Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Controversial Patriot Act power now overwhelmingly used in drug investigations

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 49 posts

Re: Controversial Patriot Act power now overwhelmingly used in drug investigations

#11

Post by csallen »

hyperion2010 wrote: post #10

I really do not understand why some people argue that slippery slope arguments are fallacious. If there is no compelling force and no oversight that prevents an organization from doing something then by entropy alone you would expect that it will eventually be done, much less when there is a huge incentive to use it because it requires less work and red tape.

Slippery slope arguments aren't necessarily fallacious. Their quality depends on how strong of a case you can build for why/how will lead to rather than .

EDIT: Don't know why I'm being downvoted. Wikipedia seems to back me up here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope).

Re: Controversial Patriot Act power now overwhelmingly used in drug investigations

#12

Post by smtddr »

aburan28 wrote: post #4

I am sure our democratic system will sort this sort abuse out right away...but in reality most people in this country won't bat an eye at issues like this or mass incarceration unfortunately

This doesn't help either....

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/august/prison-black-laws-...

Re: Controversial Patriot Act power now overwhelmingly used in drug investigations

#13

Post by smsm42 »

blazespin wrote: post #7

Oops. If true, the utter betrayal of government over the governed. At least in a fascist state, you know you're going to get screwed. Well, I think we can all agree now this is proof positive everything Snowden has said is completely valid.

Well, we can't really know everything he said is valid (he might be mistaken or deceived, for example) but certainly some of it is. But one doesn't need Snowden to know government will expand its powers if allowed to do so. You don't need Snowden, you just need a good history book and a bit of thinking. Snowden revelations showed how bad exactly it has gotten. But you could predict that it's going to get bad just because the government has been given wide powers and no substantial control over them. There's no way it would not go bad, it always does.

Re: Controversial Patriot Act power now overwhelmingly used in drug investigations

#14

Post by tetrep »

hyperion2010 wrote: post #10

I really do not understand why some people argue that slippery slope arguments are fallacious. If there is no compelling force and no oversight that prevents an organization from doing something then by entropy alone you would expect that it will eventually be done, much less when there is a huge incentive to use it because it requires less work and red tape.

this isn't a slippery slope, there wasn't a progressive increase in power, the powers were granted (mostly) at once.

the powers were granted due to reason X, but not restricted to reason X. So now they are being used for reason Y.

you could even go so far as to argue they're still used with their original and beautifully nebulous intent: national security

Re: Controversial Patriot Act power now overwhelmingly used in drug investigations

#15

Post by remarkEon »

There's a case before the SCOTUS right now that was argued back in October that has to do with something similar, where "forgotten law" (the police officer allegedly forgot what the law was for a broken tail light and pulled the person over anyway) led to a traffic stop, which led to a cursory search of the vehicle, which led to the discovery of a substantial amount of cocaine (relatively speaking). While one might argue that the court could easily rule for the government in this case given that the defendant consented to the secondary search (perhaps out of ignorance of the law), what's troubling for me in this related case is the government's position outright: namely, that it doesn't matter if the police officer does or does not know the law as long as a stop is "reasonable." To me that sounds like a pretty awful precedent to set. My law professor loved to ask us, somewhat condescendingly and to paraphrase John Adams, "are we a Nation of men, or are we a Nation of laws?"

Indeed.

[1]http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2014/2014_13_604

Re: Controversial Patriot Act power now overwhelmingly used in drug investigations

#18

Post by colordrops »

crazy1van wrote: post #16

Another example of why legislating in a fit of passion is generally a bad idea.

I'm going to be cynical here and suggest that there was no emotion involved for the legislators themselves - they knew the consequences from the beginning. They wait for constituents to become emotional and irrational to push through shitty legislation.

Re: Controversial Patriot Act power now overwhelmingly used in drug investigations

#19

Post by socceroos »

smsm42 wrote: post #13
blazespin wrote: post #7

Oops. If true, the utter betrayal of government over the governed. At least in a fascist state, you know you're going to get screwed. Well, I think we can all agree now this is proof positive everything Snowden has said is completely valid.

Well, we can't really know everything he said is valid (he might be mistaken or deceived, for example) but certainly some of it is. But one doesn't need Snowden to know government will expand its powers if allowed to do so. You don't need Snowden, you just need a good history book and a bit of thinking. Snowden revelations showed how bad exactly it has gotten. But you could predict that it's going to get bad just bec…

Prior to Snowden's 'revelations' I was accused of being a tin-foil hatter wherever I expressed my opinion on government spying. Not so much now.

Re: Controversial Patriot Act power now overwhelmingly used in drug investigations

#20

Post by Yardlink »

To those who don't like the use of this law, I think this is OK. Here's why: You live in a democracy where the popular opinion decides who's in power. You agree that's a good idea because you aren't moving to an authoritarian or libertarian country or voting to change the system. The popular opinion allowed this law, so you should accept that it's the right one according to the system. Of course there will always be a minority which doesn't like each law, and you happen to be a member of that minority in this case.

If it does become a bigger problem that affects the majority, they'll eventually decide to vote it out. Until then, it's nothing to worry about. This is the self-stabilizing effect of democracy. There can be small problems, but not big Syria-scale problems.

It's just part of the cost of sharing your country with people who think differently from you. If you really strongly believe the law is being used for "bad" purposes, the bad people are the voters who first allowed it, and after seeing it happen, continued to re-elect the same politicians that passed this law. Those are the people you should be complaining about - the two wolves voting on what's for dinner.

You might say those majority voters are ignorant and it's not their fault. No, they are taking action which you believe is wrong, so they are doing something wrong. If they aren't competent to decide who to vote for, they're being negligent by doing it recklessly.

PS I live in an authoritarian country where imagining the police have some restrictions on their power is only a fantasy. Your police at least do still have some restrictions, and they always will as long as you have a democracy.

Post reply on HN