Well I think that. -- -- armies has raised a key point in the key distinctions American be able to recognize. There's a difference between national security requirements. And criminal law requires. I... See More
Well I think that. -- -- armies has raised a key point in the key distinctions American be able to recognize. There's a difference between national security requirements. And criminal law requires. I think it's desperately important we preserve your right to be innocent until proven guilty if it's a matter of criminal law. But if you're trying to find somebody who may have a nuclear weapon. But they're trying to bring into an American city. I think you -- -- use every tool the you can possibly used to gather the intelligence the Patriot Act has clearly been a key part of that. And I think looking at it carefully and extending -- and and building -- an honest understanding. That all of us will be in danger. For the rest of our lives as this is not going to end in the short run. And we need to be prepared to protect ourselves. From those who if they could would not just kill us individually but would take out entire -- to speaker just to clarify you wouldn't change the Patriot Act. Now I but I would not change I'm not aware of any specific changing needs and -- look at strengthening it because I think the dangers are literally that great again. I spent years studying the stuff you start thinking about one nuclear weapon. In one American city and the scale of loss of life and you ask yourself what should the president be capable of doing to stop that. You come up with a very different answer again very sharp division. Criminal law the government should be -- frankly on defense and you're innocent until proven guilty. National security the government should have many more tools in order to save our lives. Congressman Paul I suspect you disagree. I do you tell us why. I think. I think the patriot asset is unpatriotic because it undermines our liberty I'm concerned is everybody is about the terrorists attacked. Timothy McVeigh was a vicious terrorists he was arrested terrorism still on the books internationally and nationally he has a criminal is a crime and we should deal with it. We dealt with it rather well with Timothy McVeigh. What -- why I really -- it is we have drifted into -- condition and that we were warned against because our early founders were very clear they said. Don't be willing to sacrifice liberty for security today. It seems to we see that our government then are congress'. Are so willing to give up our liberties for our security. I have a personal belief that you never have to give up liberty for security you can still provide security without sacrificing our bill of rights. -- -- response mister speaker out Timothy McVeigh succeeded. That's the whole point. Timothy McVeigh killed a lot of Americans I don't want -- law that says. After -- lose a major American city we're sure gonna come and find you. I don't know law that says you try to take on American city. And -- It's like saying that we need a policeman in every house a camera in every house because we want to prevent. Chal beating -- -- and wife beating you can prevent crimes by. Prevent a crime but the crime then will be against the American people and guess our freedoms that we will throw out so much to what -- Our revolution was fought for so don't do it so carelessly.
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.