HOMELAND SECURITY "JOHN DOE" AMENDMENT

Started by elinvesti8, Jul 22 2007 07:59 PM

You cannot reply to this topic

11 replies to this topic

Poll: DO YOU AGREE THE AMENDMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DEFEATED (14 member(s) have cast votes)

DO YOU AGREE THE AMENDMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DEFEATED

NO (6 votes [42.86%])
Percentage of vote: 42.86%
YES (3 votes [21.43%])
Percentage of vote: 21.43%
DON'T KNOW (2 votes [14.29%])
Percentage of vote: 14.29%
DON'T CARE (3 votes [21.43%])
Percentage of vote: 21.43%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 elinvesti8

Sr. Member

Members
186 posts

Location: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

Posted 22 July 2007 - 07:59 PM

On July 20, 2007, the Congressional Democrats voted to pull from the Homeland Security Bill provisions that would protect you and me from lawsuits for reporting suspicious behavior relating to Homeland Security. Yes there are laws already on the books to protect whistle blowers etc. But do you have the cash to hire lawyers when you are sued by persons affected by your reporting of their suspicious activities? This amendment would have stopped them from even filing a lawsuit against you.

http://mpinkeyes.wor...-security-bill/

http://www.washingto...N/70719001/1001

http://hotair.com/ar...-doe-provision/

Back to top

#2 mudmanc4

TMN Seasoned Veteran

Moderators
9,039 posts

Location: In The Plex

Posted 22 July 2007 - 09:51 PM

I believe all U.S. citizens should be protected from any and all who decide to conspire against the U.S.A. And those who would allow such happenings should be brought up on charges for treason, in the maximum penalty. Period!

Back to top

#3 Sequoia

TMN Friend

Members
347 posts

Posted 22 July 2007 - 10:04 PM

It depends so I think it should have been defeated.
If the report resulted in persons that were guilty being convicted then no suit should be allowed.
If someone that doesn't like you makes the report to get you hassled maybe costing you several thousand dollars then why shouldn't you be able to sue them?

Back to top

#4 JokeyMcScrotsack

If you go fast enough they can't tell how big it isn't.

Sophist Member
9,650 posts

Location: Pizza Napoli's

Posted 23 July 2007 - 06:27 AM

Glad it was killed. Would have never protected me, but it would have made it even easier for someone to say your a terrorist just cause they dont like you.

http://www.prisonpla...7reportbomb.htm

It would make this video become more common.

Back to top

#5 Voltageman

TMN Friend

Sophist Member
791 posts

Location: NY

Posted 23 July 2007 - 06:43 AM

Quote

http://www.prisonpla...7reportbomb.htm

Guilty until Proven Innocent?

So let me get this straight...

I face a lawsuit if I think someone is a terrorist, report them, and find out they are not...

But the President, can blow up an entire country based on false facts, and face no repercussions?

WTF!

Back to top

#6 Sequoia

TMN Friend

Members
347 posts

Posted 23 July 2007 - 09:15 AM

Good link Shug7272

Quote

So let me get this straight...
I face a lawsuit if I think someone is a terrorist, report them, and find out they are not...

I think if it came it court & you had reasonable probable cause .Like you saw your neighbor unload several bags of ammonium nitrate fertilizer & a 55 gallon drum of diesel.Assuming he was not a farmer.Then that would be reasonable probable cause so I doubt if he would win a lawsuit even if he was innocent.

Back to top

#7 elinvesti8

Sr. Member

Members
186 posts

Location: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

Posted 23 July 2007 - 09:28 AM

If someone make a false complaint just to cause problems for another person and it can be proven based on evidence then that person should be jailed and sued in civil court. But, if a person makes a good faith complaint based on suspicious activity they observed and it turns out the suspicious activity does not lead to the uncovering of a crime then the person who reported the activity should be shielded from any lawsuits. If this John Doe amendment is not included people will stop reporting their observations and our country will be more vulnerable.