Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Chairboy on January 30, 2006, 05:43:49 PM
-
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183147,00.html
Pretty scary, Arlen Specter is proposing an amendment to make political protests a felony if they're performed outside of the designated 'free speech areas' which are usually located a mile or so away.
I hope I'm not the only one troubled by this. We've had our disagreements in the past, and it seems sometimes like there are members of this board who are more than willing to give up civil liberties because they don't like the people excercising them, but I sure hope this is the camel that breaks the straws back for them.
We're past the slippery slope and are now just falling straight down.
-
does "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" mean anything to you?
-
Good luck with that.. when things gets bad, the people will be protesting regardless of the laws.
Tiananmen square... (yeah yeah, sp)
-
it will never fly
-
Specter must have lost his mind.
-
Land of the Free....
-
Originally posted by john9001
does "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" mean anything to you?
Does the Constitution of the United States mean anything to you?
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
We're past the slippery slope and are now just falling straight down.
Amen!
Deeply troubling.
-
Hell... how did it ever become legal to have designated free speech zones in the first place?
-
A Felony???
...good grief...
-
This trouble's me. This seems to have nothing to do with the patriot act as it stands and the act needs to be trimmed, not fattened up.
I can see the need to keep protestors away from events, but not to make it a felony when people at protest get out of hand.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Hell... how did it ever become legal to have designated free speech zones in the first place?
If you have an event and somone wants to protest it by shouting and heckling you arent they in fact infringing on your right of free speech. Public speaking would become a shouting match.
Free speech has NEVER meant unlimited write to say or do anything.
-
We've had worse...
sedition act of 1918
SECTION 3. Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States, or to promote the success of its enemies, or shall willfully make or convey false reports, or false statements, ...or incite insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or shall willfully obstruct ...the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, or ...shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the Constitution of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States ...or shall willfully display the flag of any foreign enemy, or shall willfully ...urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of production ... or advocate, teach, defend, or suggest the doing of any of the acts or things in this section enumerated and whoever shall by word or act support or favor the cause of any country with which the United States is at war or by word or act oppose the cause of the United States therein, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both....
and then it was repealed...
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Hell... how did it ever become legal to have designated free speech zones in the first place?
I was wondering the same thing.
Now HOW many times have we heard hear about the Patriot act?
"If you dont do anything wrong you have nothing to worry about"
-
Specter is crazy. The bad part is us PA'ians elected him because he was the best of the bunch. :confused:
Hell, the only reason I voted for him was to keep a republican majority.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183147,00.html
Pretty scary, Arlen Specter is proposing an amendment to make political protests a felony if they're performed outside of the designated 'free speech areas' which are usually located a mile or so away.
.......
CB, did you read the same article? Where did it say "Arlen Specter is proposing an amendment to make political protests a felony if they're performed outside of the designated 'free speech areas' "
This is what I see
"A new provision tucked into the Patriot Act bill now before Congress would allow authorities to haul demonstrators at any "special event of national significance" away to jail on felony charges if they are caught breaching a security perimeter
which would extend the authority of the Secret Service to allow agents to arrest people who willingly or knowingly enter a restricted area at an event, even if the president or other official normally protected by the Secret Service isn't in attendance at the time.
This is already a law
Under current law, the Secret Service can arrest anyone for breaching restricted areas where the president or a protected official is or will be visiting , but the new provision would allow such arrests even after those VIPs have left the premises of any designated "special event of national significance." The provision would increase the maximum penalty for such an infraction from six months to one year in jail.
Currently, non-violent demonstrators who enter restricted areas at such events previously would be arrested and charged by local law enforcement with simple trespassing, said Graves. Under the provision included in the new law, they will be charged with felonies by the Secret Service.
I'm not saying its a good thing, I dont see the need to make it a felony and they should just leave it with local law enforcement, but I dont see how this endangers first admentment rights or another rights.
If I missed something I'm sure you'll point it out, ;)
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183147,00.html
Pretty scary, Arlen Specter is proposing an amendment to make political protests a felony if they're performed outside of the designated 'free speech areas' which are usually located a mile or so away.
I hope I'm not the only one troubled by this. We've had our disagreements in the past, and it seems sometimes like there are members of this board who are more than willing to give up civil liberties because they don't like the people excercising them, but I sure hope this is the camel that breaks the straws back for them.
We're past the slippery slope and are now just falling straight down.
Evil Boosh is going to take all your liberties away Muuuhahaha... Its all part of the master plan!
So you guys plan on many protests in DC in the coming years? Maybe in 2008 after the next democratic presidential election loss.... Ohh Thats right Hillary is going to win running with that great patriot Wesley Clark maybe?! A women pres.
That amendment has about as much chance passing as Ted Kennedy has passing a breathalizer test on monday morning on the way to work!
TJ
-
PROTECTION
Protective Mission
After the assassination of President William McKinley in 1901, Congress directed the Secret Service to protect the President of the United States. Protection remains the primary mission of the United States Secret Service.
Authorization
Today, the Secret Service is authorized by law to protect:
* the President, the Vice President, (or other individuals next in order of succession to the Office of the President), the President-elect and Vice President-elect;
* the immediate families of the above individuals;
* former Presidents, their spouses for their lifetimes, except when the spouse re-marries. In 1997, Congressional legislation became effective limiting Secret Service protection to former Presidents for a period of not more than 10 years from the date the former President leaves office.
* children of former presidents until age 16;
* visiting heads of foreign states or governments and their spouses traveling with them, other distinguished foreign visitors to the United States, and official representatives of the United States performing special missions abroad;
* major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates, and their spouses within 120 days of a general Presidential election.
Restricted area my ****ing ass. Let the local law enforcement deal with breach of local security.
-SW
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Now HOW many times have we heard hear about the Patriot act?
"If you dont do anything wrong you have nothing to worry about"
On this Message Board? Do a Search....
-
Originally posted by T0J0
Evil Boosh is going to take all your liberties away Muuuhahaha... Its all part of the master plan!
So you guys plan on many protests in DC in the coming years? Maybe in 2008 after the next democratic presidential election loss.... Ohh Thats right Hillary is going to win running with that great patriot Wesley Clark maybe?! A women pres.
That amendment has about as much chance passing as Ted Kennedy has passing a breathalizer test on monday morning on the way to work!
TJ
Plan on protesting? no
But just because something may not directly effect me does not mean I have no concerns or objections over it.
The BS feel good anti gun laws dont effect me either as I dont own a gun but I object to them too.
As for the protestors I may not like what they have to say but they have the right to say it
-
Originally posted by storch
it will never fly
Oh yes it will, you have enough morons in this county who will say and think things such as "I dont protest so it wont affect me" or "it gives aid and comfort to the enemy" that anything is possible.
shamus
-
Ok... my take.. You guys that are for gun control and you socialists... what ya gonna do? throw rocks? and why do you care? isn't the government allways right? You could get hurt at a protest so they are doing it for your own good....
And... why should I pay for you when you get injured at a protest?
Socialists and gun control nazis are getting what you deserve. If the government doesn't fear the people they simpy grab more power.
That being said... define "protest". Is "protest" breaking stuff and shouting down or attacking people? Is "protest" blocking traffic and shutting down lawful business?
lazs
-
National Special Security Event
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
A National Special Security Event (NSSE) is a desgnation given by the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to particular special events. Some people believe that this authorizes the federal government to assume federal control of security measures normally employed by local law enforcement. This is a misleading understanding of what a NSSE is. Identifying an event as a National Special Security Event simply means that DHS (specifically the United States Secret Service) is the agency responsible for "coordinating" all federal support to the event. It does not mean that the federal government all of a sudden is "in charge" of state and local public safety security operations. State and local laws govern roles and responsibilities for law enforcement, fire, public health, emergency medical service and other public safety activities. The NSSE designation, initially created (as described below) as a part of Presidential Decision Directive 62, is simply an order from the Office of the President that affects only other federal agencies in the executive branch of government. Until the Constitution is modified, Congress still is responsible for writing laws. The President is not yet allowed to create laws under the guise of a Presidential Decision Directive. The major exception to the rule that DHS is a partner in, rather than in charge of, security planning and operations is for purely federal events, such as a presidential inauguration.
There are some people who believe that it is in the political and organizational interest of the DHS and Secret Service to maintain the illusion that the NSSE designation puts the federal government in charge of security planning and operations. When the illusion persists, it provides a sense that one agency is in charge of everything — thus satisfying some of the hierarchical impulses of agencies that are uncomfortable with the idea of "unified command." The misleading impression about NSSEs is usually easier to achieve in jurisdictions that rarely have major events, or who believe the federal government is somehow more capable than they are. At times, some local agencies pretend to defer to DHS, since having to be responsible for securing an event takes precious local public safety resources that might otherwise be better used.
Other members of DHS go out of their way to clarify that the NSSE designation does nothing to alter existing public safety laws and responsibilities. Instead, it is an administrative mechanism designed to minimize the uncoordinated and occasionally duplicative work of federal agencies who want to be involved in the event (sometimes called the "free range chicken" problem). When state and local public safety agencies can go to one agency that represents all federal resources, it makes the planning job more manageable, if not easier.
Some people also believe that naming an event an NSSE, "releases federal funding for security plans." This also is an error. Unless congress has appropriated money that can specifically be used for security planning or operations, federal agencies must cover the costs of their participation in the NSSE through their own budget. Though not declared by DHS (which did not yet exist), the first NSSE after the September 11, 2001 attacks was the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics. The NSSE designation was received prior to the start of the 2002 Olympics. The first operational NSSE was Super Bowl XXXVI, in New Orleans. More recent NSSEs include the state funeral of Ronald Reagan, the 2004 Democratic National Convention and the 2004 Republican National Convention. Major annual events, such as the NFL's Super Bowl and the State of the Union address, are automatically designated an NSSE.
In the event an NSSE is declared, the United States Secret Service is charged with employing and coordinating all federal agencies including the various bureaus of DHS, the FBI, and other federal police agencies to secure the venue from terrorist attacks. (Again, not local police or other public safety agencies.) Typically, the other federal law enforcement agencies — like the FBI — have statutory responsibilities beyond those "coordinated" by the Secret Service. Consequently, even though the Secret Service is said to be the lead federal agency, other agencies play a role in major events that is neither controlled nor influenced by the Secret Service.
The declaration of an NSSE was established by President Bill Clinton in a portion of Presidential Decision Directive 62 in May 1998. The FBI used to be the lead agency for federal support to local agencies in major events. The story of how the Secret Service took that responsibility from the FBI is a tale of organizational and political intrigue more appropriate for a novel than an encyclopedia.
Some of the security measures people can expect on the scene when they attend a major event that is declared an NSSE:
Heavy police and military presence
Police forces in the area have canceled days off and leaves
Canine teams & Bomb-sniffing dogs
Surveillance
Sharpshooters
Flight restrictions around the area
Coast Guard patrols
Increased railroad security
Extensive road closures
There will also be many security "enhancements" that most people attending the event will never see. Like an iceberg, that which is visible is only a small part of the entire security structure.
[edit]
List of past NSSEs
2000 Republican National Convention
Dates: 31 July – 3 August 2000
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
2000 Democratic National Convention
Dates: 14 August – 17 August 2000
Location: Los Angeles, California
2001 Presidential Inauguration
Date: 20 January 2001
Location: Washington, DC
United Nations General Assembly fifty-sixth session
Dates: 13 September 2001 – ?
Location: New York, New York
2002 Winter Olympics
Dates: 8 February – 24 February 2002
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
World Economic Forum USA Meeting
Dates: 21 May – 22 May 2002
Location: Washington, DC
G-8 Summit
Dates: 8 June – 10 June 2004
Location: Sea Island, GA
State Funeral of Ronald Reagan
Dates: 9 June – 11 June 2004
Location: Washington, DC, Simi Valley, Ca.
2004 Democratic National Convention
Dates: 26 July – 29 July 2004
Location: Boston, Massachusetts
2004 Republican National Convention
Dates: 30 August – 2 September 2004
Location: New York, New York
2005 Presidential Inauguration
Date: 20 January 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Some thoughts:
There have been "restricted areas" at these events for some time. Looks to me like the proposed legislation enhances laws already on the books, i.e. penalities from Misd enhanced to Felony, and the scope of restriction from before and during an event enhanced to restrict unauthorized persons before, during, and some time after the event.
There may be more to this than meets the eye. I think DHS needs to educate us a little better as to the reasoning behind this.
-
Does the word "Restricted" mean anything to you guys?
Sen. Arlen Specter , R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sponsored the measure, which would extend the authority of the Secret Service to allow agents to arrest people who willingly or knowingly enter a restricted area at an event, even if the president or other official normally protected by the Secret Service isn't in attendance at the time.
Why is this bad?
You may have the right to protest but you don't have the right to enter "Restricted" areas.
Now why are some areas restricted?
Simple!
To many numnuts wanting to shout out or cause harm to opposing views.
-
Now why are some areas restricted?
Actually the purpose of the restricted areas are to make it harder for terror strikes on attractive targets - but goes beyond protection of persons to protection of the event itself. (obviously though, persons would be in danger if an "event" were attacked.)
-
I would also like to note that the title of this thread amounts to a false statement:
Patriot Act amendment to make protest a felony
... wondering if it might be characterized as a biased, partisan statement? It seems like misdirection to me...
-
Howdy! A quick heads up, the 'restricted zones' are being expanded to include the audience, hence the title of the subject.
-
this has been going on for years...back when clinton was prez they were forcing protestors away from the president.
I think alot of the problem is crowds and how easy it is to be concealed in a crowd and to do harm, both to the people in a crowd and to whatever reason a crowd has formed. The right to protest cannot be diminished but the rules about when, how, and where certainly can be determined by law.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Howdy! A quick heads up, the 'restricted zones' are being expanded to include the audience, hence the title of the subject.
CB, I re-read the article again, and I dont see any reference about the restricted zones being expanded. In fact Spector himself says that this bill only changes the arresting authority
which merely makes a technical change to clear up legal confusion over who has arresting authority at NSSEs.
what other information do you have? sounds like just another ACLU boogieman
-
Originally posted by Yeager
this has been going on for years...back when clinton was prez they were forcing protestors away from the president.
I don't know if it was Clinton that started this, but I'm fairly certain that Gore was doing it before Bush.
-
Originally posted by Nefarious
On this Message Board? Do a Search....
It was a rhetorical question
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
I would also like to note that the title of this thread amounts to a false statement:
... wondering if it might be characterized as a biased, partisan statement? It seems like misdirection to me...
:aok it's called media spin... something the liberals do every day and people fall for it
-
Originally posted by Mustaine
:aok it's called media spin... something the liberals do every day and people fall for it
Given that the original story posted on this thread was from FoxNews, you'r comment on the liberal media spinning this is, of course, without merit.
unless, FoxNews is too stupid to tell the difference between spin and reporting...which is probably always the case :aok
-
Originally posted by Red Tail 444
Given that the original story posted on this thread was from FoxNews, you'r comment on the liberal media spinning this is, of course, without merit.
unless, FoxNews is too stupid to tell the difference between spin and reporting...which is probably always the case :aok
I think he's more alluding to Chairboys spin, more or less. Fox does spin things but the article sounded pretty cut and dry to me. Again I disagree with making harsher penalties part of the patriot act. The act needs to be trimmed not fattened up.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Pretty scary, Arlen Specter is proposing an amendment to make political protests a felony if they're performed outside of the designated 'free speech areas' which are usually located a mile or so away.
Already happening here. A new law makes it illegal to stage a protest within 1km of Westminster. A woman was recently tried for breaking this law. Her crime? Reciting the names of British servicemen killed in Iraq.
Story: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/12/11/dl1103.xml
Last week, a 25-year-old vegan chef named Maya Evans was fined and given a criminal record, having been prosecuted under a new law banning unauthorised protests within a kilometre of Westminster. Her "crime" was to stand by the Cenotaph and read out the names of British soldiers killed in Iraq, an offence for which 14 police officers were sent to apprehend her.
It was also announced last week that victims of crime who suffer minor injuries may now be deprived of compensation: instead they will be offered counselling, cosmetic surgery, and even "panic rooms" in their homes. What such victims would really prefer, of course, is the assurance that such crime will not happen to them again - but unfortunately the police are often much too preoccupied with other matters to provide adequate protection.
Perhaps - since very few of us are at risk from vegan peace protesters - our Government could be prosecuted on a charge of wasting police time.
-
Yech, i dont us geting any more like the brits.
I'm going to the dentist ASAP
-
Originally posted by Debonair
Yech, i dont us geting any more like the brits.
I'm going to the dentist ASAP
Buy a book on spelling and punctuation while you're out. :aok
-
Oh right.... from people who can't even spell tire or color or even aluminum and have lost the ability to pronounce an H (probly the last has something to do with the lack of dental care.)
lazs
-
oh yeah? I use an H when pronouncing "herb". How do Americans say it? :p
-
Herb?
We pronounce it "throat-warbler mangrove."
-
Originally posted by beet1e
oh yeah? I use an H when pronouncing "herb". How do Americans say it? :p
"You say 'erbs', and we say 'herbs', because there's a f***ing 'H' in it!" - Eddie Izzard
-
Originally posted by beet1e
oh yeah? I use an H when pronouncing "herb". How do Americans say it? :p
Spliff.
-
if you bought herbs from a guy named Herb, they could be called Herb's herbs.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Oh right.... from people who can't even spell tire or color or even aluminum and have lost the ability to pronounce an H (probly the last has something to do with the lack of dental care.)
lazs
Feel free to use a different language than English (Laz goes to get his guns) ;)
-
Hurbz erbz
-
Take away the publics right to protest and some kook will protest with a 175gn hollow point.
-
I know of some Americans who pronounce it "Hoiybs"
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
If you have an event and somone wants to protest it by shouting and heckling you arent they in fact infringing on your right of free speech. Public speaking would become a shouting match.
Free speech has NEVER meant unlimited write to say or do anything.
IMHO, a protest T-shirt isn't the same thing as heckling.
-
Remember that song from the 80s Aussie band Men at Work? "It's a Mistake"
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/02/01/sheehan.arrest/index.html
"On Wednesday afternoon, U.S. Capitol Police Chief Terrance Gainer said neither woman should have been removed from the chamber. "We made a mistake," he told CNN."
-
Originally posted by Airscrew
"You say 'erbs', and we say 'herbs', because there's a f***ing 'H' in it!" - Eddie Izzard
Simple rule of thumb
Herbs you eat
erb you smoke ;)
-
I knew two guys who were named Herb. The H was not silent. Hippie girls say "erb" for weeds.
lazs
-
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0201-01.htm
I went through security once, then had to use the rest room and went through security again.
My ticket was in the 5th gallery, front row, fourth seat in. The person who in a few minutes was to arrest me, helped me to my seat.
I had just sat down and I was warm from climbing 3 flights of stairs back up from the bathroom so I unzipped my jacket. I turned to the right to take my left arm out, when the same officer saw my shirt and yelled; "Protester." He then ran over to me, hauled me out of my seat and roughly (with my hands behind my back) shoved me up the stairs. I said something like "I'm going, do you have to be so rough?" By the way, his name is Mike Weight.
The officer ran with me to the elevators yelling at everyone to move out of the way. When we got to the elevators, he cuffed me and took me outside to await a squad car. On the way out, someone behind me said, "That's Cindy Sheehan." At which point the officer who arrested me said: "Take these steps slowly." I said, "You didn't care about being careful when you were dragging me up the other steps." He said, "That's because you were protesting." Wow, I get hauled out of the People's House because I was, "Protesting."
I was never told that I couldn't wear that shirt into the Congress. I was never asked to take it off or zip my jacket back up. If I had been asked to do any of those things...I would have, and written about the suppression of my freedom of speech later. I was immediately, and roughly (I have the bruises and muscle spasms to prove it) hauled off and arrested for "unlawful conduct."
-Cindy Sheehan
Whatever your views of this woman doesn't this seem a little overboard?
I'll bet they would make what she did a Felony if they could..... For a shirt... a shirt she wasn't asked to change, turn inside out or simply re-zip her jacket.....
Next thing you know ... wearing the wrong shirt at the wrong time could put you in prision for years.
At least it seems so to me.
"Protester!"
-
yep... she for sure seems a little overboard. She is a nutcase and she is doing nutcase things.
lazs
-
My point is .. would that be deserveing of a felony...
I don't care what you think of the woman.....
Should that be a Felony?
Should it even be a crime? They've never heard of showing someone the door? They could have a dress code that doesn't allow t-shirts.
-
not deserving of a felony, but she's still a lying sack of ****, opportunistic, media hog.
-
So let me get this right, you're saying that the only people allowed constitutional rights are the ones you agree with?
-
Lazs,
What if it was a shirt that said "I love the 2nd Ammendment", were the President was known to try to limit the 2nd Ammendment?
Is the message and the messenger the litmus test?
I do think she has stepped into nutcase land no doubt.
-
CB, you takin to me?