Kopel on the Patriot Act
Our resident Constitutional Law and Second Amendment expert Dave Kopel weighed in on the hot issue of personal liberty vs. national security in this issue of La Voz (Colorado’s #1 Hispanic publication). With the passing of the 10th anniversary of 9/11 just days ago, the Patriot Act has taken center stage once again. Take a look at what Dave thinks about the national security measures we’ve taken in the last 10 years.
Dave Kopel is a superb defender of the Second Amendment, but seems to have lost his zeal in defending the Fourth Amendment. In this case, I find myself siding with David Lane and against Dave Kopel, a place that I’m not used to being.
There has been widespread surveillance, without warrants, primarily of people who have done nothing and are not even suspected of having done anything. Computers at the NSA are scanning emails, etc., looking for anything that might be related to terrorism. That flies in the face of the Fourth Amendment.
Typically, the argument is trotted out that we have not had a 9/11 since 2001. I do not buy it. There was the Nigerian panty bomber and the Times Square bomber. Both slipped through Homeland Security. The panty bomber’s father went to the US Embassy and warned us about him, but HSA and TSA could not manage to keep him off the plane. In both of those cases, they were thwarted by observant civilians. Street vendors in Times Square spotted the Explorer, and other passengers kept the panty bomber from trying to reignite the explosive that failed to go off properly.
In other words, we have torn up the Fourth Amendment and gained nothing. Even if we had become a lot safer (we have not), the ends do not justify the means.
16 Sep 2011 at 1:33 pm