FISA

zoogs

zoogs

New member
I want to start a new thread on this because I have no idea how to feel on this topic. I'm pretty inclined to be against 'surveillance state' laws and sympathetic to the strong, even angry advocacy in this regard from corners such as The Intercept (which is born of that issue). At the same time I feel it's legitimately one of the least surprising things that there might be some bipartisan consensus on, and it's not entirely clear to me that it is always bad. 


Obviously, this guy used to work for a government security agency in the UK. To start off with some counter points:



Thoughts?

 
It's a good topic Zoogs, one that I made a note to learn more about last week.

Honestly I don't know why I'd care if people were listening to me.  I have nothing to hide, so at first blush I say have at it, especially if it keeps us safer.  But I know it's more complicated than that and I need to learn more.

Looking forward to the discussion on this thread.

 
Two questions that come to mind that I believe everyone needs to ask themselves:

1)  Knowing everything you know about this topic.......If you were in charge of keeping America safe, would you be more comfortable with this bill or with out this bill?

2)  Are you comfortable with the government having this ability no matter who is in charge of the government?  (Dems, Repubs, Trump???)

To me, my answers to these questions are in conflict with each other.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster said:
Two questions that come to mind that I believe everyone needs to ask themselves:

1)  Knowing everything you know about this topic.......If you were in charge of keeping America safe, would you be more comfortable with this bill or with out this bill?

2)  Are you comfortable with the government having this ability no matter who is in charge of the government?  (Dems, Repubs, Trump???)

To me, my answers to these questions are in conflict with each other.
Click to expand...
For #1, it depends what you mean by "keeping America safe". If we're talking solely about the lives/safety of the citizens/infrastructure, then we're probably safer with the bill. If we're talking about the Constitution and what it means to be America/American, then probably safer without the bill.

#2 is the reason I'm opposed to warrantless surveillance of our own citizens. Power eventually gets abused - always.

 
I think a lot of my doubt on this comes from specifics. Broadly, I'm very skeptical of how far we've gone in giving the government unchecked (or poorly checked) latitude. That doesn't make every specific piece of that framework wrong and something that should be overturned.

 
Back
Top