New law would jail protestors for 25 years

busybody..

Literotica Guru
Joined
Jul 28, 2002
Posts
149,503
I still say....SHOOT EM ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oregon Law Would Jail War Protesters as Terrorists


Reuters
Wednesday, April 2, 2003; 9:02 PM



By Lee Douglas

PORTLAND, Oregon (Reuters) - An Oregon anti-terrorism bill would jail street-blocking protesters for at least 25 years in a thinly veiled effort to discourage anti-war demonstrations, critics say.

The bill has met strong opposition but lawmakers still expect a debate on the definition of terrorism and the value of free speech before a vote by the state senate judiciary committee, whose Chairman, Republican Senator John Minnis, wrote the proposed legislation.

Dubbed Senate Bill 742, it identifies a terrorist as a person who "plans or participates in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.

The bill's few public supporters say police need stronger laws to break up protests that have created havoc in cities like Portland, where thousands of people have marched and demonstrated against war in Iraq since last fall.

"We need some additional tools to control protests that shut down the city," said Lars Larson, a conservative radio talk show host who has aggressively stumped for the bill.

Larson said protesters should be protected by free speech laws, but not given free reign to hold up ambulances or frighten people out of their daily routines, adding that police and the court system could be trusted to see the difference.

"Right now a group of people can get together and go downtown and block a freeway," Larson said. "You need a tool to deal with that."

The bill contains automatic sentences of 25 years to life for the crime of terrorism.

Critics of the bill say its language is so vague it erodes basic freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism under an extremely broad definition.

"Under the original version (terrorism) meant essentially a food fight," said Andrea Meyer of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which opposes the bill.

Police unions and minority groups also oppose the bill for fear it could have a chilling effect on relations between police and poor people, minorities, children and "vulnerable" populations.

Legislators say the bill stands little chance of passage.

"I just don't think this bill is ever going to get out of committee," said Democratic Senator Vicki Walker, one of four members on the six-person panel who have said they oppose the legislation.
 
banging my head against a brick wall.....

busy, darlin, hunny bunny, sweetie pie....if you start taking away constitutionaly gauranteed rights that seem extreme and anti patriotic, then eventually you will not have the right to spread your toxic hate for it will be taken away also.

Please go write that on the chalkboard 100 times as your punishment for another installment of "Busy, the queen of stupidity."
 
I hope the politicians who suggested this bill are voted out of office in the next election.
 
That's all we need, more fucking laws! :rolleyes:

There's already plenty of laws on the books to cover everything you can think of doing anyway.

Besides, 25 years???!!!
 
I'd just hit them with my car. Nothing gives them the right to block the road without a permit. Fucking hippies need to get jobs.
 
I have no problem with the demonstrators,

Until they interfere with my ability to get to work,or anywhere else I may want to go.

The law seems a tad extreme.
 
.......Oh say does that star spangled banner yet wave, o'er the land you should flee, it's the home of the knaves.
 
Lancecastor said:
.......Oh say does that star spangled banner yet wave, o'er the land you should flee, it's the home of the knaves.

Hush.

Blame Canada!
 
busybody said:
Dubbed Senate Bill 742, it identifies a terrorist as a person who "plans or participates in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly

Looks like the Oregon Legislature is trying to put themselves into jail.
 
At first, I focused on the free assembly statement. But, by some definitions, all of the activities in the passage I quoted above are engaged in by state legeslative bodies...
 
25 years is extreme armed robbers and child molesters go to jail for shorter sentences than that. I do think however it should be against the law to block traffic or any other form of protest in an effort to shut down cities and places of business. When protesting takes away the rights of others then it has crossed the line.
 
Lancecastor said:
.......Oh say does that star spangled banner yet wave, o'er the land you should flee, it's the home of the knaves.

LanceWAVE strikes again!
 
Just Watch Me

8ball said:
Hush.

Blame Canada!

We have a cool Federal Law in Canada called The War Measures Act you guys might like to send along to Tom Ridge.

We last used it here in 1971 I think it was, after the FLQ (the Federation de la Liberation de Quebec, a separatist group) kidnapped British Trade Commissioner James Cross and Quebec Govt Minister Pierre Laporte...Cross was shot and found in the trunk of a Plymouth as I recall.

The War Measures Act can be triggered by Cabinet in the event of an "apprehended insurrection"...basically meaning if the government thinks there is a threat to Peace, Order & Good Government (POGG)....ALL civil rights are suspended and the Army is called out.

Quebec was placed under martial law with tanks and soldiers on streetcorners and thousands of suspected FLQ sympathizers were detained without charges.

When our newly elected Prime Minister at the time, Pierre Trudeau, threatened using the obscure WMA, a reporter said "You wouldn't do that, would you?!" ....his famously cheeky reply was "Just watch me."

WarMeasuresAct.jpg
 
Worm said:
25 years is extreme armed robbers and child molesters go to jail for shorter sentences than that. I do think however it should be against the law to block traffic or any other form of protest in an effort to shut down cities and places of business. When protesting takes away the rights of others then it has crossed the line.

It's already against the law. Have you noticed the people being carried off to jail? The issue is one of appropriate punishment and while it could be argued that current laws are too lenient, this punishment would be far too harsh.

Also, labeling someone who's protesting as a terrorist is absurd. Sounds like something Saddam would do. Next thing you know, Lancie would be leading the Canadians down to liberate us.
 
Lancecastor said:
.......Oh say does that star spangled banner yet wave, o'er the land you should flee, it's the home of the knaves.

Home of the brave (over 4,000 missiles onto Bagdhad in the Imperialist War of Conquest)
Land of the Free (until the Patriot and Home Defense Acts)
Why can't I be the way you want me to be?

If this legislation was implemented in Oz there would be more people in jail than out on the streets.

yesterday there was a big anti-war demonstration in Sydney, without a permit. Our state has about 7,000 people incarcerated, mainly for drug related offences. A new prison "beach resort for aboriginal offenders" is being built near Kempaey for about $A150 million.

I guess we will have to build more prisons in Sydney to handle all these thousands of school kids taking democracy seriously and showing the government that they do not like the present foreign policy. :)

but then, aussie politicians realise that such demonstrations come with democracy, and unlike some American states, democracy is a participation sport. :)
 
busybody said:
I still say....SHOOT EM ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oregon Law Would Jail War Protesters as Terrorists


Reuters
Wednesday, April 2, 2003; 9:02 PM



By Lee Douglas

PORTLAND, Oregon (Reuters) - An Oregon anti-terrorism bill would jail street-blocking protesters for at least 25 years in a thinly veiled effort to discourage anti-war demonstrations, critics say.

The bill has met strong opposition but lawmakers still expect a debate on the definition of terrorism and the value of free speech before a vote by the state senate judiciary committee, whose Chairman, Republican Senator John Minnis, wrote the proposed legislation.

Dubbed Senate Bill 742, it identifies a terrorist as a person who "plans or participates in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.

The bill's few public supporters say police need stronger laws to break up protests that have created havoc in cities like Portland, where thousands of people have marched and demonstrated against war in Iraq since last fall.

"We need some additional tools to control protests that shut down the city," said Lars Larson, a conservative radio talk show host who has aggressively stumped for the bill.

Larson said protesters should be protected by free speech laws, but not given free reign to hold up ambulances or frighten people out of their daily routines, adding that police and the court system could be trusted to see the difference.

"Right now a group of people can get together and go downtown and block a freeway," Larson said. "You need a tool to deal with that."

The bill contains automatic sentences of 25 years to life for the crime of terrorism.

Critics of the bill say its language is so vague it erodes basic freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism under an extremely broad definition.

"Under the original version (terrorism) meant essentially a food fight," said Andrea Meyer of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which opposes the bill.

Police unions and minority groups also oppose the bill for fear it could have a chilling effect on relations between police and poor people, minorities, children and "vulnerable" populations.

Legislators say the bill stands little chance of passage.

"I just don't think this bill is ever going to get out of committee," said Democratic Senator Vicki Walker, one of four members on the six-person panel who have said they oppose the legislation.
 
busybody said:
I still say....SHOOT EM ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oregon Law Would Jail War Protesters as Terrorists


Reuters
Wednesday, April 2, 2003; 9:02 PM



By Lee Douglas

PORTLAND, Oregon (Reuters) - An Oregon anti-terrorism bill would jail street-blocking protesters for at least 25 years in a thinly veiled effort to discourage anti-war demonstrations, critics say.

The bill has met strong opposition but lawmakers still expect a debate on the definition of terrorism and the value of free speech before a vote by the state senate judiciary committee, whose Chairman, Republican Senator John Minnis, wrote the proposed legislation.

Dubbed Senate Bill 742, it identifies a terrorist as a person who "plans or participates in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.

The bill's few public supporters say police need stronger laws to break up protests that have created havoc in cities like Portland, where thousands of people have marched and demonstrated against war in Iraq since last fall.

"We need some additional tools to control protests that shut down the city," said Lars Larson, a conservative radio talk show host who has aggressively stumped for the bill.

Larson said protesters should be protected by free speech laws, but not given free reign to hold up ambulances or frighten people out of their daily routines, adding that police and the court system could be trusted to see the difference.

"Right now a group of people can get together and go downtown and block a freeway," Larson said. "You need a tool to deal with that."

The bill contains automatic sentences of 25 years to life for the crime of terrorism.

Critics of the bill say its language is so vague it erodes basic freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism under an extremely broad definition.

"Under the original version (terrorism) meant essentially a food fight," said Andrea Meyer of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which opposes the bill.

Police unions and minority groups also oppose the bill for fear it could have a chilling effect on relations between police and poor people, minorities, children and "vulnerable" populations.

Legislators say the bill stands little chance of passage.

"I just don't think this bill is ever going to get out of committee," said Democratic Senator Vicki Walker, one of four members on the six-person panel who have said they oppose the legislation.

youd make a good jailhouse punk

serve ya right to have tim leary's ghost rammin your sorry ass...:eek:
 
Back
Top