Try the political quiz

877 Replies

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...11yrs

No, and pass strict laws prohibiting government surveillance without probable cause and a warrant

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...11yrs

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...6yrs

Yes, but the sections involving surveillance and criminalization are too broad

@4TXVWDSfrom Michigan  answered…2yrs

No. I understand the idea, and I'm sure many terrorist acts have been prevented because of survelience. However, we cannot give up our individual freedoms in order to feel protected. You didn't see this scale of "American Infidel" in the past. We were a better country before. We were proud of our country (on the large scale) and there was such a thing as the American Dream. We have deterriorated as a country. There is no "American Dream" unless you county being materialistic, judgemental, and constantly offended. During World War II people gave up luxuries in order to support their country, even when their husbands/sons/brothers/friends were sent fighting. While there is still military support, it is not the same. It is not true support, but rather a support with a side of guilt and disgust to those that oppose it.

@4S3TY7Pfrom New York  answered…2yrs

With a warrant for any American citizen. Must have an individualized warrant. Mass survallence on Islamic citizens. Ban refugees for 2 years. Push a propaganda campaign for women's rights in the Middle East and stop lying about Islam for political gain or political correctness

@52YJQ55from North Carolina  answered…2yrs

@4S4KFX8from Oregon  answered…2yrs

Well... Not really. They've gone too far with it. I do support placing cameras everywhere and monitoring what people do in public. Are 2 guys carrying satchel charges to the stands of the Boston Marathon? Gosh, maybe that's a problem. Did an unattended bag explode? Gosh, maybe we can see who put it there before it blew up... Is someone mugging your mother in front of the A&P? Gosh, maybe we could alert the cop on the next block...

@5BXFFJZfrom Washington  answered…2yrs

It has been the excuse to enforce the UN Global agenda. 9.11 was an inside job. Create the fear and terror, then work to destroy the country to the point they can call in UN "peacekeepers" who have no affiliation other than to the UN, and would work for their richest elite - not to help us.

@4QBFGKKfrom California  answered…2yrs

No, many parts of it including section 215 completely undermine the constitutional rights of U.S citizens

@4ST4KNBfrom Maryland  answered…2yrs

I have a brown skin. Anytime I travel on a plane, I have to endure extra security procedures. I am not middle-eastern, I am an all-American racial mix. Think about that.

@4R2SYPDfrom Georgia  answered…2yrs

The Patriot Act should be subjected to a constitutional test as should be all legislation. It should have a sunset clause.

@4QC43PPfrom Indiana  answered…2yrs

Yes, but do away with detainment and deportation because it violates due process.

@4WGZZJKRepublicanfrom Vermont  answered…2yrs

Yes, but with sunset provision requiring Congressional approval every 2 years.

@4QT6B3Kfrom Illinois  answered…2yrs

Absolutely not this gives big government too much power to spy and pry into citizens private lives. There doesn't need to be a patriot act for the government to protect itself and its citizens. It's called have a pair of balls and let Old Glory fly.

@982ZRFF from Pennsylvania answered…9hrs

@97ZVG9K from Michigan answered…2 days

Yes, but there need to be serious reforms on who can serve in government, otherwise the authority will be abused.

@97YG26HIndependent from Iowa answered…7 days

Yes but only with strict laws on government surveillance without probable cause and a warrant.

@97YLK3Y from New Jersey answered…1wk

@gklewis83 from Kansas answered…2wks

Yes, but the sections involving surveillance and criminalization are too broad. Limit the scope of the government's powers.

@97WFFSF from Mississippi answered…2wks

Yes, if someone is displaying risky behavior patterns they should be confronted in person and have a chance at reform instead of stalking them and waiting for a crime to happen.

@97SZ2QN from Georgia answered…2wks

There must be ways of monitoring traffic to find suspects without invading innocent citizens' rights.

@97RGFRMRepublican from South Dakota answered…2wks

@97S6S32 from Kentucky answered…2wks

@97PN755 from Nebraska answered…3wks

No need to survey patriotic, tough, good-hearted Americans if the minorities are gone

@97P7XT5Progressive from South Dakota answered…3wks

Yes but they should restrict them to only U.S but don't allow U.S to search on crime in other countries unless it is asked to.

@97LF5HWRepublican from Washington answered…3wks

The democrats abused it against the Republicans and Trump in 2016

@97LCQLFCommunist from Florida answered…3wks

Yes, but the sections are too broad and we need to require probable cause AND warrents

@97LC46J from California answered…3wks

@97J9L8Yfrom Vermont  answered…3wks

No, and abolish the NSA, TSA, and Department of Homeland Security.

@97FGVTVIndependent from New York answered…3wks

Yes but only used for non US citizens or violent terrorist suspects

@9794GYF from North Carolina answered…4wks

@978YGJM from Virginia answered…4wks

@978KMJV from Massachusetts answered…4wks

@977WQL7 from Wyoming answered…4wks

yes, but if they are proven wrong about their claims they should cover the costs they caused.

@977MJX9 from Arkansas answered…4wks

Yes, but prohibit government surveillance and search without probable cause and/or a warrant

@977F5RM from Texas answered…4wks

@977CVWW from Ohio answered…4wks

@9735V78 from Georgia answered…4wks

Yes, I hate the process, but is necessary to prevent another 9/11.

@972NZBH from Iowa answered…4wks

@972746P from New York answered…4wks

No this is a violation to the Fourth Amendment as it is an issue without warrant and probable clause.

@SherylElenarojas… from Illinois answered…1mo

Yes, but inform the individual who is being investigated and the reason why they were investigated after investigation to prevent abuse. (A person can sue for discrimination if the reason is unstated or unsupported)

@96X6M8HGreen from Florida answered…1mo

No, because some parts of this are unconstitutional in regards to the 4th amendment.

@96VZXG6Democrat from Florida answered…1mo

I need to know more about the current wording of the act and how it is applied to make an informed choice on whether it needs to be updated or repealed.

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...