Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Justice Department Proud of Patriot Act Slippery Slope

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the first-they-came-for-the-people-different-from-me dept.

United States 1108

frank_adrian314159 writes "Yahoo News is reporting that the DoJ has been using its increased powers under the US PATRIOT Act to pursue common criminals. DoJ Officials have been holding seminars on how to use increased wiretap powers against (non-terrorist) money launderers and drug dealers. One example in the article is the guy running a meth lab who's now up for a life sentence for 'manufacturing chemical weapons' instead of the much shorter sentence he would have been facing under the current drug laws. Wonderful, huh? Who didn't see this coming? Of course, you're a law-abiding citizen, so you have nothing to worry about, right?" Patriot Act II will allow any Federal agent to demand records from anyone who interacts with you, with no judicial oversight whatsoever.

cancel ×

1108 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

suck my cock (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958746)

you bitch, you whore, you little fucking faggot.

suck it.

Re:suck my cock (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958885)

Wait. Let me get this straight. You want me to be outraged because the government is using a law passed by our elected representatives to see to it that a drug dealer spends more time in prison?

Of course, you're a law-abiding citizen, so you have nothing to worry about, right?

Well, I don't manufacture or sell drugs so I don't have anything to worry about yet. Let me know when they're using this law to violate the rights of those that haven't done anything wrong.

I, for one, welcome our... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958748)

...Federal Government Overlords....

Oh wait, we've had them since 1776. DOH!!

It's a cliche, (2, Insightful)

EverStoned (620906) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958750)

but 1984 has finally caught up to us. Big Brother is watching you, and the people who you come in contanct with.

Re:It's a cliche, (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958775)

In Soviet Russia, YOU catch up to 1984!

Re:It's a cliche, (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958939)

you got to love the doublespeak. Using the word "patriot" to discribe a law designed to negate parts of the Bill of Rights. How patriotic...

Print the article... (3, Insightful)

kitzilla (266382) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958754)

...and take it into the voting booth in November, 2004.

How's the weather up in canda? (1, Insightful)

kaltkalt (620110) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958756)

I hear it's nice this time of year.

Well (1)

Hal The Computer (674045) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958798)

Two things:
  1. It's Canada
  2. Nice is relative [yahoo.com] where I live.

Re:Well (1)

kaltkalt (620110) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958843)

I just woke up and hadn't had my coffee (it was still brewing). Give me a break, ehh buddy? ;)

Re:How's the weather up in canda? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958879)

I don't know, but keep making comments like that and you might find out what the weather is like in Cuba....

Re:How's the weather up in canda? (1)

kaltkalt (620110) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958915)

Yeah, well, call me an idealist but I still believe in free speech and free discourse, especially when talking about the government and its actions.

I'm Proud Too (-1, Troll)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958758)

I think it is great that we are using new laws to "crack down on currency smugglers, bookies, con artists and drug dealers."
Giving these people a break is not something I'm interested in doing. I don't give a bug a break when it crashes my software(and thats 100% my fault), why should I give a person a break who wants to "crash" society?

I also applaud the North Carolina county prosecutor who charged a guy cooking crystal meth with manufacture of chemical weapons, because the law defines chemical weapons as "any substance that is designed or has the capability to cause death or serious injury." And crystal
meth sure has the capability to cause death or serious injury. I applaud him just as I would a prosecutor who charged someone who hacked into a computer and vandalized data, with the same law that protects you from someone breaking in and vandalizing the files in a desk.

The article points out, "Prosecutors aren't apologizing." Good! Why would or should they apologize for using the law to do their job and put criminals in jail. Since when is that a bad thing? Most people reading slashdot are well insulated from those who are trying to raise kids with a meth lab full of tweekers next door, or the single mother who hopes her kid can walk to school without too much hassle from the local drug dealers. I'll give a crap about what some left wing nerd thinks about the government should treat and prosecute criminals right after I take C++ coding style advice from Howard Dean or George Bush.

Re:I'm Proud Too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958786)

Damn straight

Re:I'm Proud Too (0)

mosch (204) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958795)

Excellent troll.

You idiot! (0)

HanzoSan (251665) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958812)



Cant you see that the gov creates the laws and now h as the power to not only label anyone a criminal for any reason, but now they have the tools to rule over us and we can do nothing about it.

I'm all for the war against terrorism but what exactly are we fighting for if our solution for terrorism is to bring the Taliban and Nazi ideas over to the US?

Re:You idiot! (1)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958837)

Please learn hwo government works. It is not something. It is a group of people elected by the whole. They represent the intrest of the majority, not just you.

Thats BULLSHIT (1)

HanzoSan (251665) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958883)



The majority rule vote did not elect George W Bush, he does not represent the majority of the people in this country because he did not win the majority of the vote you stupid idiot.

When I talk about government I know exactly what I'm talking about, we arent a democracy we are a republic and who you vote for has nothing to do with government.

You may be able to influence congress but thats about it, and you can only influence congress if you have cash to do so and of course you dont.

Re:Thats BULLSHIT (1)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958901)

HA. Keep telling yourself that about GWB, maybe it will then be true. We are a republic and congress makes the F'ing laws, if you vote them out of office it has a big influence.

Re:I'm Proud Too (2, Insightful)

madMingusMax (693022) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958818)

Oh jesus christ..it's people like this that scare the bejesus out of me, even more so than the Patriot Act itself. Prosecutors are using the law, that's not the issue. The issue is that the law is fucked up! Expanded wire tappings not requiring a judge's signature..the ability for prosecutors to listen in on attorney-client conversations without their knowledge, the list goes on. And, for what it's worth, I sure as hell don't think someone cooking up crystal meth should be charged as a god-damn terrorist. I much prefer to sit back and allow darwinism to purge the idiots from our midst.

Re:I'm Proud Too (1)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958861)

Darwinism doesn't work if the strong are too weak willed to fight back because it may offend or bother the ACLU. You want surviaval of the fitest and the week and dumb to be protected.

You sir scare the bejesus out of me. The idea of prosecutors using your logic keeps me up nights.

Re:I'm Proud Too (0, Flamebait)

madMingusMax (693022) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958908)

Well, I, for one, am certainly thankful the the strong-willed among us such as yourself, who with righteous indignation are able to make decisions for the rest of us weak, yellow-bellied tree-huggers. Thank you, sir!

Re:I'm Proud Too (0)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958924)

I don't want to think for you. But don't speak out of your head and ass at the same time please.

Re:I'm Proud Too (1)

CoffeeCrusader (660043) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958878)

Right, there are enough things that can be solved with a decent dose of darwinism, among those drug-addicts. Those willing can be saved. But it's a completely different story if the laws allow those in charge to do just about anything they want. This situation is what all those anti-utopian novels were about, that's what the people of soviet russia were enduring. Just that in the US there are way too many people who consider those laws against terrorism nice. Sure, it's nice for right-wings who detest anything that smells even the least bit leftish, like environmentalists or the likes

Re:I'm Proud Too (1)

HanzoSan (251665) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958899)



Too bad this isnt survival of the fittest, smartest, stronger, its survival of the richest.

Often the rich and powerful have not earned their spot, ask George Bush.

Re:I'm Proud Too (2, Insightful)

Vyce (697152) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958904)

Ding! I prefer that they legalize, homogenize, and tax the holy fark outta drugs. We can get rid of dealers, we can get rid of drugs supporting terrorism (wow!) and we can purge some of the idiot pool. Aside from that, the "War-on-Drugs" is completely unwinnable. You cannot win a war against your own tax payers.

Re:I'm Proud Too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958833)

Meh. They dont "want" to crash society, they just want to make a profit, and own a few hoes. If society stands in the way, oh well.

Serriously. We already had laws to deal with these people. The Patriot Act is simply the DMCA of the Dpt. of Justice, the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA.

Both are mostly absolving the courts of responsibility, and putting the power in the hands of the "crime fighters". Can you see the other similarites between the two?

Dredd: "I AM THE Law!"

My only wonder is when they're going to start building a penal colony in Aspen.

Re:I'm Proud Too (1)

MoonBuggy (611105) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958847)

OK, you want to see the drug dealers convicted, that's fair enough. They are not, however, terrorists and should not be classed as such. Drug laws exist to combat dealers, and if they aren't harsh enough then they can be changed. Overly broad terrorism laws aren't the answer.

Also, consider the fact that you, a law abiding citizen could go to prison for 12 to life next time you cook dinner. People can choke to death on food you know, and that makes it a chemical weapon under this act. Still think it's just now that you're a terrorist?

Re:I'm Proud Too (1)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958882)

Who said they are terrorist. RTFA.

Re:I'm Proud Too (1)

bleaked (609151) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958869)

To: Ken@WearableTech (A.K.A. O'Brien)

It is people like you who make America such a terrible country. I could go on and on explaining, but you're so obviously blinded by your country that you would never understand/listen.

You may consider this trolling, but no matter what the /. community thinks of me I strongly stand by my views.

Re:I'm Proud Too (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958881)


I'll give a crap about what some left wing nerd thinks about the government should treat and prosecute criminals right after I take C++ coding style advice from Howard Dean or George Bush.


The point of a democracy is that the left wing nerd's opinions on government are just as important as a cop's, Dick Gephadt's, yours, or the suspected meth dealer next door's. If you're looking for a big daddy Ashcroft to sort it out for you so you can concentrate on your code, there are plenty of countries with constitutions that support that.

People always get... (4, Insightful)

alizard (107678) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958892)

the local government they deserve.

When you discover that your latest rant about your taxes in some neo-fascist political forum gets you a midnight visit from the Feds and afterwards, you are never seen or heard of again, you won't get any sympathy from anyone. You won't deserve any.

One of the few comforting things about the "criminalization of dissent" is the certainty that some people like you will get exactly what you deserve. From a government you're stupid enough to trust.

Re:I'm Proud Too (3, Insightful)

mr100percent (57156) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958906)

Well said, but I don't totally agree.

I agree with you that we need to throw the book at more people (drug dealers, mafia), but I don't advocate throwing out all our old laws that dealt with it, and replacing them with one big "Evil is illegal and subject to death penalty" law.

The Patriot Act (and sequel) is too vague, gives the government powers that are too broad and have no oversight. Don't you remember how Schwarzenegger wiretapped his wife's phones and carried out full surveillance? He had no oversight in that instance. I think we should fix the numerous drug laws, not supersede them all with one vague and broad bill.

I'm worried about the idea that the government can pull up my record of video rentals, phone calls, and library books, and there not being anyone who has to approve of it (like a judge or jury).

Worse, if the FBI came to my place of employment, I would be forced to hand over my pharmacy and health records of any person over to them. They may not have or need a warrant, only a badge. Congress unanimously passed the HIPAA privacy acts for patients, and some guy with a badge can just walk in and take everything without caring about the other laws. How do I know this isnt just some cop who wants to see if his wife has VD?

Re:I'm Proud Too (2, Insightful)

eidechse (472174) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958907)

Typical 'tough on crime' idiocy. You forgot to say 'Give a fair trial and hang 'em' or maybe 'It's time to clean up this town'.

The US legal system was not set up to make it easy to stamp out crime. It was set up to ensure due process, and protect the rights of the accused.

Sentences for the guilty aren't intended to match with your naive and/or hyper-literal application of a legal definition.

As for raising kids...irrelevent.

Lastly, it's every citizen's DUTY to be aware of what government does with regard civil and legal rights. It is also every citizen's duty to challenge any abridgement of those rights.

I Understand Now (5, Insightful)

jlaxson (580785) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958759)

Prosecutor Jerry Wilson says he isn't abusing the law, which defines chemical weapons of mass destruction as "any substance that is designed or has the capability to cause death or serious injury" and contains toxic chemicals.

If I chug enough gasoline, I'll die. Let's put the Oil companies away for 12 years to life! For that matter, drink some bad water from a lake and you'll die. Put the Big Bang away for 12 - life!

Re:I Understand Now (0, Troll)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958778)

Producing gasoline is not illegal. Producing crystal meth is.

Please chug gasoline. Please.

Re:I Understand Now (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958849)

I'd like to see you produce some gasoline in your home. My guess is that the BATF and the FBI would have a serrious problem with it.

You could be in the next /. Patriot Act article. Whee.

Re:I Understand Now (5, Insightful)

ScriptGuru (574838) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958880)

The point he was making was that any substance known to man "has the capability to cause death or serious injury"
Chalk, WD-40, gasoline, soda, cigarettes, et al have the capability to cause serious injury or death when consumed and to some extent contain toxic chemicals.
Thus this definition is seriously flawed and could be used to arrest people even if they haven't done anything wrong (aside from working for Dow Chemical).
As a CME major, that scares the crap out of me.

Re:I Understand Now (1)

Mr. Sketch (111112) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958796)

The government get taxes from the sales of gasoline, so if they did that, they would kill of one of their revenue sources. Needless to say, it's not likely to happen.

Re:I Understand Now (1)

Ken@WearableTech (107340) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958823)

Ya that and gasoline is avital part of our economy.

The government get taxes from everything, including YOU. Does that mean the reason it is illegal to kill you, is that the government does not want to miss out on the money?

Re:I Understand Now (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958888)

In a word, yes.

Releastically, it's because it costs the Gov so much more money to process the papers for your death permit than it does to prosecute the killer.

Re:I Understand Now (1)

Mr. Sketch (111112) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958902)

Ya that and gasoline is avital part of our economy.

Exactly, it is a vital part of the economy hence why it won't be targeted. However, an individual is not a vital part of the economy so they can be targed selectively. The collective group of all of us are vital, but a few people here and there are not.

I personally think gasoline is not a valid argument either, since it's not designed to cause death or serious injury. Cigarettes on the other hand are, just over a prolonged period of time, but of course they also have a special tax on them so they won't be targed by the government either.

Great (4, Insightful)

secondsun (195377) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958760)

When did a campaign of "Compassionate Conservatism" become synonomous with "slightly to the left of Darth Vader"?

Re:Great (4, Funny)

Unregistered (584479) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958813)

What's so bad abut Vadar?

Re:Great (4, Funny)

Adam9 (93947) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958862)

Compared to Bush... not much

Re:Great (4, Interesting)

Felinoid (16872) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958914)

Before 9-11 I was a conservitive.
After 9-11 I'm a radical libral...

And my opinions haven't changed.

Why not go after the tobacco companies next? (4, Insightful)

Mr. Sketch (111112) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958767)

After all their definition of a chemical weapon of mass destruction is:

Prosecutor Jerry Wilson says he isn't abusing the law, which defines chemical weapons of mass destruction as "any substance that is designed or has the capability to cause death or serious injury" and contains toxic chemicals.

So why don't they go after the tobacco companies since they're manufacturing substances that meet these criteria? Oh wait, the government gets taxes from the sales of these products, nevermind.

Re:Why not go after the tobacco companies next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958800)

People drown in water, why not go after those bastards over at Evian?

Re:Why not go after the tobacco companies next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958912)

They are just a small part of the problem.
This evil must be stopped [dhmo.org]

Re:Why not go after the tobacco companies next? (1)

Vyce (697152) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958854)

That, and I don't think Crystal Meth dealers contribute to political campaigns. Not that they need to, as the product simply sells itself.

Now that sounds like a blanket law.... (3, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958875)

...is there any substance not lethal in high enough doses? Btw, the "contains toxic chemicals" part merely restates the first part - the very definition of toxic is what is harmful to people.

I imagine even water is outlawed under this law, after all you can drown from it. Polluted water at least. Nevermind air, which is definately lethal if injected into the bloodstream.

Re:Why not go after the tobacco companies next? (1)

Restil (31903) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958911)

You have to make tabacco illegal first. And don't think they aren't trying. You HAVE been paying attention lately, haven't you?

-Paul

Chemical WMDs (3, Interesting)

MoonBuggy (611105) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958769)

If a chemical weapon is "any substance that is designed or has the capability to cause death or serious injury" then where does that leave manufacturers of (for example) petrol. That can cause death or serious injury, but I don't see the government throwing them down for life...

Yay for double standards o_0

Re:Chemical WMDs (2, Funny)

Unregistered (584479) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958828)

Can they book the guys that fart in the car on a rainy day so you can't open the windows?

Re:Chemical WMDs (4, Insightful)

eyeye (653962) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958853)

Double standards? Doesnt the US military give its soldiers Methampetamine?

Ob. Brockman. (3, Funny)

$hecky (445344) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958771)

I, for one, welcome our new Republican over--

Wait a second. No I don't.

Support MIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958772)

Meth Industry Association of America issues a statement accusing government of trying to infringe on free market economy and healthy industry that meth production is. Stay tuned.

Campaigning by the Executive Branch (5, Insightful)

maomoondog (198438) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958774)

John Ashcroft has been touring [chicagosuntimes.com] to gain popular support for Patriot Act II. Nevermind that his speeches are invitation-only, to "safe" crowds of police officers in order to avoid inevitable protests... is anyone else creeped out that the executive branch has so many characters making such public efforts at lawmaking rather than just the execution of law?

But that sort of thing can't happen here. (4, Insightful)

Whammy666 (589169) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958782)

Isn't that what people used to say. Well guess what. It is happening here. Right now before your very eyes. Remember that when 2004 rolls around and be sure to thank Dumbya and his minions by sending them packing.

1984 was never meant to be a how-to guide.

Re:But that sort of thing can't happen here. (2, Insightful)

HanzoSan (251665) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958834)



Oh no people will never say anything bad about Bush, because you'll lose your job and be labeled a terrorist if you do.

Lets also reminded the Media is controlled by Mr.Bush, just look at FoxNews, MSNBC, etc.

The police, the media, both controlled by Mr.Bush, so who will you vote for this election?

Be careful, make the wrong choice and someone might think you are a terrorist, a traitor, or unpatriotic, ask Anne Coulter.

Re:But that sort of thing can't happen here. (1)

nosfucious (157958) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958933)

Yeah, possible.

But who's the replacement? Will he (or possibly she), be much better. Will they be WORSE?

The ultimate democracy is one where you can vote: "X": None of the above.

Any so-called "multi-party democracy", that essentially boils down to a two horse race can benefit from that one. I'm thinking US, UK, Australia, etc. Where it's more or less "Winner take all".

It is ok (1)

jackb_guppy (204733) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958788)

It is ok bacause Homeland Sercurity buying all Microsoft [computerworld.com] the worm and virus writers will be caught in the world largest honeypot. All those nasity agents will only be running around trying to find ways to keep their equipment running.

And everyone loves Republicans right? (2, Insightful)

HanzoSan (251665) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958791)



I want to see some conservatives comment now on how Republicans are "conservative". Republicans want even bigger government than the Democrats. I am tired of this, everytime I read the news paper or watch TV George Bush is asking for more money for stupid shit. Hundreds of billions for building schools and hospitals in Iraq, Billions for Africa, Billions for this and Billions for that as if we have money to just throw into the fire, and then as our so called homeland security, we now spy on each other and use the patriot act as some kinda control against the people?!

I cant understand the logic of these Republicans, they seem to be far from conservative, Republicans seem to want Global Government which scares the shit out of me far more than the big US gov democrats.

Re:And everyone loves Republicans right? (1)

Vyce (697152) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958832)

That's the farce you see. There isn't a government in existence that wants smaller government. The whole smaller government is an election-time phenomenon, in that it only exists at times of election.

Re:And everyone loves Republicans right? (2, Insightful)

HanzoSan (251665) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958852)



I know this, you know this, but the republican turds who think George Bush can do no wrong just because he has an R next to his name cannot see this.

I dont know what the difference is between voting republican or democrat, the only reason I'd vote democrat over republican is because democrats seem to understand the economy, and at least they flat out say "We are going to raise taxes"

I'd rather have my taxes raised to pay for stuff in this country than to pay for stuff in Iraq, Afganastan, Africa, etc.

Goonies (1)

Vyce (697152) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958799)

Talk about a role-reversal. I thought republigoons wants LESS government intrusion. This whole "terrorism-as-an-excuse" crap has simply got to stop. Soon we'll get people with wiretaps on their phones and bugs on their cars after they get caught speeding. Oooh, he was speeding, he must be in a hurry to get to the bomb-laden-Uhaul-truck. Gimme a fricken break. At least in facist governments you KNOW you're being monitored all the time as a general rule. Personally I will NOT be surprised when Patriot III comes out giving the current president powers to halt democratic elections. Finally, the new Rome. One corrupt dictator!

I for one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958855)

Welcome our new corrupt dictators. With knives, poisons, traps, guns, hellfire, and damnation.

Re:Goonies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958931)

Personally I will NOT be surprised when Patriot III comes out giving the current president powers to halt democratic elections.

Too late - or perhaps you forgot about Bush v. Gore?

Land of the free ? (4, Insightful)

IanBevan (213109) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958808)

Are you guys in the 'States going to have to change your country's description ? Land of the free ? I think not. It seems to me that if you stay on the right side of the law, you *may* be OK, but stray, even a little, and the state can use ridiculously arcane and morally almost indefensible laws to serve 'justice'. In most cases, it seems to me that these laws are to protect (1) companies, and (2) the state itself. Perhaps one of the problems is that the distinction between these two entities is becoming grey ?

It seems odd to me that in one of the great democracies, individual freedoms and rights are becoming more and more compromised. The real concern for me is that American culture permeates just about every Western culture. Does this mean that the American legislative way will soon arrive here in New Zealand ? I hope not - but it's interesting to see that Australia seems to be using the USA as a role model recently.

Re:Land of the free ? (1)

Vyce (697152) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958922)

Actually, the US seems to be using Australia as a role model for certain things. Such as censorship of the media.

Not just in the US (1)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958809)

Ironically, much the same story has been relevant to the UK this week. At a high-profile arms fair (ahem... sorry... trade conference) where there were extensive (non-violent) protests, police used our recently-enacted anti-terrorism legislation under dubious circumstances. Our Home Secretary has demanded a full inquiry from the police -- interesting, since he's supposed to authorise any use of it in the first place. Apparently that may have happened on a technicality, because there was some sort of generic authorisation because of the anniversary of September 11. A slippery slope indeed...

This is good (4, Funny)

CausticWindow (632215) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958814)

Finally the US government has unveiled some dangerous chemical WMD.

Too bad it's produced in the US, by a US citizen and for recreational purposes.

Go USA.

Abuse of "anti-terrror" legislation. (4, Insightful)

MartinG (52587) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958816)

Unfortunately, many people didn't see this coming, and I just can't understand why. History has repeatedly shown that when any authority is given powers it WILL use them whenever it feels, and it WILL eventually abuse them.

It's similar to the recent case un England [bbc.co.uk] where demonstrators at an arms fair were detained using anti-terrorism measures.

I find it ironic that people demonstrating against the sale of weapons, some of the same kind used by terrorists are then arrested using laws designed to reduce terrorism.

Premature pontificators (0)

God! Awful 2 (631283) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958937)

As usual, the /. crowd is out there whining about the effects of a law before anything has been tested in court. Who knows if the crytal meth guy will actually be convicted, or if the decision will be reversed on appeal. I'm not defending the patriot act here.

I don't know if it will turn out to have more good or bad effects in the long run. But it does bug me that /. readers will make a big stink about the fact that trials/lawsuits can even be filed based on them. Any law can be misinterpreted and used to file a bogus lawsuit. But unless the suit actually holds up in court, it doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the law. Get back to me when this guy is convicted.

-a

That's the problem with democracy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958822)

... you have no one to blame but yourselves. After all, the majority of you either voted for these people or didn't vote at all. Welcome to your Orwellian nightmare.

I'd like to think that living in Canada will put me far enough out of the way that I'm not sucked in when America flushes itself down the toilet, but that might be too optimistic.

They're all after us (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958825)

Who didn't see this coming? Of course, you're a law-abiding citizen, so you have nothing to worry about, right?

I'm not afraid of FBI agent storming my place, because I'm not only paranoid, I'm also schizophrenic, which means I outnumber my ennemies 2 to 1!

Re:They're all after us (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958886)

Not only am I paranoid, I've got booby traps up from hell to breakfast. The fact I'm outnumbered doesn't matter. The agents are going to be whittled down.

It was once said... (5, Insightful)

TWX (665546) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958827)

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin

If the federal government persists in the behaviours that it has been engaging in lately, all that they'll do is force people who care to either leave the U.S., or to engage in rebellion.

I hope that the courts start thinking with some sanity, and dismiss entirely charges against people, despite their illegal acts, because of the treatment that they're receiving at the hands of law enforcement officials in charges and the like. If someone is doing something illegal, like manufacturing an illicit substance whose creation process is relatively dangerous, they deserve the trouble that they'd get, but they do no deserve to be branded "Terrorist". The DA or police who came up with the charge deserve to be sued for libel.

Re:It was once said... (1)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958909)

If the federal government persists in the behaviours that it has been engaging in lately, all that they'll do is force people who care to either leave the U.S., or to engage in rebellion.

Or, without the overblown dramatics, you could just vote for another candidate...

Re:It was once said... (1)

d3faultus3r (668799) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958918)

You know, the Romans once had a law that allowed you to kill anyone who was plotting to be king. I really wish the US had that law right now.

Rebelion? (1)

TLouden (677335) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958930)

If anyone tries to start a rebelion they'll learn more than they want about the power of the patriot act. After all, wouldn't that be like terrorism? We're looking at a defective government that's using its power to increase its power too much. We need to get the people more involved and the media and corperations less involved.

I wish this would be turned on corps... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958829)

I heard about how the Meth labs were going to be prosecuted as "chemical weapons/wmd's" based on the (very limited) damage their polution causes. It seems to me that those coal fired power plants that Bush and Chainy, with the help of Christie and gutting of the clean air act, enable to polute my air in nearby air also could be an act of chemical terrorism. Please, lets send the marines there and shut them down, jailing their operators for life! Of course that particular part of the act is so poorly worded that potentially even operating a moter vehicle could also be construed as a terrorist act!

Ebay (4, Interesting)

lord_paladine (568885) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958835)

Heck, even Ebay [com.com] (via PayPal) has been charged with violating the Patriot Act. Are we only seeing the beginnings of this kind of abuse, or will someone with deep pockets step up to the plate?

Also of note, here is the full write-up of the wire tap law from Cornell [cornell.edu]

So it seems... (1)

bob670 (645306) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958838)

final, we are all F ed!

sue McD's! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958845)

Can I sue Mc Donalds for producing and selling WMDs now?

Terrorism? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958846)

cat=terrorism -- its nice that theres a dedicated category for terrorism news articles.

terrorism
n : the systematic use of violence as a means to intimidate or coerce societies or governments.

Crack labs are violent? :\

This is good news (1)

TLouden (677335) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958868)

We've got a drug house across the street from us. The cops won't do a thing because we don't have enough usable evidence or something like that. With all these shortcuts and such we should be able to get these guys a good old life sentece in no time. I'm liking this more already.

Re:This is good news (1)

yuda (704374) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958917)

As long as the DEA dosn't mistake your door for theirs and gun you down in your bed by mistake

Rhetoric.. (3, Funny)

MrPerfekt (414248) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958872)

This is the point where people spew out "If you don't like it, leave!" in a standing tall, patriotic stance.

I do believe this is the final straw for myself. I will be permanently leaving the country as soon as financially possible.

It would incredibly interesting if the emmigration rate soared in the next few years from the US. I guess we'll wait and see.

Pleas (1)

wondering eyes (696778) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958873)

I don't want to hear the argument "well if you're not doing anything wrong you havwe nothing to worry about". I am an "upstanding" citizen, and am still freaked out about the government's broadening powers. These laws coming through is a blueprint for a police state. I for one don't trust any state with this much power.

Ever see Ashcroft on TV talking about this (3, Funny)

kaltkalt (620110) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958876)

I saw him on FoxNews with Tony Snow last week (safe haven for him, no tough questions). He was saying how little the patriot act does and how "we still need judges to sign all these warrants, it's not like we do anything on a whim." His basic spiel was "oh come on, it's nothing! Really, we would never use it in a bad way, trust us! We love jesus! Praise!"

We can only hope 4 year terms run in the bush family. And I voted for dubya.

Sickening (0, Troll)

FLoWCTRL (20442) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958877)

One example in the article is the guy running a meth lab who's now up for a life sentence for 'manufacturing chemical weapons'

DMCA, Patriot Act, War on Drugs, Total Information Awareness, Preemptive Strikes... and the sanctioned abuse of bad laws. The USA is really becoming a disgusting offense to justice.

6 months?!? (2, Funny)

ThesQuid (86789) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958890)

Quote from the article:
A North Carolina county prosecutor charged a man accused of running a methamphetamine lab with breaking a new state law barring the manufacture of chemical weapons. If convicted, Martin Dwayne Miller could get 12 years to life in prison for a crime that usually brings about six months.

Six months?!?!?? I think the drug laws are kinda whacked, but do you blame a prosecutor from trying to get a stronger sentence any way he can? The guy was manufacturing meth, fer gawd's sake. Not like he was smoking a doob or doing an occasional line.

Us is becoming the USSR of the XXI century (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958891)

-Media have to follow the rules from the president.
-No forreing journalist are permitted to ask question to your president or your gouvernment in press conference
-You can be spy by your gouvernment without been an criminal.
-You can't tell politic opinion that contest the gouvernment

Just like the old Soviet Union (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958900)

This is very much like how the Soviet's used to do it. If one read the Soviet era constitution, citizens in theory were told they had all sorts or rights and freedoms, including to due process, and that these could only be violated for the most heneous of crimes, such as treason. On the other hand, the Soviet treason laws were written so that anyone could be easily and effectivily charged under them :).

Today, in America, we now say due process and freedom is to be enjoyed by all, except those potential or suspected terrorists. Again, the problem is that our terrorist laws being so written that anyone may be charged under them.

And we now have our very own gulogs to boot. What a fitting description for both Guantanimo bay, and for the military brigg in Virginia where several actual American citizens have been held for close to a year now without any rights whatsoever.

Putting Away Meth Makers Is Wonderful (1)

reallocate (142797) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958905)

>> ...the guy running a meth lab who's now up for a life sentence for 'manufacturing chemical weapons' instead of the much shorter sentence he would have been facing under the current drug laws. Wonderful, huh?

In the part of the country where I live meth labs are a major problem in many counties. Prosecutors using these new procedures are seeing their arrest, conviction, and imprisonment rates increase.

That all sounds pretty wonderful to me. If you're making meth, you're dealing in death and ruined lives.

Partio? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6958910)

If you mispell patriot, then the terrorists have already won.

Won't abuses be challenged in the courts? (1)

computerlady (707043) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958928)

These cases will be challenged in the courts and many of them will be overturned. We should be able to craft a reasonable bill that prevents these kinds of abuses while loosening up the restrictions that made terrorism detection virtually impossible. Surely we've got the smarts for that?

Damn... (1)

incom (570967) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958932)

I try to be hopefull about the future of america, but shit like this keeps coming up. Are these idiots trying to cause a bloody civil war? Or do they think they can actually pull off a stalinist reversal of america?

Don't troll me. (1)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 10 years ago | (#6958934)

Partio Act II will allow any Federal agent to demand records from anyone who interacts with you

You have been warned!

On the bright side, I hope now the powers that be have overstepped the mark far enough that the people will kick back.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>