Goodbye protesters!!

[Old Blue Collar Joe]

Okay, first point, everyone on here pretty much knows I absolutely despise far left liberal sites even more than I despise far right sites.

So, it's scary when you find BOTH sides discussing the same issue, and the same opinion of it!
And the right has a similar take on it.
Seems the only bipartisanship we get is when it's going to ******** our rights. If Obama signs this into law, anyone that claims he's 'for the people' is hypocritical. Of course, same can be said if anyone votes for any of the politicians that voted for this, too.

[Magus200]

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr347enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr347enr.pdf

Quote:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Restricted Buildings
and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011’’.
SEC. 2. RESTRICTED BUILDING OR GROUNDS.
Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to
read as follows:
‘‘§ 1752. Restricted building or grounds
‘‘(a) Whoever—
‘‘(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building
or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
‘‘(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the
orderly conduct of Government business or official functions,
engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such
proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so
that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly
conduct of Government business or official functions;
‘‘(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt
the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions,
obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted
building or grounds; or
‘‘(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence
against any person or property in any restricted building or
grounds;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided
in subsection (b).
‘‘(b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is—
‘‘(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more
than 10 years, or both, if—
‘‘(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense,
uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm;
or
‘‘(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as
defined by section 2118(e)(3); and
‘‘(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more
than one year, or both, in any other case.
‘‘(c) In this section— H. R. 347—2
‘‘(1) the term ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ means any
posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area—
‘‘(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice
President’s official residence or its grounds;
‘‘(B) of a building or grounds where the President or
other person protected by the Secret Service is or will
be temporarily visiting; or
‘‘(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national
significance; and
‘‘(2) the term ‘other person protected by the Secret Service’
means any person whom the United States Secret Service is
authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by
Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined
such protection.’’.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.

Don't you need a permit to protest?
All this bill says is you can just go and start disrupting and impeding events that are nationally significant. Same thing for individuals protected by the Secret Service, I see nothing wrong with this bill.

[Ban]

Magus200

Don't you need a permit to protest?
All this bill says is you can just go and start disrupting and impeding events that are nationally significant. Same thing for individuals protected by the Secret Service, I see nothing wrong with this bill.

You don't need a permit in all situations, no. There are plenty of areas that are traditional public forums. Sidewalks, streets, parks, et cetera, are all places that individuals can commandeer for free speech activities. If you want to stand up on a soap box on a street corner and shout your manifesto on the evils of immigration policy to the world, you can do that, under the First Amendment. Now, there might be time, place, and manner restrictions, but those have to be content neutral, and it has to pass intermediate scrutiny (serves an important government interest, and substantially related, or tailored, to serve that interest).

[METALFumasu]

Magus200

Don't you need a permit to protest?
All this bill says is you can just go and start disrupting and impeding events that are nationally significant. Same thing for individuals protected by the Secret Service, I see nothing wrong with this bill.

Except that needing a permit to protest really, really contradicts the whole "right to freedom of assembly" thing in the Constitution. Although that right kinda went out the window with the "free speech zone" concept that's now become disturbingly commonplace in the last decade.

And a fine plus a possible a 10 year max jail sentence if you get arrested for protesting?!

Really?!

The fine I could get behind, but a jail sentence for exercising your right to free speech/assembly? That's a bit extreme. Even with the jail sentence, a 5 year maximum would be more appropriate than 10 years (and that's pushing it). Our prison system is already filled to the brim with non-violent offenders (aka people who get caught in possession of illicit drugs), do we really need to fill it up with more people who don't deserve to be stuck in a cell with Bubba?

I really hope the President doesn't sign off on this, but knowing him, I won't get my hopes up.

As the Zen Master says, "We'll see."

[LightWarrior]

So then what happens to the Tea Party?

[Bubsy]

Old Blue Collar Joe

Okay, first point, everyone on here pretty much knows I absolutely despise far left liberal sites even more than I despise far right sites.

Oh but you miss the point. Those very websites can harbor the same kind of people. It just seems like you hate liberals in a comical "Lol, liberurls R dumb" sort of fashion, or just hate for the sake of hate to seem revolutionary or as if to maintain some sort of hate quota.

Basically what I trying to say is, Yeah we know you have an irrational hatred of liberals for some reason. Can you at least explain why?

More on topic, that is the DailyKos. A website that promotes conspiracy theories and has been known to defend the Democratic Party with them. That is not very liberal if you ask me.

The problem to me is that you seem to use the Word LIBERAL too loosely. Notice you say "Far Left Liberal" but also say "Far Right BLANK" Far right what?

Far right or left people are always going to appeal to authority because they are highly partisan in the first place.

My personal opinion about the legislation: It seems redundant and unnecessary.

[N3bu]

Bubsy

Old Blue Collar Joe

Okay, first point, everyone on here pretty much knows I absolutely despise far left liberal sites even more than I despise far right sites.

Oh but you miss the point. Those very websites can harbor the same kind of people. It just seems like you hate liberals in a comical "Lol, liberurls R dumb" sort of fashion, or just hate for the sake of hate to seem revolutionary or as if to maintain some sort of hate quota.

Basically what I trying to say is, Yeah we know you have an irrational hatred of liberals for some reason. Can you at least explain why?

More on topic, that is the DailyKos. A website that promotes conspiracy theories and has been known to defend the Democratic Party with them. That is not very liberal if you ask me.

The problem to me is that you seem to use the Word LIBERAL too loosely. Notice you say "Far Left Liberal" but also say "Far Right BLANK" Far right what?

Far right or left people are always going to appeal to authority because they are highly partisan in the first place.

My personal opinion about the legislation: It seems redundant and unnecessary.

Joe hates freedom, 'cause Liberals suck.

[The rose in spring]

More proof that your precious rights do not exist.

[Bento the spazcat]

I posted about this bill before it was cool.

/hipster

[Less Than Liz]

The code as it stands, for the curious:

Quote:

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person or group of persons—
(1) willfully and knowingly to enter or remain in any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting;
(2) willfully and knowingly to enter or remain in any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance;
(3) willfully, knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, to engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any building or grounds described in paragraph (1) or (2) when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
(4) willfully and knowingly to obstruct or impede ingress or egress to or from any building, grounds, or area described in paragraph (1) or (2); or
(5) willfully and knowingly to engage in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any building, grounds, or area described in paragraph (1) or (2).
(b) Violation of this section, and attempts or conspiracies to commit such violations, shall be punishable by—
(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if—
(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or
(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118 (e)(3); and
(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.
(c) Violation of this section, and attempts or conspiracies to commit such violations, shall be prosecuted by the United States attorney in the Federal district court having jurisdiction of the place where the offense occurred.
(d) None of the laws of the United States or of the several States and the District of Columbia shall be superseded by this section.
(e) As used in this section, the term “other person protected by the Secret Service” means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title when such person has not declined such protection.

[Agent Thrax]

What did you expect? This is America, land of dreamers, dreams, and lies.

[Bubsy]

N3bu

Bubsy

Old Blue Collar Joe

Okay, first point, everyone on here pretty much knows I absolutely despise far left liberal sites even more than I despise far right sites.

Oh but you miss the point. Those very websites can harbor the same kind of people. It just seems like you hate liberals in a comical "Lol, liberurls R dumb" sort of fashion, or just hate for the sake of hate to seem revolutionary or as if to maintain some sort of hate quota.

Basically what I trying to say is, Yeah we know you have an irrational hatred of liberals for some reason. Can you at least explain why?

More on topic, that is the DailyKos. A website that promotes conspiracy theories and has been known to defend the Democratic Party with them. That is not very liberal if you ask me.

The problem to me is that you seem to use the Word LIBERAL too loosely. Notice you say "Far Left Liberal" but also say "Far Right BLANK" Far right what?

Far right or left people are always going to appeal to authority because they are highly partisan in the first place.

My personal opinion about the legislation: It seems redundant and unnecessary.

Joe hates freedom, 'cause Liberals suck.

Blllarrraaaagghhhhh emotion_drool

Reading that made my brain poop.

Just gimme another answer.

[Old Blue Collar Joe]

N3bu

Bubsy

Old Blue Collar Joe

Okay, first point, everyone on here pretty much knows I absolutely despise far left liberal sites even more than I despise far right sites.

Oh but you miss the point. Those very websites can harbor the same kind of people. It just seems like you hate liberals in a comical "Lol, liberurls R dumb" sort of fashion, or just hate for the sake of hate to seem revolutionary or as if to maintain some sort of hate quota.

Basically what I trying to say is, Yeah we know you have an irrational hatred of liberals for some reason. Can you at least explain why?

More on topic, that is the DailyKos. A website that promotes conspiracy theories and has been known to defend the Democratic Party with them. That is not very liberal if you ask me.

The problem to me is that you seem to use the Word LIBERAL too loosely. Notice you say "Far Left Liberal" but also say "Far Right BLANK" Far right what?

Far right or left people are always going to appeal to authority because they are highly partisan in the first place.

My personal opinion about the legislation: It seems redundant and unnecessary.

Joe hates freedom, 'cause Liberals suck.

Yup. Completely hate freedom. That's why I posted this link about a gross infringement of our freedoms. It's why I am hardcore pro second amendment. And why I have no problem whatsoever with gay marriage. Yep. You nailed it. I'm against freedom. rolleyes

[SailorGreenSparkles]

LightWarrior

So then what happens to the Tea Party?

They dont need permits. Since they are not "troublemakers"

[Old Blue Collar Joe]

Stacie LaVelle

LightWarrior

So then what happens to the Tea Party?

They dont need permits. Since they are not "troublemakers"

When have they held protests without permits? Occupy has camped out and such in areas that aren't camping zones and such, but I'd like to see where they haven't had permits.