Fourth Amendment V.S. the Administration/ security V.S. Constitution

Tweet

We in the United States have had a difficulty lately in balancing the rights granted under them 4th Ammendment and the desires for security post 9-11. We have in power an Administration which repeatedly invaded the personal privacy of U.S. and international citizens and that has, often without cause, and with the help of telecom companies, credit companies etc. and the CIA and NSA, has obtained personal information, listened in on conversations, recorded conversations, read and grabbed onto email conversations of people, in fishing expeditions without following the appropriate processes laid out for the Executive Branch to follow amoung other things. The problem with this Administration's behavior is not that he is wanting to protect the people or to insure that security needs are met, No. It is in the violation of the Constitution of the United States, namely the 4th ammendment which states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,and effects against unreasonable search and seizures shall not be violated, and no Warrents shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched,and the persons or things to be seized." FindLaw: The U.S. Constitution: Fourth ammendment The Founding Fathers knew about security needs... They you need to remember actually were involved in fighting for the freedom we now enjoy and had far less security in their lives than we do now and far less stability. They were the founders of what was then a frail independent nation facing threats from Europe, from their own countrymen, some of whom remained loyalists to Britian and to other nations, and from an often hostile environment. They envisioned a nation that would protect the privacy of the residents of that nation as they had seen the abuses done by tyrants who disrespected the rights of the people. They wanted to preserve the right of the people to rebel against their leaders if their leaders were corrupt, violated the Constitution or attempted to become dictators and they knew that unless the people had the right to gather to discuss what to do about tyranny, write down their intermost thoughts, and express oppostition in writing or in whatever means possible, that right to rebel would not exist and the dictators they most feared would prevail. They guarded the right to privacy of person, writings, place and possessions so strongly and stated often that these and all other rights and liberties granted under the Constitution should be preserved and that in all cases these rights and liberties should trump the desire for security. (See freedomkeys.com/vigil.htm for proof about this statement and other statements in this post as there are many comments by the Founding Fathers of the United States and other people about this.) The question I have for all of you is which do you value more, the potential for security or the Constitutionaly granted rights granted under the 4th Amendment? If you value security more, then what else will you be willing to lose for your security? If you value the rights granted to you under the Constitution of the United States, what have you done to preserve them or to use them? Have you ever read the Constitution of the United States enough to know what your rights are?