Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

PATRIOT Act movement in the Senate

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Savannah Progressive Donating Member (272 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-18-06 10:00 PM
Original message
PATRIOT Act movement in the Senate
Edited on Sat Feb-18-06 10:02 PM by Savannah Progressive
For those who didn't notice, a measure of the PATRIOT Act was amended to allow people to consult with an attorney if they are served with a warrant or subpoena. No kidding. When I heard about that prohibition, I actually laughed my ass off.

This takes you to the senate site and the roll call vote in regards to cloture on the measure. In other words, they are ready to vote on the measure and pass or fail it on it's merits.

http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00022

Now, the reason I laughed my ass off. For those who haven't read it lately, the Constitution kinda covers this just fine. I quote Amendment VI (1791)

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.


Now, I haven't had the pleasure of being served a subpoena or warrant under the often discussed PATRIOT Act, however I wasn't worried about it. You see, if I violated the law, and contacted my lawyer in regards to one of these secret warrants, I wasn't at all concerned that I would be picked up or detained about it. You see, if I was arrested for contacting my lawyer, then under the Constitution, and the Miranda Decision, I would have to be given a free phone call to contact a Lawyer. Then the Government would have to put me before a judge, with a lawyer representing me, for availing myself of my 6th Amendment rights, of contacting a lawyer.

In other words, while arresting me for contacting an attorney, they would advise me of my rights to contact an attorney, and have the attorney present during questioning in regards to my criminal activity of contacting an attorney. Did anyone else but me find this a little silly?

Corrected a stupid typo, correct spelling, wrong word
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-18-06 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. bowel movement in the house hehe nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC