The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-24-2013, 03:06 AM   #1
Meck77
.
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,752
Default Be careful where you protest...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeanin...b_1328205.html

Didn't realize they snuck this one in. You could get 10 years and a felony for protesting. wow

More on HR 347

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/restricted.asp

Botton line is if Obama is around, secret service is around, and you better not protest him.

Last edited by Meck77; 02-24-2013 at 03:29 AM..
Meck77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 02-24-2013, 06:33 AM   #2
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,089

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Sorry. Can't read that commie **** on the Huff Post.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 07:51 AM   #3
Meck77
.
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,752
Default

Ok here is the communist bill itself.



http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr347/text

H.R.347


One Hundred Twelfth Congress


of the


United States of America


AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the third day of January, two thousand and twelve

An Act

To correct and simplify the drafting of section 1752 (relating to restricted buildings or grounds) of title 18, United States Code.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

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:

-‘Sec. 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--

‘(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.’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.

Last edited by Meck77; 02-24-2013 at 07:59 AM..
Meck77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 08:53 AM   #4
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,089

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

So, the Praetorian Guard affords the emperor an aureola of serenity and peace? What could be wrong with that?
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 09:02 AM   #5
baja
Happy camper
 
baja's Avatar
 
Sweet

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the present moment
Posts: 60,022

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ware
Default

I told you years ago Americans were slowly loosing their freedoms. You told me I was a coward & a traitor. I am glad you are beginning to differentiate between Americans and the federal government that has been hijacked by globalists who do not care about the precious freedoms of the great country of the USA. More and more people are waking up to what is happening to America just as you are. Maybe it is not too late.
baja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 10:42 AM   #6
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,003

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meck77 View Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeanin...b_1328205.html

Didn't realize they snuck this one in. You could get 10 years and a felony for protesting. wow

More on HR 347

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/restricted.asp

Botton line is if Obama is around, secret service is around, and you better not protest him.
Didn't realize they snuck it in 40 years ago? This is a small tweak, essentially closing the "ignorance is not an excuse" loophole. It also passed Congress with only 3 dissenters. Love how it's framed as something huge move by Obama.

Did you even read your own links?

For the record, I don't like the law, but to pretend/imply its either a.) new or b.) Obama's doing is just plain dishonest.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 10:53 AM   #7
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
Didn't realize they snuck it in 40 years ago? This is a small tweak, essentially closing the "ignorance is not an excuse" loophole. It also passed Congress with only 3 dissenters. Love how it's framed as something huge move by Obama.

Did you even read your own links?

For the record, I don't like the law, but to pretend/imply its either a.) new or b.) Obama's doing is just plain dishonest.
Agreed.

There sure has been a rash of "gotcha" articles posted by right wingers that they themselves neglected to read lately.

What's up with that?
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 10:56 AM   #8
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,003

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Bipartisan support, and bipartisan dissent.

With the libertarian head (Paul), abstaining. Really Paul?
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 10:56 AM   #9
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,994
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
So, the Praetorian Guard affords the emperor an aureola of serenity and peace? What could be wrong with that?
Heh heh heh. You said "aureola". Heh heh heh.
W*GS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 06:23 PM   #10
Meck77
.
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,752
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
Didn't realize they snuck it in 40 years ago? This is a small tweak, essentially closing the "ignorance is not an excuse" loophole. It also passed Congress with only 3 dissenters. Love how it's framed as something huge move by Obama.

Did you even read your own links?

For the record, I don't like the law, but to pretend/imply its either a.) new or b.) Obama's doing is just plain dishonest.
You didn't read it.

They added a clause the says you can't protest anywhere there is secret service present. The president always has secret service. That is a huge difference.


You might not care now but wait until another Bush takes office.

Ron Paul has it right.

Ever heard of the First Amendment? Perhaps you should read it.

First Amendment – Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly; right to 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.

Last edited by Meck77; 02-24-2013 at 06:30 PM..
Meck77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 06:54 PM   #11
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,003

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meck77 View Post
You didn't read it.

They added a clause the says you can't protest anywhere there is secret service present. The president always has secret service. That is a huge difference.
From your own link:

" In February 2012, the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act was passed in the Senate by unanimous consent and (as HR 347) approved by the House of Representatives by a lopsided vote of 399-3; the bill was then signed into law by President Obama. This bill was an updating of an existing law, originally enacted in 1971, that restricted access to areas around the president, vice president, or any others under the protection of the Secret Service.

HR 347 did not technically make it "illegal to protest anywhere the Secret Service is present," as a law to that effect had already been in place for over forty years. The primary differences between the previously existing law and the updated version enacted by HR 347 are:"

[EDIT]
From the original Law:

Text of the original law: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1752

Quote:
(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
Which is the ****ing exact text of the updated law with respect to defining "where" its unlawful to protest.

Moron.

Quote:
You might not care now but wait until another Bush takes office.

Ron Paul has it right.

Ever heard of the First Amendment? Perhaps you should read it.

First Amendment – Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly; right to 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.
I already said I didn't agree with the law. Go **** your idjit self.

Last edited by Fedaykin; 02-24-2013 at 07:14 PM..
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2013, 08:25 PM   #12
orinjkrush
...
 
orinjkrush's Avatar
 
Hey, no hurling on the shell, dude,

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: FrontRangeAbove8500ft
Posts: 5,195

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Ben Garland
Default

the constitution is dead. tot. merde.
the intelligentsia killed it.

and the sheeple grazed. seig heil.
orinjkrush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2013, 03:29 PM   #13
mhgaffney
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,238
Default

A "national security interest event" could be anything big brother says it is.

The solution is mass protest. They can't put all of us in jail.
mhgaffney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 08:54 PM   #14
Meck77
.
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 16,752
Default

White House threatened Bob Woodward for speaking out. Things are getting interesting....

http://www.businessinsider.com/bob-w...olitics-2013-2
Meck77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2013, 04:25 AM   #15
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 9,732

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meck77 View Post
White House threatened Bob Woodward for speaking out. Things are getting interesting....

http://www.businessinsider.com/bob-w...olitics-2013-2
It never ceases. The Obama dullards will back and defend him no matter how completely stupid they sound. It wasn't long ago they peed their panties on a daily basis anything that even hinted at a violation of rights for people, but now are completely silent about it now despite how blatant Obama is trampling said rights. Threaten reporters. Rig elections so people can vote numerous times. Drones going around killing whoever happens to be in the way. For them, basic and human rights are only important depending on who is doing the violating.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2013, 04:40 AM   #16
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,003

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by barryr View Post
It never ceases. The Obama dullards will back and defend him no matter how completely stupid they sound. It wasn't long ago they peed their panties on a daily basis anything that even hinted at a violation of rights for people, but now are completely silent about it now despite how blatant Obama is trampling said rights. Threaten reporters. Rig elections so people can vote numerous times. Drones going around killing whoever happens to be in the way. For them, basic and human rights are only important depending on who is doing the violating.


* Meck77 posts idiotic thread and is shown to be completely wrong.
* Meck77 then posts unrelated article in same thread.
* barryr shows up and spluges all over the thread with the usual misplaced, bigoted bluster.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2013, 05:32 AM   #17
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 
All hail Hercules!

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 55,089

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Any way you want to look at it, Obama is a lousy president. Of course, Boehner is the worst Speaker I've ever seen. Reid is the worst Senate majority leader, McConnell the worst minority leader, etc. etc. etc. We should bulldoze the whole damn place, turn it into a park, move the capital elsewhere, form a new government, and write a new constitution. This one is busted.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2013, 11:21 AM   #18
Crushaholic
Armchair Poster
 
Crushaholic's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Topeka, KS
Posts: 22,596

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Isaiah Burse
Default

Can we send the Phelps cult to the next Secret Service-attended event? This could be gold...
Crushaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2013, 05:39 PM   #19
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 9,732

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post


* Meck77 posts idiotic thread and is shown to be completely wrong.
* Meck77 then posts unrelated article in same thread.
* barryr shows up and spluges all over the thread with the usual misplaced, bigoted bluster.
Says the idiot who is always in hurry up mode to suck off Obama. You will never be anything but a democrat shrill who looks lost from reality. Liberals are the biggest bigots, so look in the mirror.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:29 AM.


Denver Broncos