Civics -- Green/Raby

Well writen post, I love the examples you used and the way you worded your argument. I liked when you talk about how vauge the Patriot Act was written, I totally agree. I also agree with your first statement, how the government has changed "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty untill proven innocent. I liked when you said the government could use these tactics on suspected criminals and not American citizens, I feel this act is unconstitutional.:( but on a happier note, GREAT JOB!(:

when you had stated that the government changed the "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent". i had agreed. but i believe that the government of the United States has the right to do as they wish to keep America, along with the people, safe.

I completely disagree with your statement. I don't believe that the government changed the "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until provent innocent" because if it was that way then there would be no reason to even provide a criminal with a defense attorney. A criminal wouldn't have so many rights if the government wasn't also trying to protect them. There wouldn't be juries, due process, or the fact that a prosecutor needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that one is in fact a criminal. Also, from this case, no one got hurt. No one was actually accused or arrested for anything. The government was only trying to protect its people by doing more research. I don't believe that the fourth amendment was violated because not only are there situations where the government can search through one's things [where they expected to have privacy], but also because the government had to issue letters to the businesses that they were asking the information from. When you state that "the act said that the government could use these tactics on suspected criminals, not on all of the American people" I'm assuming that you are once again stating that the government accused everyone of being guilty, but once again the "search" had to be done before any fingers were pointed and in the end, it all turned out to be a mistake. While many may feel like their privacy was violated, it was the necessary protocol to make sure no one was going to be harmed. Again, the government is doing its best to keep its citizens safe and sound; I don't think we need to turn on the government just because we feel like everything needs to be private. Everyone knows that they are being watched every time they use their credit cards, cellphones, computer etc. 

I do agree that the executive branch has too much power and the thought of the government spying on us 24/7 is kind of creepy because I need my privacy. Its true that the gov. changed it from "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent" because some people get spied on more because the way they look and then they get put on the watch list. So yeah..