PDA

View Full Version : Patriot Act police


Faithless
02-01-2006, 11:57 PM
Does this article present scare tactics or offer something truly scary in the infamous Patriot Act?

The new police are empowered to "make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence, or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony."

The new police are assigned a variety of jurisdictions, including "an event designated under Section 3056(e) of Title 18 as a special event of national significance" (SENS).

Patriot Act police threaten our rights (http://www.ocala.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060131/NEWS/201310308/1030/news08)

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS | Creators Syndicate | Published Jan. 31, 2006 7:30 am

A provision in the "Patriot Act" creates a new federal police force with power to violate the Bill of Rights. You might think that this cannot be true, as you have not read about it in newspapers or heard it discussed by talking heads on TV.

Go to House Report 109-333 - USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005, and check it out for yourself. Sec. 605 reads:

"There is hereby created and established a permanent police force, to be known as the 'United States Secret Service Uniformed Division.' "

This new federal police force is "subject to the supervision of the secretary of homeland security."

The new police are empowered to "make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence, or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony."

The new police are assigned a variety of jurisdictions, including "an event designated under Section 3056(e) of Title 18 as a special event of national significance" (SENS).

"A special event of national significance" is neither defined nor does it require the presence of a "protected person" such as the president in order to trigger it. Thus, the administration, and perhaps the police themselves, can place the SENS designation on any event. Once a SENS designation is placed on an event, the new federal police are empowered to keep out and to arrest people at their discretion.

The language conveys enormous discretionary and arbitrary powers. What is "an offense against the United States"? What are "reasonable grounds"?

You can bet that the Alito-Roberts court will rule that it is whatever the executive branch says.

The obvious purpose of the act is to prevent demonstrations at Bush-Cheney events. However, nothing in the language limits the police powers from being used only in this way. Like every law in the United States, this law also will be expansively interpreted and abused. It has dire implications for freedom of association and First Amendment rights. We can take for granted that the new federal police will be used to suppress dissent and break up opposition. The Brownshirts are now arming themselves with a Gestapo.

Many naive Americans will write to me to explain that this new provision in the reauthorization of the "Patriot Act" is necessary to protect the president and other high officials from terrorists or from harm at the hands of angry demonstrators, "No one else will have anything to fear." Some will accuse me of being an alarmist, and others will say that it is unpatriotic to doubt the law's good intentions.

Americans will write such nonsense despite the fact that the president and foreign dignitaries are already provided superb protection by the Secret Service. The naive will not comprehend that the president cannot be endangered by demonstrators at SENS at which the president is not present. For many Americans, the light refuses to turn on.

In Nazi Germany, did no one but the Jews have anything to fear from the Gestapo?

By Stalin's time, Lenin and Trotsky had eliminated all members of the "oppressor class," but that did not stop Stalin from sending millions of "enemies of the people" to the Gulag.

It is extremely difficult to hold even local police forces accountable. Who is going to hold accountable a federal police protected by Homeland Security and the president?

Fireblade
02-02-2006, 02:04 AM
America's new Secret Police. Glad to see Bush using history's (Stalin) tried and true governing policies.

Player 0
02-02-2006, 02:19 AM
In all fairness, Stalin isn't the only political leader in history to use such methods, personally i'm surprised such an organization hadn't existed in America before hand.

snailpoo
02-02-2006, 08:28 AM
I've got three problems with things like this:

First, there IS a very distinct cutoff as to how they may apply their powers:

Note how only the first sentence is quoted, and note the very distinct limitations as to the jurisdiction of the Secret Service in the proposed language:

`(a) There is hereby created and established a permanent police force, to be known as the `United States Secret Service Uniformed Division'. Subject to the supervision of the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division shall perform such duties as the Director, United States Secret Service, may prescribe in connection with the protection of the following:

`(1) The White House in the District of Columbia.

`(2) Any building in which Presidential offices are located.

`(3) The Treasury Building and grounds.

`(4) The President, the Vice President (or other officer next in the order of succession to the Office of President), the President-elect, the Vice President-elect, and their immediate families.

`(5) Foreign diplomatic missions located in the metropolitan area of the District of Columbia.

`(6) The temporary official residence of the Vice President and grounds in the District of Columbia.

`(7) Foreign diplomatic missions located in metropolitan areas (other than the District of Columbia) in the United States where there are located twenty or more such missions headed by full-time officers, except that such protection shall be provided only--

`(A) on the basis of extraordinary protective need; ...
yada, yada, yada... you get the picture. Meaning, unless it DIRECLTY AFFECTS the rather narrow jurisdiction of the Secret Service, they can't do anything.



Second, the article was supposed to amend 18 USC 3056:

18 USC 3056(c)(1)(C) ALREADY reads

(C) make arrests without warrant for any offense against the
United States committed in their presence, or for any felony
cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have
reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has
committed or is committing such felony;

Meaning... THEY HAVE THIS RIGHT ALREADY.

Which is not surprising. EVERY DAY POLICE HAVE THIS RIGHT ALREADY. If a police officer SEES YOU robbing a bank, he does NOT have to head to a judge to get a warrant before arresting you. And "reasonable grounds" is a lot of caselaw behind it.


And third:

Can anyone even find this provision in HR 3199 EH, as in, the version Enacted by the House?

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR03199:@@@X


Or are we all fussing about something, among the thousands of other wacky things, merely proposed, and NOT PASSED? :rolleyes:



***The above and anything else I post, is NOT legal opinion, reliable, to be relied up, or legal anything.