House votes to amend part of the USA PATRIOT Act

[Fotix]

WASHINGTON -- The House voted Wednesday to block the FBI and the Justice Department from using the anti-terror Patriot Act to search library and book store records, responding to complaints about potential invasion of privacy of innocent readers.

Despite a veto threat from President Bush, lawmakers voted 238-187 to block the part of the anti-terrorism law that allows the government to investigate the reading habits of terror suspects.

The vote reversed a narrow loss last year by lawmakers complaining about threats to privacy rights. They narrowed the proposal this year to permit the government to continue to seek out records of Internet use at libraries.

The vote came as the House debated a $57.5 billion bill covering the departments of Commerce, Justice and State. The Senate has yet to act on the measure, and GOP leaders often drop provisions offensive to Bush during final negotiations.

Congress is preparing to extend the Patriot Act, which was passed quickly in the emotional aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Then, Congress included a "sunset" provision under which 15 of the law's provisions are to expire at the end of this year.

The Associated Press

Roll call for the Sanders Amendment

[Matt]

like before, i doubt anyone will notice the change.

[PseudoRandomDragon]

This is good news.

[Dashel]

like before, i doubt anyone will notice the change.

I completely agree. There will be no change, just less power that could be abused by the government.

[rumbleph1$h]

I completely agree.  There will be no change, just less power that could be abused by the government.

586071033[/snapback]

.... or the safety of U.S. citizens has taken a back burner to the 'rights' of suspected terrorists because of dangerous obstructionist groups like the ACLU. Time desensitizes people to the reality of the terrorist activities of 9/11. It scares me that much of America finds itself sympathizing more with the terrorists who flew those planes into the WTC than those who never made it out of the building.

FFS, if only people would actually read the Patriot Act before jumping to rash conclusions about it.

[MonkeyClaw Veteran]

"Suspected" Terrorist. that term could mean anyone they dont like rumble, so in my eyes this is a great move because it protects everyones liberties. whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

it was replaced innocent until an fbi agent thinks you are guilty of something labeled terrorist activity, perhaps protesting or being muslim, or being muslim with shoes going into an airport giving dirty looks at people. the term is so vauge that it could mean anything. i think this is the best move this congress has made, or well this house, we shall see if the senate is just as wise...

[Dashel]

It scares me that much of America finds itself sympathizing more with the terrorists who flew those planes into the WTC than those who never made it out of the building.

Why try and taint the argument? Americans aren't sympathizing with terrorists and its offensive to so casually paint such a picture. I could really care less if they are all lined up and shot. If they want to pass a bill that says that they will travel to Iran and shove a grenade up Bin Laden's ass 99.9% of American's will be behind them.

However, as American's we put a premium on liberty above all else, even our own safety. That is where the problem lies, some of us love liberty more that the rest. That you would demonize someone for this, in this great land, is absurd. I'll stick to the sage advice of Penn & Teller, "Cameras don't stop terrorists, armed passengers do."

[PseudoRandomDragon]

It scares me that much of America finds itself sympathizing more with the terrorists who flew those planes into the WTC than those who never made it out of the building.

586071060[/snapback]

And I find it irritating that you think that people like me sympathize with terrorists simply because we don't want our rights to be violated.

[j.nudd]

And I find it irritating that you think that people like me sympathize with terrorists simply because we don't want our rights to be violated.

586071580[/snapback]

Yeah, the Patriot Act has met disapproval because of the violation of rights of every American, not just the violation of "suspected terrorists".

[o_87]

.... or the safety of U.S. citizens has taken a back burner to the 'rights' of suspected terrorists because of dangerous obstructionist groups like the ACLU. Time desensitizes people to the reality of the terrorist activities of 9/11. It scares me that much of America finds itself sympathizing more with the terrorists who flew those planes into the WTC than those who never made it out of the building.

FFS, if only people would actually read the Patriot Act before jumping to rash conclusions about it.

586071060[/snapback]

I'm not sure how not being able to gain access to what books someone might read is supposed to be determental to the security of America.

[j.nudd]

I'm not sure how not being able to gain access to what books someone might read is supposed to be determental to the security of America.

586071656[/snapback]

I'm assuming you mean detrimental... Many people don't like to have somebody know what they're doing, or in this case, reading.

[Starcom826]

I think we should instead of relaxing scrutiny of suspected terrorists, we should tighten and make more transparent our definition of what IS a suspected terrorist. But the restrictions on what the government can do to call someone a suspected terrorist, not what they can gather about suspected terrorists. This way, then you don't have invasion of privacy of those who don't have something to hide. Like we've seen before, some of the WTC hijackers were on a terrorist watch list. In all honesty, if we know something is fishy, why SHOULDN'T the government be able to find out of this terrorist is buying bomb books and such...as long as they make sure there is something substantial.