Home

Was the vote tally different than the link I posted?

Free people?

I am no expert or fan of the ACLU nor in favor of freedoms lost, this just doesn't quite seem to be as bad as is being portrayed
Perhaps Iam wrong.

Would be nice to get some expert opinions on this.



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

I believe that is why a few abstained from the vote. While they're votes still counted as yes votes, they kinda voted "whatever".

But the sneaky azz senate makes my skin crawl.

Secret Service Agents where needed = SS Officers = Jackboots, No?

I suspect that one too will have to run through the courts for an eventual rejection. Sad that a mega team of DC lawyers can't draft a bill that fits within our constitution.

Another gut shot to the 1st Amendment.

Amendment I
Freedom of Speech, Press, Religion and Petition

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.

The Right to Peaceably Assemble
Think it's no BIG DEAL?

There was once a time when you could be arrested for gathering on a public street...

Once thought of as the lesser of the Five Fundamental Freedoms, Assembly has really gotten some major respect from the Supreme Court...

Originally, the right to assemble was considered less important than the right to petition.

Did you know that getting together to chill with friends at the mall is protected by the First Amendment?

Getting together to share ideas, coming together to share common beliefs and act upon those beliefs has given the right to assemble major street credit.

Fighting for the right to vote, civil rights and protesting war is protected by the right to assemble. Even going to church or helping with the American Red Cross is protected.
And know this...

Picketing is protected when it is for a lawful purpose and is conducted in an orderly manner and publicizes some type of grievance. Many groups and organizations use assembly as a way to get the word out.
The right of every single United States citizen to peacefully...

Parade and Gather
Demonstrate support or opposition of public policy
Express one's views

...is guaranteed by the freedom of speech and the right to peaceably assemble.

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.��.

Thanks for the link!

Welcome to the campfire.

Many of us can't stand Obama here. You will find some idiotic supporters, bothers me they have no common sense, but I digress.

Shot and won a rifle match or two over at Ft Polk years ago. Bet its getting humid and warm about this time of the year again.
Thank you for your service!!

Jeff

One would think so, but it takes a long time between the passage of a law and that law finding its way to the SCOTUS. The O'bama administration is taking advantage of that time lag.

Steve.

Thanks Pat...par usual,we have a sizeable portion of folks who choose not to look before they leap.

I'm not sure, but judging by its overwhelming support from both parties, are we sure this isn't in response to the protesting at soldiers funerals? Finally a way to get Fred Phelps to STFU? Aren't funerals of soldiers considered government functions?

Never mind, I just read the text of the law posted above.

Ok i got all that but when you look at how the government uses so many laws to hide what they are doing they can do the same with this.. For example during this run for the white house all but Ron Paul have secret service protection. So it would make it illegal to protest anywhere they are campaigning. So now would that would make it illegal for lets say Rick Santorum supporters or Ron Paul supporters to go and have a sign wave at a Rommney event. And you may say well if they are not being disruptive then there is no problem, but here is the real question WHO decides when you are being disruptive or aggressive. In most cases the police are always the first to be aggressive. So if i was to ask a question to Santorum about one of his views and that question just happen to strike a nerve or is a question that he doesnt want to answer could they just arrest me and then later say that i was trying to cause a disturbance or being aggressive in my manner of questioning. It leaves the door wide open to stop all free speech and freedom of assembly because it allows the Officials the capacity to decide when we the people can be arrested for saying something they dont like or arrest us for assembling and protesting when they dont want us to. All they have to do is sent secret service or if they are already there just say we are being disruptive and slap on the cuffs.


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.��.