If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Boing Boing)   Proposed US law bans protesting near anyone who rates a Secret Service detail, even if you don't know where he is, or if it is even there   (boingboing.net) divider line 140
    More: Scary, secret service, Boing Boing  
•       •       •

2928 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Mar 2012 at 12:37 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



140 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-04 08:48:50 AM
Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
 
2012-03-04 08:57:31 AM

TsarTom: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


I think we are done here.
 
2012-03-04 09:08:24 AM

TsarTom: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


That's very pre-9/11 thinking.
 
2012-03-04 09:11:31 AM

Nefarious: TsarTom: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I think we are done here.


On to practical matters: how to stop it?

President Obettergoalongtogetalong isn't going to veto it.

Reps and Senators like being 'special' - never mind that those disruptive Tea Party townhall shenanigans are the reason many of them have seats now.

So, do you think the current Supreme Court - the 'we don't like your Occupy shirt so you're going to jail' folks are going to overrule it? When, by a simple vote by Congress and Obama's signature, anybody, including them and their families, can rate Secret Service protective details?
 
2012-03-04 09:48:18 AM
from :Text of H.R. 347: Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011

'(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) any 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--
'(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 when such person has not declined such protection.'.


//Gee, the word "knowingly" is used in all 4 clauses. Does that mean "unknowingly"?
 
2012-03-04 10:05:39 AM
that's ok, I didn't want to be a democracy anymore anyways.
 
2012-03-04 10:31:31 AM

Weaver95: that's ok, I didn't want to be a democracy anymore anyways.


The Free Speech Zone has been moved to a small parking lot in Red Dog Mine, AK.

Next week, it will be in Miami, FL.
 
2012-03-04 11:04:17 AM

TsarTom: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Done in one.
 
2012-03-04 11:19:22 AM

TsarTom: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Pretty much.

I know we blew our wad early, but did anyone get pie?

/What?
//I like pie.
///Really, who doesn't?
 
2012-03-04 11:24:41 AM

TsarTom: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Seems to me this would be a good time to start using that right. too
 
2012-03-04 11:38:04 AM
I think...and I'm simply spitballing here...that this law would mean that anyone rating Secret Service protection could force the dispersal of any protest, simply by deciding to go visit the area. Bunch of people protesting down by the reflecting pool? "Oh, I think I'll take a walk on the Mall. Hey, Capitol Police, could you do something about those peons so I can continue my walk?"
 
2012-03-04 12:10:50 PM
Jeez, it's like the text of the law wasn't even quoted in this thread.

knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business

That's not waving a sign outside a building.

Come on, people.
 
2012-03-04 12:40:57 PM
"Hey guys, what can we do to give the Occupy movement some ammunition they can use to completely discredit us and make us look like tyrants? Any ideas?"
 
2012-03-04 12:43:07 PM
Well you can see their point. People keep protesting stupid shiat that these people are saying and making them look callous and heartless or just plain frigging nuts. Rather than stop saying said crazy shiat and hating the small minority that is their base's feelings, it better to crack down on everyone else that points out how ridiculous they are viewing.

I thought that was kind of obvious.
 
2012-03-04 12:44:23 PM
The existing text of 18 USC 1752 (the provision this law is going to replace):

(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.


If that looks familiar, it's because the new law does very little to actually change the existing provisions.
 
2012-03-04 12:44:38 PM

hillbillypharmacist: Jeez, it's like the text of the law wasn't even quoted in this thread.

knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business

That's not waving a sign outside a building.

Come on, people.


That line is so vague that anything could be interpreted as "disruptive".
 
2012-03-04 12:47:04 PM
man, this shiate is getting old quick

/more tempted than ever to move with my gf back to Austrailia
 
2012-03-04 12:47:23 PM
Good luck enforcing unconstitutional tripe.
 
2012-03-04 12:48:53 PM

hillbillypharmacist: Jeez, it's like the text of the law wasn't even quoted in this thread.

knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business

That's not waving a sign outside a building.

Come on, people.


And you don't think this won't be abused? What impedes government business? Noise?
 
2012-03-04 12:49:51 PM

Kibbler: "Hey guys, what can we do to give the Occupy movement some ammunition they can use to completely discredit us and make us look like tyrants? Any ideas?"


They could fracture the skull of a peaceful veteran at a protest with a sandbag shotgun. Oh, wait, they already did that.
 
2012-03-04 12:53:45 PM

Satanic_Hamster: hillbillypharmacist: Jeez, it's like the text of the law wasn't even quoted in this thread.

knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business

That's not waving a sign outside a building.

Come on, people.

And you don't think this won't be abused? What impedes government business? Noise?


The protestors might convince some of the government workers to join their cause. If that doesn't count as interfering then I don't know what does.
 
2012-03-04 12:56:23 PM
Hmmm... So who do we vent at based on this article?

Let's find the legislation on Thomas...

Rep Rooney, Thomas J. [FL-16]

http://rooney.house.gov/

@TomRooney

Now, stage a protest in his interface, internets.
 
2012-03-04 12:59:05 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Kibbler: "Hey guys, what can we do to give the Occupy movement some ammunition they can use to completely discredit us and make us look like tyrants? Any ideas?"

They could fracture the skull of a peaceful veteran at a protest with a sandbag shotgun. Oh, wait, they already did that.


Or pepper-spray a bunch of students sitting cross-legged.

// I heard there was more video which shows something "justified" in that
// anyone seen/heard that?
// I'm OK with the law (read the cite, at least), if and only if the penalties that cops/feds get for stuff like fracturing a peaceful protestor's skull or pepper-spraying someone sitting on the ground, or using a truncheon on someone running away from you are more severe than the 10-year max in (b)(1)(A)
 
2012-03-04 01:01:13 PM

Weaver95: that's ok, I didn't want to be a democracy anymore anyways.


Weaver, you're so silly that it's cute...
 
2012-03-04 01:01:24 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Good luck enforcing unconstitutional tripe.


Still has to make it to court. How long will that take?
 
2012-03-04 01:02:22 PM
That's unconstitutional and even if it were to pass, it would be shot down at several stages up to and including the Supreme Court.
 
2012-03-04 01:05:41 PM

strapp3r: man, this shiate is getting old quick

/more tempted than ever to move with my gf back to Austrailia


You really think that the Australian government is an improvement? That's cute.
 
2012-03-04 01:06:45 PM
Amash, Broun and RON PAUL voted the right way.

Only 3 people left in Congress who haven't lost their farking minds? Tis a sad thing.
 
2012-03-04 01:07:03 PM

Jamdug!: That's unconstitutional and even if it were to pass, it would be shot down at several stages up to and including the Supreme Court.


You sure about that? This Supreme Court has five politicians pretending to be judges. The law -even the constitution itself - aren't on their radar screen.
 
2012-03-04 01:09:20 PM

Satanic_Hamster: And you don't think this won't be abused? What impedes government business? Noise?


If laws are going to be intentionally abused, it hardly matters what the law says.
 
2012-03-04 01:12:44 PM

Dr Dreidel: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Kibbler: "Hey guys, what can we do to give the Occupy movement some ammunition they can use to completely discredit us and make us look like tyrants? Any ideas?"

They could fracture the skull of a peaceful veteran at a protest with a sandbag shotgun. Oh, wait, they already did that.

Or pepper-spray a bunch of students sitting cross-legged.

// I heard there was more video which shows something "justified" in that
// anyone seen/heard that?
// I'm OK with the law (read the cite, at least), if and only if the penalties that cops/feds get for stuff like fracturing a peaceful protestor's skull or pepper-spraying someone sitting on the ground, or using a truncheon on someone running away from you are more severe than the 10-year max in (b)(1)(A)


I've seen the video in its entirety and it shows Officer Pike step over the kids at least twice before discharging his spray into the air and then into the faces of the kids, some getting hit twice.

The full video gave his defenders a boner, perhaps, but there's nothing in there that shows any good reason for him to hit them with spray at all.

It's just a bunch of cops too lazy to pull a dozen kids apart.
 
2012-03-04 01:15:14 PM

Weaver95: that's ok, I didn't want to be a democracy anymore anyways.


The US is not nor was it ever intended to be a democracy.
 
2012-03-04 01:16:32 PM

Crosshair: The US is not nor was it ever intended to be a democracy.


I just rolled my eyes so hard that I went blind. I hope I'm clicking on the right place to post this.
 
2012-03-04 01:17:08 PM

Crosshair: Weaver95: that's ok, I didn't want to be a democracy anymore anyways.

The US is not nor was it ever intended to be a democracy.


Time to change that mistake.
 
2012-03-04 01:17:12 PM

Crosshair: Weaver95: that's ok, I didn't want to be a democracy anymore anyways.

The US is not nor was it ever intended to be a democracy.


It would serve those maniacs in congress well to remember what the US *is* intended to be. A constitutional republic.

Bunch of assholes.
 
2012-03-04 01:17:45 PM
On the upside, it means this guy:

www.examiner.com

could be thrown in jail now.

Seriously, though, this bill doesn't allow the rounding up and jailing of random protesters on the street. Why? Because they have a right to be there, and this is only enforceable in cordoned off areas. Do you know what happens if you're a protester in a presidential rope line and you pass the velvet rope? Secret Service tackles you and arrests you. They always did, this doesn't change that. In fact, I'm really not sure what this changes or why I'm supposed to be angry about it.
 
2012-03-04 01:21:23 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: It's just a bunch of cops too lazy to pull a dozen kids apart.


Figured as much. That shiat pisses me off - we should be tougher on cops and authority figures, not more lenient. Stories like this - that end in a month's paid vacation, a slap-on-the-wrist suspension, or firing with no criminal charges - are the reason that cops continue to pull shiat like this, and the reason many of us mistrust them.

With great power comes great responsibility. I'd sooner trust Ivy-league pointy-headed elitist hippie liberal academics in ivory towers to protect me than GED-and-a-gun Gomer.

// DC Chief Cathy Linnear once claimed - on the radio - that citizens' review boards weren't fair because the citizens expected accountability
 
2012-03-04 01:23:02 PM
I bet the British had similar laws in the Colonies right before the American Revolution really kicked into gear.
 
2012-03-04 01:23:47 PM
TsarTom: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
clancifer:
That's very pre-9/11 thinking.

-=-

That's the good ol' American Constitution way of thinking.

Am I the only one who sees America being raped on a daily basis?
I mean, don't you feel like the bystander across the street from a gang of guys brutally raping your sister?

Because that is what is happening.
 
2012-03-04 01:28:46 PM

Blathering Idjut: Jamdug!: That's unconstitutional and even if it were to pass, it would be shot down at several stages up to and including the Supreme Court.

You sure about that? This Supreme Court has five politicians pretending to be judges. The law -even the constitution itself - aren't on their radar screen.


Don't taze me bro.
 
2012-03-04 01:30:27 PM
But I'm told on FARK.com that our liberties aren't under attack.
 
2012-03-04 01:32:49 PM

Blathering Idjut: This Supreme Court has five politicians corporate tools pretending to be judges.

 
2012-03-04 01:33:58 PM

Stoker: TsarTom: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
clancifer:
That's very pre-9/11 thinking.
-=-

That's the good ol' American Constitution way of thinking.

Am I the only one who sees America being raped on a daily basis?
I mean, don't you feel like the bystander across the street from a gang of guys brutally raping your sister?

Because that is what is happening.


My sister is an only child.
 
2012-03-04 01:49:52 PM
pic.templetons.com
hot
 
2012-03-04 01:51:45 PM
i.qkme.me
 
2012-03-04 01:57:35 PM
Too many vague qualifiers in that bill to make me comfortable. What is a "dangerous" weapon? What is "disrupting" a government office?

The standard "overzealous law enforcement officer" or government official can always use such vague wording to crack down on any protest, ISTM, which is probably why the wording is written like that. Plausible deniability, after all.
 
2012-03-04 01:58:46 PM

TsarTom: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Like congress reads the constitution.
 
2012-03-04 01:59:15 PM
Thomas Jefferson carried death threats in his pocket.

Abraham Lincoln walked through the streets of Richmond days after it was captured with the belief that he'd eventually be assassinated.

Teddy Roosevelt gave a speech moments after he was shot.

Richard Nixon snuck out late at night to debate the Vietnam War with some protesters at the Lincoln Memorial.

The sound you're hearing is the past calling us a pussy and Nixon telling us we're being paranoid.
 
2012-03-04 01:59:51 PM

dehehn: [pic.templetons.com image 640x853]
hot


Worst. Kitchen. Evar.
 
2012-03-04 02:01:19 PM
During the Cheney administration I noticed many ostentation displays of security details for the higher officials. It wasn't like someone like Rumsfeld would have 1 or 2 SS agents to protect him, but instead every time he traveled it would be in a large security motorcade.

Those people seem to think the larger your posse/entourage is and the more isolated you are from the hoi-polloi the more important you are.

This isn't unusual for leaders in other part of the world. I remember years ago seeing the 405 freeway in LA shut down so that a large motorcade flying the Korean flag could travel unimpeded to the airport.

Do we really want US government officials acting like rap stars with a posse?
 
Displayed 50 of 140 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report