves his girlfriend home alone. While he's gone, everything around her shakes and she has no idea what's going on outside. Soon after the shaking stops, the boyfriend comes home covered in dust and crying. 

As a director, I was inspired. The entire film was silent, minus the vibrations of the shaking apartment. It made me think of the many different kinds of people that experienced 9/11, and how only one perpestive is told. It's always able-bodied men or women that can hear and see. I didn't even think of any other perspectives until I saw that film.

As an American, I was speechless. I was in first grade when the attacks happened, and as far as I could tell, that was a pretty good day for me. I got out of school early, and my family was all at my house so I got to play with my cousins. It wasn't until later when I was told the actual story did I understand how horrible that day was for Americans everywhere. And every year it's a reminder that we as a country are stil not over what happened.

Be the first to comment


There is no room for debate, at least according to the way in which this bill was passed. The patriot act was introduced for one over arching reason, terrorism. Even though it seems like terrorism has gone away and no need for the law and therefore should be abolished, right? No, wrong! It is more vital than ever to have this law in place, to show we are a strong country but also a smart one. If something happened once its bound to happen again if nothing is changed, If they got rid of this law it would be like wiping the slate clean allowing terrorism which could bring us mere moments away from a catastrophe like 9/11.  Why would one need to abolish this law and start a new? So people don’t get scanned at airports? There are two reasons people would decide against this law, one being convenience purposes because people rather be lazy then be safe or people don’t feel safe with their information/privacy in the governments hands. This law, the U.S.A.  P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act allows the government access to information they could use to help them capture terrorist. On a personal level I wouldn’t mind my privacy being “violated” if it is to help catch terrorist. Listening in on my phone calls, tracking web traffic? All they would find is I’m a nerd, laugh, and then move on. What are you teenagers hiding, your conversations with your special someone? The government doesn’t care.


Now I feel like a stronger rebuttal to this topic is the government has too much power, and I could see this being a problem in countries that are not the US. The Patriot Act simply asks if they could use information that they need access to help capture terrorist.


Imagine it like this… We go to a school in the School District of Philadelphia, in the SDP they filter websites and don’t allow access to certain websites, that they decide are beneficial or not. There have been times where you needed to find information or watch a video to complete a task and it was blocked. Well imagine the government trying to capture terrorists and they had a filter like this, figuratively. Imagine if they had these exact same filters. It holds back the process and delays the capture of terrorists, sometimes delaying them too much… 

Be the first to comment

Room for Debate: The Patriot Act

On paper I think that is law is great. It has the ability to prevent terrorist attacks form occurring as well as save thousands of innocent lives. The issue, like many other laws in the United States, is that it is very easily corruptible and has the possibility to be majorly misused. While yes, this law could be used to prevent evil it could also be used to create evil, and thus needs a better system of checks and balances before being further implemented. 
I totally agree that there needs to be some way to help prevent attacks against civilians and do not think that counterterrorism has become obsolete. That said there needs to be regulations put in place before any more sections of this law are renewed. There is no way to make a law 100% incorruptible, but permission to use these intelligence tools should not be given out so generously. 
In addition, law makers needs to be more clear about what they consider a threat. Being able to differentiate between a legitimate warning an and over reaction or stereotype is huge. Who is really in charge of regulating this law and what are the standards that they use? Like I said above, I do agree that the United States does need resources to help prevent terrorism, but the line needs to be drawn somewhere and as of now that line is not very clear. 
Be the first to comment
Edit Delete

Room for Debate: The Patriot Act

On paper I think that is law is great. It has the ability to prevent terrorist attacks form occurring as well as save thousands of innocent lives. The issue, like many other laws in the United States, is that it is very easily corruptible and has the possibility to be majorly misused. While yes, this law could be used to prevent evil it could also be used to create evil, and thus needs a better system of checks and balances before being further implemented. 
I totally agree that there needs to be some way to help prevent attacks against civilians and do not think that counterterrorism has become obsolete. That said there needs to be regulations put in place before any more sections of this law are renewed. There is no way to make a law 100% incorruptible, but permission to use these intelligence tools should not be given out so generously. 
In addition, law makers needs to be more clear about what they consider a threat. Being able to differentiate between a legitimate warning an and over reaction or stereotype is huge. Who is really in charge of regulating this law and what are the standards that they use? Like I said above, I do agree that the United States does need resources to help prevent terrorism, but the line needs to be drawn somewhere and as of now that line is not very clear. 
Be the first to comment

To be or not to be? That is the question.

Nathan A. Sales states that the Patriot Act is needed to protect America from terrorists. He also states that there will be some elaborated safeguard measures so the officers are not going to abuse this power. However, when I watched "Enemy of the State" I can't just say that this movie is not going to happen in real life. Someday -hopefully never, someone inside of the government or someone with power will use the tools for their own vain needs.  

"This tool can only be used to investigate international terrorism, not domestic. And it doesn’t apply to Americans, only to temporary visitors like tourists." - Nathan A. Sales

I have some slight dilemma in this statement because what if, just what if, someone inside US and that is a citizen started to work for the terrorists? Because to be honest, we can never trust everyone because everyone has their own needs. The Patriot Act will give us more problems than we already have. Great power comes with great responsibilities. And who define the word "appropriate"? Also, what are the necessary tools that we need to prevent terrorism?

And where will be our privacy go? Just like Susan N. Herman said in her article, "The Patriot Act is jeopardizing the people's values, freedom of speech, association and religion, privacy and dude process." Everything that is being recorded can backfire and ruin everyone. Privacy is the big problem in this law.

It's not that I am fully hating on the Patriot Act, I am just trying to voice my opinion that this topic needed more time and tweaking for it to be okay. There has to be a lot of thinking and debate when it comes to this kind of protection. Yes, we need protection but this protection can be our weakness in the future. 

Be the first to comment

Patriot Act

I feel as though we should keep the Patriot Act because it ensures the safety of everyone. As shown in this quote. “As we lose some of our security, it is natural and proper for government to increase surveillance and other security measures..” This quote is valid because the less security we have the more the government will need to step in and take control. As many people don’t know their are restrictions and strict safeguards to the Patriot Act such as you must show proof as to why you suspect someone is a terrorist and you also must get a judge’s permission before tapping into anyones phone.  The F.B.I is flawed as well as everything else, nothing is perfect. Social media and technology has become so advanced that nothing is truly private. You don’t need the Patriot Act to have your privacy violated when you have social networks. The Patriot Act isn’t made to be in everyone’s personal life, instead it is to ensure that everyone is protected from terrorist and other threats to life. In conclusion, keeping the Patriot Act would be very beneficial and productive in the long run.

Be the first to comment

Patriot Act (:

America, being the top dog of the world, is not only a country with many hands to hold and many countries that are holding on with it. America is also a country with many guns pointed at it. Many envious hearts, and evil eyes. Though, America cannot stop the threats that people hold against, America can try to stop those actions that are have been and are being portrayed. One way that America has decided to help themselves and the citizens, is with the Patriots Act. There may be so much debate or whether the Act is good for us, or an invasion of privacy… what does one have to loose? Aside from if the Government uses this weapon as a way to "stop crime" , or if they use it as a way to block terrorism for the country. With my person opinion, a regular citizen should not care. The government does not have the time, space, or ability to care that your child may have stolen a dollar candy bar from a store and it calling all their friends about it. Rather, when there are physical and literal threats being announced to potentially bombing that family house. Now for a Mofia family, the privacy act may be a bit more threatening. So in result, only those objected to the act are those with something to hide. &Those who feel the act gives the government 100% lethal ability to override your life, don't understand that's NOT what it's for. I feel as if they could care less for the one individual, vs the millions around the country. If it's a way to protect us, then so be it. But if it's a way to get out of hand and ruin the lives of the people, then fight it. 

Be the first to comment

USA Patriot Act

September 11, 2001 the Twin Towers were attacked and many lives were lost. Innocent people's lives were taken by an act of terrorism. The government wanted to assure Americans that they are safe; the government responded with the USA Patriot Act. This Act should remain a law because terrorism did not go away, it is present just as it was 11 years ago. Some Americans may see the Act as an invasion of privacy but when innocent lives are at stake then some sacrifices may have to be made. No one should have their  personal life invaded but no one should lose their life in a terroristic attack. This Act is for the safety of our country and to help the government try as hard as it can to make sure nothing like 9/11 happens again. This act helps bring justice to people/groups who are plotting to harm Americans before the attacks happen. This may give the government a little more access into your life but to protect yourself, family and friend it is worth it. 

I'm not saying this Act is perfectly fine the way it is but the basic principles of it should remain a law. Some things need to be looked over and changed but just kicking this bill aside won't help. The government should never enable a person/group of people to be investigated without strong evidence showing they are terrorist or planning a terroristic attack. This Act should have strict regulations that won't bend for any official. There is a strong possibility that these "weapons" who are suppose to protect us fall into the wrong hands. This government should never allow such power to fall to misuse. This Act being a law has helped save lives and make America more safe. This Act needs to remain a law as long as America is a target for terrorism. Your home and life are a target for attacks and no one should have to live in fear. This act should be looked over, updated and changed in some ways but we still need protection from terrorism.

Be the first to comment

Do We Still Need The Patriot Act ?

In my opinion the Patriot Act has aspects in it where yeah it can prevent future attacks. However I do believe that some parts of the act aren't as clear as they should be. In "A Vital Weapon" Nathan A. Sales says that the agents are using tools that police officers have used for decades. Does this mean that all this time we suffer the risk of the government just being able to listen in our private conversations? Maybe so, in all honesty I think that people who are Pro the Patriot Act just want to make it seem as if there is nothing wrong with it. When in reality there are a lot of loose ends that need to be revised. In the same post it also said that "Agents can monitor a terrorist even if they havent yet found evidence he belongs to a foreign terrorist organization". How is it possible for these agents to just monitor someones daily lives and ways of communications without having any evidence that they are a threat? This to me is one of the biggest reasons why the patriot act needs to be looked over throughly to fix this loose end. In the end its all about being able to convince the judge, and that to me seems unfair. Shouldn't you be able to prove something with that big of a deal.

In "Too Many Needless Provisions" there was a case linked where agents requested the name of people who checked out a biography of Osama Bin Laden. When I read over the article it seemed so crazy for agents to ask for that type of information. Not ask but demand at that. How would checking out a biography of Osama Bin Laden make you a threat, why demand that type of information. Why violate peoples rights in such ways without having a structured reason why? Other point that I found interesting was why should people sacrifice freedom for safety. Not even, just because they are basically stalking people who are "threats" doesn't guarantee that we will be more safe. Sure it has helped in some ways, but the measures taken are a bit out of wack to me.

I also think that overall the Patriot Act is a way to jeopardize our constitution. It violates our privacy, something we shouldn't have to worry about.After finding out about this this whole act im even kinds freaked out just talking on the phone. What if someone is listening on in my conversation what if someone ever just knows my every move. I know it kind of is being dramatic but the whole thought of agents and the government being able to actually do this to other people freaks me out. 
Be the first to comment

Patriot Act (should be altered)

I believe that some provisions of the patriot act could just be removed all together, but it should still be an act that is upheld to provide a sense of safety.

I completely agree with the statement that "There is an inescapable tradeoff between security and liberty." In order to keep tabs on people or investigate, the government would require the ability to check up on, and closely watch persons of interest. At the same time, wire taps, financial  information, and  daily routines are things that the average person would rather keep private. I believe that it was okay for security to be balanced with liberty, but as attacks become more advanced and eminent , the government should adjust things to further ensure the general safety of its citizens, without being too drastic, like hidden cameras being placed in the homes of citizens.

The general conspiracy stereotypes of the government are supported with the way that the patriot act  can, and has been used by the government. It's a waste of money, resources, and just generally a waste of time if its mostly focused towards innocent citizens with less than positive views on some aspects of American Society. Many people would agree that the right to just take things (literally anything thats tangible) because they believe it to be suspicious or evidence without proper justification. The wire taps are bad enough, but the right to take things just because they want to is wrong.  Also, If government agents can actually order internet and library records on the spot, then there's something wrong. Without a real way of justifying their accusations, then they can just run through peoples private lives, without any regard for their rights and privacy laws.

If the patriot act is used for actually preventing terrorist attacks, and with good judgement, plus safeguards (like judge approval for wiretaps and other steps) then it should be left where it is standing, but theres still room for more consideration of the privacy and civil rights

Be the first to comment


To be completely honest Im not even sure if we till need the PATRIOT Act. It is as if it does not fully stand for what it was made to stand for. Yes everyone wants to feel safe to a certain extent of not having to worry about being in harms way on a daily basics. After 9/11 I’m pretty sure that the idea of being safe was no longer taking easy in the comfort of ones own home or even traveling from one place to the next as a daily routine. 

One thing the U.S. must remember is 9/11 is the past and we have to move forward in a positive manner an not get so wrapped up into the PATRIOT Act that we find ourselves reliving it by doing too many unnecessary investigations. There is a thin line between suspicion for protection an suspicion for insanity. In 1978 Congress decided to establish the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court as special and with that the Chief of Justice had to choose federal district judges to review applications for warrants in regards to any investigations that had to do with national security. Any agents that have to or feel as thought they need to investigate will go get a valid warrant that would be issued from a federal district judge and proceed with further investigation. The only problem with that is that most of the time if not all of the time agents whether is is the police, F.B.I, C.I.A etc tend to do a little investigation of their own before they go get a warrant. I feel as though a warrant should be issued before the investigation begins, if it is reasonable belief that an particular individual is creating harm to society then there should not be any problem with getting a warrant. 

There has to be some balance between trying to keep everyone safe from terrorism and not just bombarding the privacy of individuals. The PATRIOT Act was made to protect the citizens not hurt them, when agents do investigations and leave off at a dead end that does not make us feel any safe. It just seems as if the government is not doing their job to the fullest and are checking the backgrounds of the wrong people. 

So far the heighten surveillance seems to be working to some extent, for the simple fact that we have not had a repeat of 9/11 and for that I am very grateful. So I say it’s only needed if it will be in effect to stop terrorism an not just for tracking  personal information. 

Be the first to comment

RoomForDebate, PatriotAct, Activity1

Lianna Jordan


The patriot act is a U.S law that was passed in the wakes of September 11, 2001 terrorists attacks. Its goal was to strengthen domestic security and broaden the powers of law-enforcement agencies with regards to finding and stopping terrorists.

There are both pros and cons behind the Patriot Act. Some of the pros are the act is useful in assuring people that they are more protected from terrorist attack which is very unlikely to happen. It also makes some soldiers feel like they are trying to defend the act and increase the chances of men and women to join the army.

            The cons of this act is the simple fact that the bill of rights is being abused, it opens up a gate way to pass other bills like the “Cyber Security Act” which is a way to take control of the internet. I feel like this act gives the government too much power. I personally feel like the act means well inreffrence with the tourism, but the government has taken advantage of their inside power and are using this act to do whatever they feel is justice. I like the thought of the re-authorizing that Senator Ron Weyden; Democrat of Organ introduced a bill that would narrow the most controversial provisions of the act section 215. Unfortunately, President Obama, who supported a similar amendment when he was in the Senate, signed the Patriot Act re-authorization without insisting on the Wyden amendment. 


Be the first to comment