5 ms·

Most people don't care about NSA surveillance or they agree with it. A surprisingly large number of Americans approve of the Patriot Act. Those who disagree wit

by beeboop 11y ago

Most people don't care about NSA surveillance or they agree with it. A surprisingly large number of Americans approve of the Patriot Act. Those who disagree with surveillance often don't understand the full implications of it and don't make any connection between that and the idea that citizens might need to protect themselves from their government by force. For a lot of people, their desire for stricter gun control largely outweighs any desire to arm themselves against their government.

pc86 11y ago
I don't want to turn this into a 2A debate, but it might be partly because gun control seems much more real than someone in a building in Maryland seeing which route they take to work in the morning, even if most of them never had any interaction, positive or negative, with a firearm.
- Akkuma 11y ago
  I think the reason stems from fear of death. Very few people actively fear the NSA & government using this information to inflict harm on them to result in their or their loved ones demise. On the other hand, they see the news plastered with murders done with guns and now have some degree of fear.
forgetsusername 11y ago
>A surprisingly large number of Americans approve of the Patriot Act. Because the vast majority of those people don't understand the repercussions of it. They think it allows the government to "catch the terrorists" on our soil. That's the way it was pitched. The people in power are still immigrants to the internet and this sort of technology in general. The views regarding domestic spying will change as more technologically savvy people age and move into politics. That's why they're trying so hard to push certain legislation, before it's too late.
- untog 11y ago
  They think it allows the government to "catch the terrorists" on our soil. That's the way it was pitched. And it does. Some people are worried enough to think that is worth the price.
  - forgetsusername 11y ago
    >And it does. Maybe. Do you have any evidence? How many terrorists have been captured on American soil since 2002? How many were caught thanks to the Patriot Act?
    - tremon 11y ago
      One of the Boston bombers was captured. /s
  - discardorama 11y ago
    > And it does. Some people are worried enough to think that is worth the price. That's a broad claim. From everything I've read, there has not been much real success. Can you point me to some news reports where the spying actually helped catch real terrorists? The only case I know of is a Somali expat sending money home, which ended up in Al Shabab's hands.
  - fukusa 11y ago
    Most of the terrorist attacks taking place in the USA are staged by the FBI: https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrorist/ https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrori...
    - untog 11y ago
      The article you've cited discusses the FBI and a single terrorist. I'd like to see the citation for most attacks being staged by the FBI.
      - fukusa 11y ago
fukusa 11y ago
>Those who disagree with surveillance often don't understand the full implications No, those invading countries, killing people with drones, torturing people in concentration camps, creating even more animosity against the USA don't understand the full implications. Why aren't we talking about those implications?
- richmarr 11y ago
  > Why aren't we talking about those implications? Assuming I've understood your question properly, my suspicion is that there isn't an easy, one-line, (ideally rhyming) sound-bite defence against accusations of disloyalty. When you question aggressive foreign policy you get accused of everything from "not supporting our troops" to being "soft on terror", take your pick. It's a little like how Obama's drive to address economic inequality seems (to an outsider at least) to have collapsed because of repeated accusations of "class war". There was no snappy defence.
  - smileysteve 11y ago
    Or being an "isolationist". I feel like Rand and Ron Paul have been some of the few that have read that paper by the CIA on Blowback.
- 13thLetter 11y ago
  > Why aren't we talking about those implications? Are you kidding? Frankly, people never shut up about them. Even that famous "We Are All Americans" article after September 11th, 2001 went on about how the attacks were blowback for past American misbehavior.
sampo 11y ago
> Most people don't care about NSA surveillance or they agree with it. John Oliver went to the streets with the question, if people have ever send a naked photo of themselves with a cellphone or email, should the government have the right to collect and look at those photos? None of the people agreed that the government should have that right. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M#t=24m54s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M#t=24m54s

by beeboop 11y ago

pc86 11y ago

I don't want to turn this into a 2A debate, but it might be partly because gun control seems much more real than someone in a building in Maryland seeing which route they take to work in the morning, even if most of them never had any interaction, positive or negative, with a firearm.

Akkuma 11y ago
I think the reason stems from fear of death. Very few people actively fear the NSA & government using this information to inflict harm on them to result in their or their loved ones demise. On the other hand, they see the news plastered with murders done with guns and now have some degree of fear.

forgetsusername 11y ago

>A surprisingly large number of Americans approve of the Patriot Act. Because the vast majority of those people don't understand the repercussions of it. They think it allows the government to "catch the terrorists" on our soil. That's the way it was pitched. The people in power are still immigrants to the internet and this sort of technology in general. The views regarding domestic spying will change as more technologically savvy people age and move into politics. That's why they're trying so hard to push certain legislation, before it's too late.

untog 11y ago
They think it allows the government to "catch the terrorists" on our soil. That's the way it was pitched. And it does. Some people are worried enough to think that is worth the price.
- forgetsusername 11y ago
  >And it does. Maybe. Do you have any evidence? How many terrorists have been captured on American soil since 2002? How many were caught thanks to the Patriot Act?
  - tremon 11y ago
    One of the Boston bombers was captured. /s
- discardorama 11y ago
  > And it does. Some people are worried enough to think that is worth the price. That's a broad claim. From everything I've read, there has not been much real success. Can you point me to some news reports where the spying actually helped catch real terrorists? The only case I know of is a Somali expat sending money home, which ended up in Al Shabab's hands.
- fukusa 11y ago
  Most of the terrorist attacks taking place in the USA are staged by the FBI: https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrorist/ https://theintercept.com/2015/03/16/howthefbicreatedaterrori...
  - untog 11y ago
    The article you've cited discusses the FBI and a single terrorist. I'd like to see the citation for most attacks being staged by the FBI.
    - fukusa 11y ago

fukusa 11y ago

>Those who disagree with surveillance often don't understand the full implications No, those invading countries, killing people with drones, torturing people in concentration camps, creating even more animosity against the USA don't understand the full implications. Why aren't we talking about those implications?

richmarr 11y ago
> Why aren't we talking about those implications? Assuming I've understood your question properly, my suspicion is that there isn't an easy, one-line, (ideally rhyming) sound-bite defence against accusations of disloyalty. When you question aggressive foreign policy you get accused of everything from "not supporting our troops" to being "soft on terror", take your pick. It's a little like how Obama's drive to address economic inequality seems (to an outsider at least) to have collapsed because of repeated accusations of "class war". There was no snappy defence.
- smileysteve 11y ago
  Or being an "isolationist". I feel like Rand and Ron Paul have been some of the few that have read that paper by the CIA on Blowback.
13thLetter 11y ago
> Why aren't we talking about those implications? Are you kidding? Frankly, people never shut up about them. Even that famous "We Are All Americans" article after September 11th, 2001 went on about how the attacks were blowback for past American misbehavior.

sampo 11y ago

> Most people don't care about NSA surveillance or they agree with it. John Oliver went to the streets with the question, if people have ever send a naked photo of themselves with a cellphone or email, should the government have the right to collect and look at those photos? None of the people agreed that the government should have that right. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M#t=24m54s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M#t=24m54s