Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush support renewal of Patriot Act


personally I never had a problem with the Patriot Act even though I know many conservatives were against it(and many liberals).
If you have nothing to hide you should have nothing to be afraid of.
Yes I know there’s room for abuse, but personally I’m just not worried about that right now.
And no more an intrusion on civil rights than some of the things other leading candidates are proposing.
Of course, I was never a Snowden fan-never bought into the line that he had the U.S’s best interest at heart.


I was ok with the Patriot Act until a certain Administration started using it to spy on it’s citizens and political rivals instead of identifying and monitoring suspected terrorists.


That’s because “we the people” are the enemy.


yeah I know and I think that’s why a lot of conservatives have been against it-it could fall into the wrong hands.
But just sealing the borders are not enough-We need tools to go after those that are born here. I don’t know what the answer is-but we need to do something.
We live in a digital world now, and our enemies such as radical Islam know this., and have been using this fear against us.
We are going to have to make some hard choices.
For those that don’t support restoring the act, what would you suggest?
I’m open to suggestions.
And I’m already on board with curtailing immigration quite a bit.
And we can’t rely on “see something Say something”


Imagine Hillary using it? Shudder to think about what the future would hold for anyone with any vaguely Christian or conservative leanings


Do you understand why conservatives might be hesitant to give up their privacy and liberty to people who hold them in contempt? Citing the “fierce urgency of now” isn’t very compelling.


Sigh…God help us all if some of these attitudes I’m seeing here are reflective of even an appreciable minority of people in this country at this point.

It’s hard to know where to even begin, but first, the Patriot Act is an abhorrently intrusive violation of our civil liberties, and has been used for pernicious and destructive ends by TWO administrations now, not just one.

Secondly, the comments on here about it being “dangerous if falling into the ‘wrong’ hands” are laughably short-sighted, and politically biased. This boils down, essentially, to “We love government overreach and tyranny as long as OUR guys are the ones in office who get to do it, go ahead and shred the Constitution then, but if it’s not US in power, well then we hate it”. I’m sorry, but let’s think about this just a little bit…The Constitution was not made with this attitude in mind, and does not countenance such bald-faced partisanship when it comes to how civil liberties in this country are to be treated. This is precisely because the Framers understood well the perils of just this sort of thinking: at some point the political winds will change, and the supreme law of the land must not be subject to arbitrary abrogation in part or whole based on the whims of any one administration or political party.

One serious question: what do you honestly think the founding fathers would have thought of this attitude that we should allow the federal government to take our civil liberties away so long as we think they’ll do a good job of protecting us/going after only the “bad people”/(insert additional lame justifications here)? Here’s what Ben Franklin said about this very subject: “Any people who would sacrifice a little of their freedom in exchange for a little security deserve neither and will lose BOTH.”

Have we really become so pathetically paralyzed by fear that this is where we’re at?

Lastly, and it was off-topic, but I must ask to the OP: when you say you’d like to see more curtailing of immigration, can I assume you mean legal immigration as well? You may not realize this, but the U.S. already is one of the LEAST open, most restrictive first world countries on Earth with respect to its immigration laws. As an attorney who works in corporate and business immigration law, let me assure you that it’s already VERY difficult for persons to legally immigrate here. You wish to make this more difficult? Please keep in mind that highly educated, skilled immigrants already are completely indispensable to our economy and our future. THEY are overwhelmingly the ones designing our cars, engineering our technologies, making biological and medical research advances, driving forward our computer and IT technologies, etc. Look at any engineering, mathematics, or other similar STEM field department in any U.S. university and you will see a tiny minority of American born persons as the professors, researchers, and even the students of today. Almost all of them are immigrants. You may want to carefully consider this before slamming the door on the people who are responsible for keeping America in standing in scientific and technological innovation.


I understand many people feeling it’s going to turn us into Orwell’s 1984.
Under the wrong person, maybe.

I would like to hear alternatives.
We need a multi-pronged approach to this.
Which means curtailing immigration
Taking it to them over there
AND being able to detect it here because let’s face it:
It’s already been shown that we can’t rely on “See something-Say something” or “innocent” members of ones own family turning them in.
Liberals have put forward turning in all gun’s or tightening gun control- I am opposed of course to both, it’s already been show our government can’t protect us at least now and in the case of the terrorist attacks wouldn’t have made a difference anyway. I believe in the 2nd amendment.
So give me some alternatives to stopping what happened in Boston and San Bernardino.
I’m already on board with curtailing immigration but that’s not gonna stop those that are already here.


Maybe we could look at hardening targets by allowing more liberal concealed carry laws. That way we’d be expanding freedom rather than restricting it. One thing all these mass shooting incidents have in common is that they occur where the shooters are unlikely to meet meaningful resistance, but I’ve never heard of one happening at a gun show or NRA event.


I’m completely on board with that. ^^
But how do we nip these terror cells that are ALREADY HERE in the bud?
Before they get to the point of carrying out the crime?


I’ve never had a problem with legal immigration and people who play by the rules, and people of all faiths and ethnicities who come to this country to better their lives and want to become Americans and respect American laws and values. And I have no problem with people retaining their native dress, customs and language or religeon either, on the contrary, we have a fourth of July Parade in my town in which the ethnic groups dress in their native costumes and make floats and march and I think it’s great.
But we have people coming here who do not love this country and don’t want to assimilate,
and instead want to create terror, so how do we know who is who? If someone wants to come here with good intentions, I’m all for it.
As I’ve said before, a country has a right to protect it’s citizens, as well, there is no absolute right to immigrate here. And we have to put a stop to illegal immigration which we now must assume includes those who would harm us when it didn’t usually a few decades ago.
So someone give me an alternative to the Patriot Act that doesn’t violate civil liberties.
and things like monitoring all mosques I would not accept, nor putting all Muslims in a database, I think those WOULD be a violation of civil liberties.
So someone give me an alternative to other than waiting around until next mass attack.

ETA the fiancé came in on a K-1 visa it is now not known whether she was radicalized after she got here or came here with the intention of carrying something out.
So we do have to be careful these days.


They would be the ones I would expect to try and renew the Patriot Act. All the more reason I have no desire to vote for them. The Patriot Act was a terrible idea. You don’t give away your liberties and freedoms to protect them.


Equating immigration with terror is wrongheaded and a non-starter with only fear behind it, not thought. There have been FAR FAR more atrocities and massacres committed here by white American men than any ethnic immigrant. Columbine, Sandy Hook, Aurora, the Black church shooting, Oklahoma City, the list is nearly ENDLESS and grows roughly every three weeks. The answer cannot be associating all immigrants with terrorism and closing the door entirely. The Patriot Act has likewise solved nothing, what justification for continuing the farce that it is? You seem internally inconsistent in saying huzzah for legal immigration but boo to letting in terrorists but we can’t tell one from another, can’t have it both ways.

And statistically I’m sorry but the best thing we could do to maximize public safety at this point is remove firearms from the streets. It is indisputable that my children stand a far greater chance of being shot and killed in school a theater or on the street by a deranged white male American than in an Islamist terrorist attack. A depressing reality.:frowning:


Restricting firearms would have made zero difference in the San Bernardino attack as the attackers also had pipe bombs and other explosives as it’s becoming increasingly clear as time goes on that it wasn’t just the two of them, either.
The Tsanaev brothers used pressure cookers to cause a lot of damage
Timothy McVeigh used fertilizer and the 9/11 highjackers used planes.
And the Patriot act might route out the white shooters you’re so afraid of, too, if they were part of a terror group or used social media. Some of the lone figures you mentioned had mental health issues(Aurora) which needs to be dealt with, too, but I don’t have a clue how to handle that one. The shooters in Paris got their guns on the black market, as gun ownership I believe is either banned outright or very restrictive in France.
So I’m still looking for alternatives…that doesn’t involve just being sitting ducks or staying barricaded in our homes.
Armed Security at soft targets might be a good one but costs money.

ETA I’m not OK with the government wholesale spying on citizens but I think we need to expand and upgrade our survelliance in a way that balances with civil liberties.
I’m not OK with waiting for it to happen and then figuring out what happened after the fact.


3 of the Parisian attackers were “refugees” who got through the Grecian border and made their way to Germany. Consider this:

If you knew that there was a 1 in 300 chance of a plane crashing would you fly? If so that’s your decision but it doesn’t give you the right to gamble with your fellow citizen’s lives. If 3 or 4 terrorists are among the incoming migrants, you have to consider what would happen if an attack killed members of your family.

The rest of your post is offensively racist and mirrors the words of your Alinskyite President who is so far to the left now that he’s a Marxist dictator. He uses peoples’ deaths to attack political opponents and point score and foment division in society. He follows his idol Saul Alinsky.

I’m sure these stats will reveal some interesting facts. Before you make statements like those you have done, please be aware of the actual evidence

“First, we find that during the 2012/2013 period, blacks committed an average of 560,600 violent crimes against whites, whereas whites committed only 99,403 such crimes against blacks. This means blacks were the attackers in 84.9 percent of the violent crimes involving blacks and whites.”


Hmm, emotion seems to have gotten the better of your reading comprehension here. A few points: first, your chart is totally irrelevant as we are talking about shootings and massacres of people in public, deaths caused by such incidents. This chart specifically excludes homicides in its statistics. But more importantly are you even willing to suggest that the public shootings and we see weekly in the news are not almost entirely perpetrated by white American males? Really? It isn’t racist to point out an obvious fact of demographics, and for the record I’m a white American male and no I don’t carry self-hate or race guilt or whatever. I’m quite proud of my Scottish heritage actually!

Secondly, your reasoning about immigrants is insane, and you don’t apply this logic to any group outside Muslim immigrants. If you did the same exact reasoning would dictate you should profile every young white American male for the obvious reasons discussed already and seen on the news every week or so.

Lastly why are you bringing Obama into this? And he’s NOT “my president” other than in the sense that he is, in fact, THE president of the country right now. I voted for Jon Huntsman, thank you very much!


You have no evidence and those are facts. Care to provide anything or is it an opinion you have because CNN told you?

You said that White males were more likely to shoot you or your family and that’s not true. Please provide some facts and figures to dispute these FACTS

Really so…the Bali bombing, Madrid bombings, Tunisia shootings, Paris shootings, London bombing etc all involved followers of what religion? These are FACTS

That’s a tiny representation of the HUGE number of attacks that are attributable to radical Islamic terror and consider where the most radical views of Islam are held. No I don’t think it’s acceptable to allow migrants into a country if there’s the slightest chance that one of them might perpetrate an attack


What? Your statistics, as stated in the actual link you gave, are not relevant to the discussion in the slightest; they don’t include homicides. CNN, MSN, the newspapers, a lot of news sources tell me things: things like mass shootings and killings of people keep happening on about a weekly basis in America, and nearly all of them are by white American men. This is awful to say: but why don’t we wait (shouldn’t need to wait long, only another few days or so likely) and see what the demographic background is of the next killer in one of these public massacres? It’s rather obvious what the good money would be on were we placing bets. And you’re listing all kinds of other places outside the U.S. now, showing more than a little desperation. These places all have vastly different social, economic, religious, ethnic, and legal/immigration law differences from the U.S. with very different, unique issues and problems as a backdrop for such attacks, so really don’t give us a whole lot to go on for HERE, in the U.S., which is what this thread is supposed to be about.

Lastly, all I can say is this: those Syrian refugees include a large number of OUR Catholic brothers, yours and mine. Our allegiances are to GOD and CHURCH before country, and our faith calls us to be giving without counting the cost, to love in the face of loss, and to open our hearts to those in need. How can we open our hearts if we close our doors to them? A middle eastern man who lived about 2,000 years ago named Jesus, one who I try to talk with a little each day, read about a little each day, and who I meditate on and offer worship, love, and fidelity to each day as my Lord and my Savior God said “I was hungry and you fed me, I was naked and you clothed me…I was a stranger, and you welcomed me. Whatever you do to the least of these, you do to me.” I just cannot see how that can be reconciled with your attitude.

And it’s Advent, this is depressing me, and so I will leave the conversation at that. God bless you, and God keep you all.


I think you have a very balanced attitude about this issue.


From the FBI (2013) crime statistics:
Murder with white victim and non-white offender: 458
Murder with white victim and white offender: 2509

You know, I was in training all day with a Muslim women that I had never meant before in a city that doesn’t allow firearms. She was also a foreign national.

I wasn’t scared. At all. Even remotely.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit