HR 347, The so-called anti-occupy bill

[WTJ]

When I went to school, I was taught the meaning of the word. Now it is mostly programming changes by the practitioners. Back then, we thought Orwell was fiction, not prediction. I completely understand why someone thirty years younger would think the word meant something different. I mean absolutely NO disrespect by this statement. When I was twenty, Communism was the Evil Empire. Now it's widely accepted, like Visa card. On the other hand, the Evil Empire has been gone more than twenty years also.

If you think about, maybe the Cold War wasn't such a bad thing. At least the hippie protesters could interfere with the King's travels in those days. Oh wait, those same hippies are in DC now, aren't they?

 

[ignerntbend]

Now you're confusing me WTJ. Isn't the law in the OP designed specifically to hose those self same hippies down and mail them home? Isn't that a good thing from your point of view? I mean if you're gonna talk about Orwell, didnt he see the race riots in the teens and the bonus riots in the thirties? Didn't you see all the stuff from Selma to Chicago in your youth? All that happened without any silly HR 347.

 

[HMFIC]

Hopefully this will turn some of his blind supporters away from him and help get him fired. Now we just need a commitment from the next Congress and President to get rid of it.

I'll be calling my worthless politicians on Monday to voice my opinion.

In certain corners of the Internet, concern has been gathering about another so-called “Anti-Occupy” bill.

Last week, H.R. 347, otherwise known as the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act, passed the House 399-3, and on Thursday it was signed into law by President Obama. In response, bloggers from the libertarian Daily Paul to the leftist Daily Kos accused the federal government of gutting the First Amendment.

Did something important happen while the rest of us were rolling our eyes at Rush Limbaugh?

According to the ACLU, there is indeed something disturbing about H.R. 347-but it had already been part of federal law long before last week.

The new bill modifies a 1971 law that restricted entering or blocking public areas cordoned off by the Secret Service while a protected individual is passing through, or during major public events like the Super Bowl or party nominating conventions. Violators can face up to a year in jail; if they’re carrying a dangerous weapon, it’s ten.

Of course, it’s probably a good thing that the police can arrest strangers with guns who try to get a little too close to the president. But more recently, this law has been used to shunt protestors at major political events into “free speech zones,” isolated from the crowds-and cameras-that might give their constitutionally-protected demonstrations some heft. Another issue is that the Department of Homeland Security has fairly wide latitude in what areas it can declare off-limits.

This has major implications for anyone planning protests at the NATO or G8 conferences later this spring, including Occupy. But that would have been the case whether or not H.R. 347 had passed.

What, then, has changed? First, certain parts of the District of Columbia, like the White House lawn, were added to the list of federally protected areas. (Previously, they had only been covered under DC trespassing statutes.) Second, and somewhat more ominously, it’s now easier for prosecutors to convict people arrested under the law. Before, violators had to “willfully and knowingly” enter a protected area, meaning that they knew the area was protected, and knew that it was illegal for them to be there. H.R. 347 deletes the word “willfully,” meaning that prosecutors no longer need to prove that someone knew what they were doing was illegal to convict them.

In other words, Congress removed a hurdle in enforcing the law without actually adding any new restrictions to the First Amendment. Then again, the restrictions that already exist are enough to concern anyone who believes the right to assembly is a crucial part of the democratic process.

 

[ignerntbend]

Put the lotion on your skin

 

[WTJ]

Now you're confusing me WTJ. Isn't the law in the OP designed specifically to hose those self same hippies down and mail them home? Isn't that a good thing from your point of view? I mean if you're gonna talk about Orwell, didnt he see the race riots in the teens and the bonus riots in the thirties? Didn't you see all the stuff from Selma to Chicago in your youth? All that happened without any silly HR 347.

Was state laws under Democratic leadership that did all that, except for the Bonus Marchers (That was MacArthur, Ike, And Patton). States can make their own stupid laws without DCs help. I also remember the hippies sticking flowers in the muzzles of the Old Guard's rifles. The same Commies that were doing that are now in DC as mostly Democrats trying to make what they did to usurp power illegal. BTW, DC is under Federal Magisterial Authority. Notice a trend here?

Maybe that's why you are confused.

 

[fustigate]

The people voted for change, so there you go.

 

[WTJ]

The people voted for change, so there you go.

Politicians ain't people.

 

[Hobbes]

The vote in the House was 399 to 3 with 30 non voting.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll149.xml

Very interesting.

 

[ignerntbend]

Was state laws under Democratic leadership that did all that, except for the Bonus Marchers (That was MacArthur, Ike, And Patton). States can make their own stupid laws without DCs help. I also remember the hippies sticking flowers in the muzzles of the Old Guard's rifles. The same Commies that were doing that are now in DC as mostly Democrats trying to make what they did to usurp power illegal. BTW, DC is under Federal Magisterial Authority. Notice a trend here?

Maybe that's why you are confused.

I'm not sure that MacArthur, Ike or Patton had any administrative authority in 1932. But I'll take your word for it.

 

[WTJ]

I'm not sure that MacArthur, Ike or Patton had any administrative authority in 1932. But I'll take your word for it.

They were the enforcers who carried out the order from Hoover. MacArthur was also the guy who violated an order from Hoover to cease and desist, and caused the majority of the damage. Guess he just assumed the authority. Looks like DC forgot all about that little piece of history, so it can happen again.