From: "Mark" 


"Geo."  wrote in message
news:41694ac3$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> "Mark"  wrote in message
news:41689f5f$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>> Other portions (or perhaps not in the act, but similar) allow them to
>> wiretap on any phone line the suspect acquires (read throwaway cell
>> phones)
>> rather than get new warrants each time the phone number changes. Now from
>> tapping the lines they get good intel, but not enough to pull in the
>> other
>> parties, so they "sneak" in and tap the PC so they can
"peek" at
>> hopefully
>> even more info to thwart attacks and nab more perps and save lives.
>
> this is all fine but the law needs one more restriction. If they get
> caught
> using it for crime prevention or anything else instead of anti-terrorism,
> the
> law becomes null and void, no questions, no appeals, game over. That would
> keep
> them honest because as it is there is no check and no penalty for abuse.

That's a reasonable caveat. I've never been against making adjustments in
the Act, but the furor I'm hearing always seems to oversimplify the
objections into it's "Bush's Act" and "we need to get rid of
it"

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5