Firearms Talk banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So yet another anti-constitution bill was passed almost unanimously (388-3) in congress & signed into law by King Obama on Thursday without much press. This basically says you can no longer protest or assemble in defiance in any place the secret service is present or plans to be present in the near future! Why wasn't this passed when we had all the occupy people or the G8 people protesting? Only now that gun rights are being fought for are they are they trying to strip our right to protest this baloons policies ?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
19,844 Posts
The crux of this is "willfully & knowingly". They're removing "willfully" and that's the big deal. Willfully means the gov. must prove intent. With that removed, they don't have to do that anymore. It gets their ducks in a row for mass arrests at any protest or civil demonstration. They'll silence opposition at any cost and continue to destroy the Constitution and B.O.R. with impunity.

http://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/how-big-deal-hr-347-criminalizing-protest-bill
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
19,844 Posts
That's the one. For some reason, it's popping up on the web now.
 

·
Coffee! If your not shaking, you need another cup
Joined
·
7,515 Posts
Some stand outs in that thing!

The original statute, unchanged by H.R. 347,made certain conduct with respect to these restricted areas a crime, including simple trespass, actions in or near the restricted area that would "disrupt the orderly conduct of Government," and blocking the entrance or exit to the restricted area.

H.R. 347 did make one noteworthy change, which may make it easier for the Secret Service to overuse or misuse the statute to arrest lawful protesters.

Any time the government lowers the intent requirement, it makes it easier for a prosecutor to prove her case, and it gives law enforcement more discretion when enforcing the law. To be sure, this is of concern to the ACLU. We will monitor the implementation of H.R. 347 for any abuse or misuse.

Also, while H.R. 347, on its own, is only of incremental importance, it could be misused as part of a larger move by the Secret Service and others to suppress lawful protest by relegating it to particular locations at a public event. These "free speech zones" are frequently used to target certain viewpoints or to keep protesters away from the cameras. Although H.R. 347 doesn't directly address free speech zones, it is part of the set of laws that make this conduct possible, and should be seen in this context.

Rest assured we'll be keeping an eye on how this law will be interpreted and used by law enforcement — especially in light of the coming elections.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,426 Posts
I thought this came up in 11'? Is it a reoccuring deal or what? Its horse spit for sure either way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,426 Posts
It came up in 2011 but was not signed into law until 3/8/2012
Thought so. It gets a (dis)honorable mention in my thread titled "Scorecard: How Many Rights have Americans Lost" over in the politics section.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,426 Posts
Only 3 voted against the bill, Ron Paul, Paul Broun, and Justin Amash, 30 did not vote and most were republicans which amounts to a yes vote.
Those crazy libertarians and their "conspiracy theories" on an out of control federal government! :p ;)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,868 Posts
They had a lot of republican support for the bill and as you can see most voted for it. government is no longer for the people by the people and of the people. It is an elite group who believe in control of the masses and they should stop using democrat or republican because none are any of that
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,426 Posts
Just found it. Yep never even heard about this until yesterday... Sad that little was even made of this at the time.:confused: Sorry for digging up old trash..
Thats ok :)

Its good that the people not forget the trangressions of their government!
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top