Your Right to Protest & Free Speech Has Been Made a Felony

[Stoner4Life]

here's how I feel about protesters disrupting political rallies.

If it's a press conference and you want to squeeze your question in good for you, the candidate is taking questions, but maybe not yours w/out press credentials. oh well.

If it's a rally and the candidate has paid his dime to speak & make it happen then you really have NO right to interrupt it or do you think that some crappy garage band has the right to try to upstage and interrupt the Rolling Stones while they're on stage because they think they actually have the right to free speech and freedom of expression anywhere? same exact premise.

now let's just say every single douchenozzle that wants to interrupt a political rally has the right to actually be heard instead of being dragged off? how would we know what the politicians position was on anything? and btw, any decent controversial question needing to be asked or point needing to be made will certainly be fielded by one reporter or another or by their opponents.

a protester disrupting a rally is as productive as a fan running across a baseball field.

btw, if we disrupted Romney @ one rally we might never have heard him utter those profound words in Michigan, "I love this state, it seems right here, trees are the right height."

or Rick Santorum spewing: "The British were the most powerful army in the world, navy in the world; they were ruled by highly educated noble people. Their uniforms were crisp and stiff! they looked good!"

why interrupt these guys, they'll bury themselves.

got something to say? hold your own rally, if your point is valid and of concern to millions I'm sure your rally will be a huge success, if not you'll be the first to know.

 

[paulo73]

Nice debate.
Keep those opinions coming.

 

[HempKat]

here's how I feel about protesters disrupting political rallies.

If it's a press conference and you want to squeeze your question in good for you, the candidate is taking questions, but maybe not yours w/out press credentials. oh well.

If it's a rally and the candidate has paid his dime to speak & make it happen then you really have NO right to interrupt it or do you think that some crappy garage band has the right to try to upstage and interrupt the Rolling Stones while they're on stage because they think they actually have the right to free speech and freedom of expression anywhere? same exact premise.

now let's just say every single douchenozzle that wants to interrupt a political rally has the right to actually be heard instead of being dragged off? how would we know what the politicians position was on anything? and btw, any decent controversial question needing to be asked or point needing to be made will certainly be fielded by one reporter or another or by their opponents.

a protester disrupting a rally is as productive as a fan running across a baseball field.

btw, if we disrupted Romney @ one rally we might never have heard him utter those profound words in Michigan, "I love this state, it seems right here, trees are the right height."

or Rick Santorum spewing: "The British were the most powerful army in the world, navy in the world; they were ruled by highly educated noble people. Their uniforms were crisp and stiff! they looked good!"

why interrupt these guys, they'll bury themselves.

got something to say? hold your own rally, if your point is valid and of concern to millions I'm sure your rally will be a huge success, if not you'll be the first to know.

Bingo far more is accomplished by a sound civilized presentation of good sound ideas then is ever accomplished by reactionary people seeking to disrupt and humiliate those they protest. Like in the Glitter bombing. Now Romney being Mormon there is very little chance he'll ever do anything positive on the issue of same sex marriage if he gets elected but after that glitter bombing I'd say it's fair to say he'll definately not do anything favorable on that issue and might even set that movement back a decade or so.

If however that same person made a civilized reasonable presentation he might at least convince a Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum to at less endorce civil unions and grant people in civil unions the same survivor rights and the like as a married couple. Which while not exactly what the same sex people want, would be alot better then what they got now.

Looking back over the last several decades I can't recall one in-your-face protest that accomplished anything positive.

 

[sso]

The fuck we do.

Our government has no interest in your health, safety or well being. They ignore over half the country that wants marijuana legal.
They ignore science in almost every debate.
They sell their votes to pacs and lobbyists.
They say one thing then expect us to smile when they vote the other way.
They want us to be divided and they are doing a good job at dividing us.


Our government is supposed to be of the people, not against the people.

I feel like our government is my enemy and that I need to take measures to protect my family against it.

I have absolutely no respect for pretty much any political office.
Anyone that spends their life living it the way they think the majority wants them to, is an asshole.

Passing a law is not going to create respect for the office. Respect is earned, not taken by passing another law.

actually its worse than that,

the people that want marijuana illegal, are actually a minority by far.

half the country want it legal and most of the rest, dont give a fuck, cause they dont smoke.

you have to be bit secluded and idiotic (somewhat insane in an ignorant manner) to be against marjuana..

specially today with all the information available to us.

 

[SeaMaiden]

How about at a local county board of supervisors meeting, during public comment? My husband and I experienced something that can only be called 'surreal' on Tuesday when one of the board members, clearly upset and offended that I/we called them out, went on to state that we're fortunate that they're allowing us to participate in these meetings. Either he or one of the others then went on to say that we need to pay attention to what's going on in other countries, I assume so that we would shut our mouths and feel more grateful that we're being allowed to participate in the King's Court.

Seriously. I have audio if you want to hear it. Supervisor Novelli, District 3, Amador County.

 

[MadBuddhaAbuser]

The rights in question are defined by the first amendment and reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Nowhere in there is it guarenteed you can protest wherever you want. The law does not prohibit you from protesting but rather from protesting within a certain distance of Politicians protected by Secret Service.

I don't see how it's irresponsible to make such a law because of a deranged psychopath when it was the open interpretation of the law that allowed the deranged psychopath to get so close as to be able to successfully shoot Ms. Giffords in the face. What rights do you feel you are losing if the law now says you got to exercise your rights x number of feet away from a politician with Secret Service Protection? Is there some right I'm unaware of that guarentees you can get up in the face of whoever you please? s.

Are you kidding me. "congress shall make no law respecting... The right of the people to peaceably assemble or redress...grievances" it's right there.

The law is not "you can't shoot politicians in the face" as far as I know, there are laws against that. This anti protest law does not prevent scitzOphrenics from buying high capacity magazines for comcealable weapons.

He was at a pro giffords rally, which would not be covered. This law also is nit limited to politicians, it extends to any national security deemed event, including the fucking super bowl.

And citing a smoke in from nearly forty years ago has nothing to do with todays climate. If you sat in a park with a joint today you will be arrested if even one cop sees you, no mater how peaceful you are.

 

[Protea]

WOW, I am amazed by what the u.s. americans will put up whit from "their" government.

 

[mrcreosote]

How about at a local county board of supervisors meeting, during public comment? My husband and I experienced something that can only be called 'surreal' on Tuesday when one of the board members, clearly upset and offended that I/we called them out, went on to state that we're fortunate that they're allowing us to participate in these meetings. Either he or one of the others then went on to say that we need to pay attention to what's going on in other countries, I assume so that we would shut our mouths and feel more grateful that we're being allowed to participate in the King's Court.

Seriously. I have audio if you want to hear it. Supervisor Novelli, District 3, Amador County.

-------------

Yup, local govt. can be just as crooked and fascist as the Feds.
We just had an attempt in our small city at a coup to pack the city council with 'buddies' so they could not renew a bunch of city job contracts and hand them out to friends that will support them.
Because of good management, we are actually running a small surplus and that seems to drive some people crazy as they try to spend it while we are still paying off a bond on a white elephant 'stimulus deal' to woo industry from 8 years ago when things were good.
The reasoning, as in Washington, is that if it doesn't work then you need to keep doing it and maybe you'll get lucky.
They were prevented by using 'an emergency vacancy' by the State law only because of complaints by citizens and had to hold the election which they lost by 2 votes.

Very few of these people actually care if they represent your interests or use sound fiscal policy because gambling with other peoples money is fun.

Welcome to " You're stupid. We're smart and we know what's best. The law is for you guys, not for us."

In this case pissed off people and voting DID make the difference
between reason and a crony packing govt. nightmare.

Keep up the pressure.

 

[SeaMaiden]

We're doing just that. My husband has spoken with the editor of our local publication (from which we somehow ended up being banned from VIEWING, a whole other story there... or is it?) who has requested a send a 'Letter to the Editor' which he said he'll publish.

During yesterday's Board of Supervisors meeting, I was shocked to hear some of the statements made by the supervisors. You see, my wife and I spoke to the board and were very critical of them. Apparently they took umbrage with our criticisms. Tough. A note to the board...You ran for public office and got yourself elected. Deal with it. When you're a public official, you are subject to scrutiny. I , along with my wife, scrutinized you. You as public officials have the audacity to tell me and other members of the public who were present that you resented what we said? Who the hell do you think you are? Perhaps you gentlemen have forgotten that you work for us! And if we feel that you are not doing your job, you will be scrutinized and held accountable!


But let's discuss the whole “you work for us” issue, shall we?


One of the supervisors, in response to our criticisms, went on to say


“If you think we're doing something to your rights and personal liberties, we're LETTING you come up here and speak....If you think we're violating your rights by LETTING you come to OUR board meetings, then I'd like to meet with them afterward because maybe they haven't been to many countries. They need to open their eyes and see what's going on in the world...We, as a board, are LETTING people come to these meeting.”


Another supervisor made mention that we should be thankful we don't live in another country where we wouldn't be afforded these rights. Oh really? Quite frankly, I don't care. I'm an American citizen. I was born here. I live here. It really doesn't matter how other countries conduct their affairs and it most certainly has no pertinence when it comes to the rule of law within my country. Besides, am I to suppose that the comment was made to make me aware that I should be thankful that the board is gracious enough to “grant an audience”?


Let's think about that, shall we? It's nice to know that you gentlemen are “letting” us speak. It's warms my heart to know that you “let” us attend “your” meetings. What's next? The next time we attend shall we be required to address you all as “my Lords”? After all, weren't the “lords” of the past owners of large tracts of land? Did they not have others under their employ? Did their families not go back generations? Perhaps you gentlemen have lost sight of who you work for. You work for ME....not the other way around. And furthermore you do not grant me the right to attend public meetings.

But don't take my word for it gentlemen; allow me to quote CAL. GOV. CODE § 54950 : California Code - Section 54950 of the Brown Act for you:


“In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.

The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.”

Please take note of the second paragraph in the code...The people in delegating YOUR authority do not give YOU the right to decide for us what we can and cannot know, and you most certainly do not “let” us attend. How dare you! You gentlemen have already violated the Act with your “special meeting” held on 12/27/2011. I was watching the BoS calendar before and after Christmas and your special meeting was not posted. Had it been posted, you can be assured that my wife and I would have been present.

The notion that we cannot physically make a peaceful, verbal and visual protest in front of, nearby or around a politician who is acting in a public capacity or arena is ridiculous. It's exactly what THEY signed on for. The Giffords case cannot be used as comparison, this guy wasn't exercising free speech, he was displaying insanity. The rest of us, the VAST majority who are law abiding and non-gun carrying members of society, should not pay in this manner for this crime.

This is just like making photography a crime in my eyes.

 

[gingerale]

The notion that we cannot physically make a peaceful, verbal and visual protest in front of, nearby or around a politician who is acting in a public capacity or arena is ridiculous.

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, will make violent revolution inevitable."

-- JFK

 

[Hash Zeppelin]

^I know and I am not willing to hurt anybody when it comes down to civil war. The civil war did not sound fun. My only choice would be to go live off grid.

 

[HempKat]

Are you kidding me. "congress shall make no law respecting... The right of the people to peaceably assemble or redress...grievances" it's right there.

The law is not "you can't shoot politicians in the face" as far as I know, there are laws against that. This anti protest law does not prevent scitzOphrenics from buying high capacity magazines for comcealable weapons.

He was at a pro giffords rally, which would not be covered. This law also is nit limited to politicians, it extends to any national security deemed event, including the fucking super bowl.

And citing a smoke in from nearly forty years ago has nothing to do with todays climate. If you sat in a park with a joint today you will be arrested if even one cop sees you, no mater how peaceful you are.

You totally miss my point, I don't like it any more then the rest of you but the reason it happened is because of people like the guy who shot Giffords or the Glitter bombers. As is usually the case the many pay for the actions of a few. Had incidents like those never happened it is doubtful such a law would have recieved sufficient support to be passed. There's no real political benefit to passing such a bill as it will be taken by most the same way most here are taking it as an erosion of our constitutional rights. If however you fear such attacks could convievably happen to you then it's not hard to figure out why the politician's enacting this law would take the political risk.

As a side point I'm also saying that no rights are being lost hear really you can still excersize your free speech in more places then you can't, you can still peacefully assemble and you can still petition for redress of grievences. None of these rights guarentee you can do these things just whenever and wherever you feel like. Plus in the case of Freedom of speech there are actually quite a few restrictions the supreme court would support.

It's also not worthy that since 2003 under the Bush administration and in limited form prior to that there existed "Free Speech Zones" where at events with Secret Service, especial Presidential events the secret service would identify potential protestors and move them to restricted zones usually well out of sight of the media. The court upheld that the government may regulate the time, place, and manner—but not content—of expression. A Free Speech Zone is more restrictive than an Exclusion zone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

So really this bill is the progression of restrictions resulting from the progression of stupidity people display as "Protest"

 

[Stoner4Life]

How about at a local county board of supervisors meeting, during public comment? My husband and I experienced something that can only be called 'surreal' on Tuesday when one of the board members, clearly upset and offended that I/we called them out, went on to state that we're fortunate that they're allowing us to participate in these meetings. Either he or one of the others then went on to say that we need to pay attention to what's going on in other countries, I assume so that we would shut our mouths and feel more grateful that we're being allowed to participate in the King's Court.

Seriously. I have audio if you want to hear it. Supervisor Novelli, District 3, Amador County.

===================


The notion that we cannot physically make a peaceful, verbal and visual protest in front of, nearby or around a politician who is acting in a public capacity or arena is ridiculous.

your comment or query @ the top is exactly where you're permitted and encouraged to duke it out with politicians not living up to the standards you expect, they have NO right to treat you as they have. I would threaten to sue and insist that the recorded minutes be turned over to your attorney, watch the pinheads squirm.

===================

protesters have never had the right to disrupt political rallies, it's only now been clarified for fools to understand and then made a felony to discourage the same fools from breaking the law.

please define 'peaceful, verbal & visual' in legalese so that this huge gray area is better defined, can't be done. someone is always willing to push the envelope. are we supposed to give them the microphone?

if a politician pays for their rally, nobody has the right to speak at it aside from him or her. if someone has paid for the use of a park, stadium or arena it is NOT just a public place, by proxy of rent, security expenses, insurance and all other associated costs it is the property of the politician in question.

what if you rented the nice gazebo in the park for your wedding, are you suggesting that because it's in a public place I would have the right to interrupt the ceremony? grab the microphone from the groom so I could give the toast? The Muslim in me just might hate the Catholic wedding I see happening, my 1st amendment rights to free speech & religious expression would allow me to piss on your parade?

no offense SeaMaiden but I suddenly doubt you'd be as progressive in these ideals.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I don't think that 'peaceably assemble' includes disrupting a rally, it does however mean that you will be allowed to have your own rallies. And 'to petition the Government for a redress of grievances' doesn't include those disruptions either. Your redress of grievances is being handled by you properly in your county board meetings, THAT is where you should NEVER be intimidated by those pricks, there you have the right to speak and be heard with any valid issues.

As I recall most protesters are dragged away yelling & screaming which is certainly exercising their right to free speech.

want to be heard? make sure nobody votes for them if possible, if already elected challenge them in the proper forum or your voice will NEVER be heard.......

 

[SpasticGramps]

IMO all these new laws are just the inevitability of the matter.

Economic situation continues to decline. Purchasing power greatly diminishes. People do more fucked up shit. Sweeping laws are made to control aforementioned fucked up shit.

Wash Rinse Repeat.

 

[mrcreosote]

My guess is that Homeland Security didn't buy those 450 million rounds of 40 cal. hollow points to pass out as party favors.

Not the brass part, anyway.

 

[supermanlives]

aaah no big deal most everything else i like to do is also a felony. put it on my tab

 

[BurrZurrKurr]

I'm tellin' you this much - soon the shit is gonna come down so hard you'll wish you wore a wide brimmed hat.

200+ yrs ago a bunch of ill treated nobodies got off their asses and tossed a bunch of effete toadies into the shit pile. They grabbed guns, and they shot some motherfuckers. THEN they wrote down all the reasons they did it, and made everybody know that shit would not be tolerated again.

"Just a little bit of history repeating" (Shirley Bassey and the Art of Noise)

It's a comin' - make sure you know what side yer on.

 

[Grobot2010]