Funmurphys: the Blog

PATRIOT (cue the shreaking)

Juan Non-Volokh points out that John Edwards was inaccurate in his criticism of the PATRIOT act, and then expands his point in response to reader criticism. I think a couple of things are going on here. One is that the argument over PATRIOT is in part over what has been done versus what could be done. The second is that there are certain hot button issues (e.g. abortion) where thinking and listening go out the window for many people, and PATRIOT (along with John Ashcroft) has reached, somehow, that status (mainly for its opponents though). The idea that the police can subpeona my library records in the course of an investigation simply doesn't fill me with dread, yet that is metioned over and over by opponents as the most sinister aspect of the law. And if Ashcroft is for it, well, need we say more? Yes, you do. And just because it's named PATRIOT, and we're in a war, doesn't mean that any criticism of it is treasonous. There are few if any laws that can't be improved upon (sometimes by their outright repeal) and honest, thoughtful criticism is the only way to improve them.