• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Homeless Man Evicted Under Patriot Act

ShamMol

Only Way Round is Through
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
1,988
Reaction score
10
Location
Pasadena, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
You may either find this outrageous, are neutral or get a kick out of it.
CNN.com said:
EWARK, New Jersey (AP) -- The USA Patriot Act, in the name of fighting terrorism, allows the government to find out which books and Internet sites a person has seen. It lets investigators secretly search homes and monitor phone calls and e-mail.

Now, officials in the wealthy New York City suburb of Summit are using the law to justify forcing homeless people to leave a train station -- an action that sparked a $5 million federal lawsuit by a homeless man.

Richard Kreimer, who filed the lawsuit in March after being kicked out of the train station, said the Patriot Act defense makes no sense.

"Unless they've been smoking those funny cigarettes, I can't see how my civil lawsuit has anything to do with the Patriot Act," said Kreimer, 55, who is acting as his own attorney.

But Summit officials argue they are protected by a provision regarding "attacks and other violence against mass transportation systems." Town attorney Harry Yospin, who did not return calls seeking comment Tuesday and Wednesday, has used the law as one of more than a dozen defenses in the case.

Edward Barocas, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, said the Patriot Act defense is weak: "Nothing in the Patriot Act lets them kick homeless people out of train stations."

The U.S. Justice Department also criticized Summit's use of the law.

"That represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what the Patriot Act is," spokesman Kevin Madden said Wednesday. "The Patriot Act is a law enforcement tool to identify and track terrorists and stop them from further attacks on America. To apply it to this case is, shall we say, an overreaching application of the law."
Source

Frankly, this case is kinda interesting insofar as it might be a great legal challenge to the Patriot Act which hasn't really been done effectively. I bet that the court gets amicus curiae briefs like crazy from the Justice Dept. saying to rule that in this case alone it is unconstitution, but that it has no bearing whatsoever on other cases. Just my bet..
 

Naughty Nurse

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
1,972
Reaction score
12
Location
The UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
The Patriot Act sound terrifying - what is this world coming to?
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
NoobieDoobieDo said:
Freedom is over rated.
I think we all knew that the Patriot Act would be abused. It needs to be repealed.
 

Fantasea

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
8
It's amazing. Folks who behave as responsible citizens have no reason to fear the Patriot Act. Folks who behave irresponsibly complain when it nails them.

Why is it that the socialist-lib-dems and their media apologists never mention the fact that the vote in the House of Representatives was 357 yeas and 66 nays; and in the Senate, the vote was 98 yeas and 1 nay?

Anyone care to calculate the number of Democratic yeas in that total of 455 yeas?

Anyone know the name of the single Senator who voted in opposition to the Patriot Act?
 

ShamMol

Only Way Round is Through
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
1,988
Reaction score
10
Location
Pasadena, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Fantasea said:
It's amazing. Folks who behave as responsible citizens have no reason to fear the Patriot Act. Folks who behave irresponsibly complain when it nails them.

Why is it that the socialist-lib-dems and their media apologists never mention the fact that the vote in the House of Representatives was 357 yeas and 66 nays; and in the Senate, the vote was 98 yeas and 1 nay?

Anyone care to calculate the number of Democratic yeas in that total of 455 yeas?

Anyone know the name of the single Senator who voted in opposition to the Patriot Act?
This isn't a partisan issue, it is an intersting legal challenge, which personally I think will go the way of civil libertarians. The Patriot Act was not meant for this purpose and thus his removal will likely be thrown out.

And way to not actually adress the issue, amazing job.
 

JustineCredible

Wading through the Mire
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
1,379
Reaction score
91
Location
Eastern Standard Time zone
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
ShamMol said:
You may either find this outrageous, are neutral or get a kick out of it.
Source

Frankly, this case is kinda interesting insofar as it might be a great legal challenge to the Patriot Act which hasn't really been done effectively. I bet that the court gets amicus curiae briefs like crazy from the Justice Dept. saying to rule that in this case alone it is unconstitution, but that it has no bearing whatsoever on other cases. Just my bet..
Well that's if it actually ends up going to Appellate court.

I have to say I agree with the Justice Dept Spokesman on this one. It's a flagrant overreaching that should be laughed out of court.
 

JustineCredible

Wading through the Mire
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
1,379
Reaction score
91
Location
Eastern Standard Time zone
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
galenrox said:
Alright, **** the democrats, they're worthless too.
It doesn't matter whether or not responsible citizens have nothing to fear from the Patriot Act, that still doesn't ****ing justify it! It ass rapes a whole lot of the things that Americans hold dear, along with a large part of a little thing called DUE PROCESS!
You see, I don't like the idea that my phone could be tapped for no reason. I don't like the fact that a police officer no longer needs probable cause to search my car, and I don't like the fact that if at some point I decided to read that the government may check on me based on my choices!
And I don't like the idea that if I'm law abiding that I should be ok with this. I am fairly law abiding, quite a bit more than most people my age, and I am still not ok with this! I am not ok with this because it takes America the dream and turns it into America, the bastardized hollow shell of what it once was, and I'm supposed to be ****ing OK with this? In your ****ing dreams!
Rock on!

I couldn't agree more. I too am fairly law abiding and truly hate the idea that medical records can be searched without notice to those being investigated! I don't like that public library records can be searched without notice to those being investigated.

These things bother me a on a grand scale. I'm an AMERICAN G*DDAM*IT! I served my country, pay my taxes and utilize MY right to PRIVACY!

What also bothers me is that the Patriot Act violates HIPAA, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. HIPAA
Medical Privacy - National Standards to Protect the Privacy of Personal Health Information.
It's not anyone's business to know when I last received a flu shot or what medications I've been prescribed.

The whole concept bothers me because I have a father who is NOT an American citizen. Granted, he's from Canada, but he's still recognized only as having a permanent visa and is not a citizen therefore cannot utilize many rights we all take for granted.
 

Fantasea

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
8
galenrox said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantasea
It's amazing. Folks who behave as responsible citizens have no reason to fear the Patriot Act. Folks who behave irresponsibly complain when it nails them.

Why is it that the socialist-lib-dems and their media apologists never mention the fact that the vote in the House of Representatives was 357 yeas and 66 nays; and in the Senate, the vote was 98 yeas and 1 nay?

Anyone care to calculate the number of Democratic yeas in that total of 455 yeas?

Anyone know the name of the single Senator who voted in opposition to the Patriot Act?
Alright, **** the democrats, they're worthless too.
It doesn't matter whether or not responsible citizens have nothing to fear from the Patriot Act, that still doesn't ****ing justify it! It ass rapes a whole lot of the things that Americans hold dear, along with a large part of a little thing called DUE PROCESS!
You see, I don't like the idea that my phone could be tapped for no reason. I don't like the fact that a police officer no longer needs probable cause to search my car, and I don't like the fact that if at some point I decided to read that the government may check on me based on my choices!
And I don't like the idea that if I'm law abiding that I should be ok with this. I am fairly law abiding, quite a bit more than most people my age, and I am still not ok with this! I am not ok with this because it takes America the dream and turns it into America, the bastardized hollow shell of what it once was, and I'm supposed to be ****ing OK with this? In your ****ing dreams!
First, let me say that I am, indeed, sorry about your speech impediment. Perhaps, if you seek help, you can have it corrected. It's really a distraction and greatly diminishes the merit of anything you say. A few well chosen verbs, adverbs, and adjectives in place of the juvenile invective would improve the readability of your posts and make them appear to be considerably more sensible as well as cordial.

Second, a country upon which war has been declared does not have the luxury of indulging all of the desires of all of its residents. Previous wars set the precedent for temporarily restricting freedoms for their duration. Complaints then, as now, fell on deaf ears.

Security in wartime is paramount. This has never been so true as it is now when the enemy who has declared war on the US is a faceless shadow able to inflict great damage at relatively little cost to himself. Past and present examples of their work are proof of that.

Whatever legal tools which can be made available to aid in the fight should and will be used. When the war is concluded, things will get back to normal, as they always have.

Until then, despite all the noise being made about all of the "what ifs", those who behave themselves will have no cause to fear anything from the government.
 

Fantasea

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
8
JustineCredible said:
Rock on!

I couldn't agree more. I too am fairly law abiding and truly hate the idea that medical records can be searched without notice to those being investigated! I don't like that public library records can be searched without notice to those being investigated.

These things bother me a on a grand scale. I'm an AMERICAN G*DDAM*IT! I served my country, pay my taxes and utilize MY right to PRIVACY!

What also bothers me is that the Patriot Act violates HIPAA, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. HIPAA
Medical Privacy - National Standards to Protect the Privacy of Personal Health Information.
It's not anyone's business to know when I last received a flu shot or what medications I've been prescribed.

The whole concept bothers me because I have a father who is NOT an American citizen. Granted, he's from Canada, but he's still recognized only as having a permanent visa and is not a citizen therefore cannot utilize many rights we all take for granted.
Consider it your contribution to the war effort.

If your father wishes to avail himself of the full rights of US citizenship, there are steps he may take in that direction.
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Fantasea said:
First, let me say that I am, indeed, sorry about your speech impediment. Perhaps, if you seek help, you can have it corrected. It's really a distraction and greatly diminishes the merit of anything you say. A few well chosen verbs, adverbs, and adjectives in place of the juvenile invective would improve the readability of your posts and make them appear to be considerably more sensible as well as cordial.

Second, a country upon which war has been declared does not have the luxury of indulging all of the desires of all of its residents. Previous wars set the precedent for temporarily restricting freedoms for their duration. Complaints then, as now, fell on deaf ears.

Security in wartime is paramount. This has never been so true as it is now when the enemy who has declared war on the US is a faceless shadow able to inflict great damage at relatively little cost to himself. Past and present examples of their work are proof of that.

Whatever legal tools which can be made available to aid in the fight should and will be used. When the war is concluded, things will get back to normal, as they always have.

Until then, despite all the noise being made about all of the "what ifs", those who behave themselves will have no cause to fear anything from the government.
You are not understanding the issue here. The Patriot Act should be used for war concerns. It should not be used to harrass the citizens that it is meant to protect. Kicking out a homeless person from the subway, or whatever it was, using the Patriot Act is wrong. That is abuse and it shoud not be tolerated.
 

Fantasea

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
8
alex said:
You are not understanding the issue here. The Patriot Act should be used for war concerns. It should not be used to harrass the citizens that it is meant to protect. Kicking out a homeless person from the subway, or whatever it was, using the Patriot Act is wrong. That is abuse and it shoud not be tolerated.
I understand the issue perfectly.

If some malcontent insists on making a nuisance out of himself, any available legal means should be applied to correct the situation.

This guy is homeless because that's what he wants to be. He chooses to ignore the alternatives. Why should others have to put up with his antics in a railroad station?
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Fantasea said:
I understand the issue perfectly.

If some malcontent insists on making a nuisance out of himself, any available legal means should be applied to correct the situation.

This guy is homeless because that's what he wants to be. He chooses to ignore the alternatives. Why should others have to put up with his antics in a railroad station?
That is a major misunderstanding of our law system. If any law can be used to abuse any person, we are in a lot of trouble. Every law has an intention. Going outside of that intention is corruption. Would you be so tolerant if the Patriot Act was used outside its intent against you? Being homeless is not a crime.
 

Fantasea

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
8
alex said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantasea
I understand the issue perfectly.

If some malcontent insists on making a nuisance out of himself, any available legal means should be applied to correct the situation.

This guy is homeless because that's what he wants to be. He chooses to ignore the alternatives. Why should others have to put up with his antics in a railroad station?
That is a major misunderstanding of our law system. If any law can be used to abuse any person, we are in a lot of trouble. Every law has an intention. Going outside of that intention is corruption.
Laws do not abuse persons. They set out standards of unnaceptable conduct and enumerate penalties upon conviction. What do you think of the RICO laws, enacted to go after the Mafiosa now being used in cases of white collar crime?
Would you be so tolerant if the Patriot Act was used outside its intent against you?
Personalities have no place in an objective discussion.
Being homeless is not a crime.
I'm not a lawyer but I believe being a public nuisance is a misdemeanor.
 

ShamMol

Only Way Round is Through
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
1,988
Reaction score
10
Location
Pasadena, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
But the homeless never get charged with that. And what they do get charged with is loitering, which is only illegal in front of businesses or places where business is done. That doesn't apply here. Go to homeless court every once and a while and you will see that these people aren't out there because they choose to be as you said. They are desperate, they are sometimes insane, they are veterans, they are people that just aren't cared for. Work at a homeless shelter, do something, and see that these people aren't worthless as you seem to think.
 

JustineCredible

Wading through the Mire
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
1,379
Reaction score
91
Location
Eastern Standard Time zone
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Fantasea said:
Consider it your contribution to the war effort.

If your father wishes to avail himself of the full rights of US citizenship, there are steps he may take in that direction.

Yes, Fantasea, we're well aware...DUH. Gods, can we say "EGO TRIP?"

...Scr*w your war effort, I want no part of it and will not allow BU **** to steal my son away for his illegal war!
 

JustineCredible

Wading through the Mire
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
1,379
Reaction score
91
Location
Eastern Standard Time zone
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Fantasea said:
I understand the issue perfectly.

If some malcontent insists on making a nuisance out of himself, any available legal means should be applied to correct the situation.

This guy is homeless because that's what he wants to be. He chooses to ignore the alternatives. Why should others have to put up with his antics in a railroad station?
I suggest you try being a homeless man. Not a homeless woman, to which there are hundreds more "alternatives" available, but a homeless man. Try getting a job without an address or phone number.
Or maybe he's one of the thousands of people of whom the system has failed. He could be suffering from a mental disorder, but because he isn't considered a threat to himself or anyone else, he was released from treatment with nowhere to go, no money and no means of employment. Shelters only last just so long, many of them are full, hard to get to, only allow patrons to come in at night but do not allow them to use the shelter as a home address, many shelters are dangerous as theft and violence is a common problem.
The truth is, you just don't know this man's personal story. Your assumptions about him are simply uneducated blanket attacks at something you find distasteful.
Well too danged bad for you. Your beloved country just isn't as perfect as you'd like to believe.
Welcome to reality.
 

Naughty Nurse

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
1,972
Reaction score
12
Location
The UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Fantasea said:
First, let me say that I am, indeed, sorry about your speech impediment. Perhaps, if you seek help, you can have it corrected. It's really a distraction and greatly diminishes the merit of anything you say. A few well chosen verbs, adverbs, and adjectives in place of the juvenile invective would improve the readability of your posts and make them appear to be considerably more sensible as well as cordial.
Let me say that I am, indeed, sorry about your reality impediment. A few well chosen trips to the real world would make your posts appear to be considerably more sensible.
 

Naughty Nurse

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
1,972
Reaction score
12
Location
The UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Fantasea said:
This guy is homeless because that's what he wants to be. He chooses to ignore the alternatives. Why should others have to put up with his antics in a railroad station?
If we were talking about a truly civilised society that really cared for its vulnerable people youmight have a point. Again, Fantasea, try connecting with reality once in a while.

Oh, and BTW, if you are right and there really is a God, you might discover that he/she/it doesn't like you very much.
 

JustineCredible

Wading through the Mire
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
1,379
Reaction score
91
Location
Eastern Standard Time zone
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Naughty Nurse said:
If we were talking about a truly civilised society that really cared for its vulnerable people youmight have a point. Again, Fantasea, try connecting with reality once in a while.

Oh, and BTW, if you are right and there really is a God, you might discover that he/she/it doesn't like you very much.
Now now, we have a basement for that...none of that this afternoon. (Well afternoon to you, that is....it's still fairly early in the AM here in the states)
 

Naughty Nurse

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
1,972
Reaction score
12
Location
The UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
JustineCredible said:
Now now, we have a basement for that...none of that this afternoon. (Well afternoon to you, that is....it's still fairly early in the AM here in the states)
Point taken, mother.

But I meant every word, and I won't say sorry. Anyway, he started it! :boohoo:
 

JustineCredible

Wading through the Mire
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2005
Messages
1,379
Reaction score
91
Location
Eastern Standard Time zone
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Naughty Nurse said:
Point taken, mother.

But I meant every word, and I won't say sorry. Anyway, he started it! :boohoo:
Didn't ask you to apologize, now did I? Be a good boy and just iggy the sniveling little twit. :Oopsie {did I just say that outloud?...bad me}
 
Top Bottom