Thursday, March 15, 2012

The Need to Pay Attention

This is what happens when we don't pay attention.

The President signed H.R. 347/S. 1794 into law on 3/8/12.  Public Law 112-98 is the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act.  It is also in direct opposition to the 1st Amendment of the Constitution.

To see the text of the legislation, go to "http://thomas.loc.gov" and search for H.R. 347.

The short version is that any protest of national leaders (being protected by the Secret Service) can result in a felony conviction.  If the President is moving from "a" to "b", and you are on the other side of the street, and you are holding a bullhorn and expressing negative feelings towards one of the President's many bad policies, you can be arrested and charged under this new law.

Someone needs to inform our local "representative," the Honorable Mr. Conaway, that his vote in favor of this anti-Constitutional piece of, er, legislation will be his undoing.  Let us not forget that Mr. Conaway is in a primary contest this year with Chris Younts.  Those "little L" libertarians out there that are "big r" Republicans can do your country a great service, and get rid of the Washington-based politician by voting for a small-government, true conservative alternative -- Chris Younts.

Contact Mr. Conaway and let him know we're tired of him selling us out for a committee position.

11 comments:

  1. Smoke, thank you for bringing this to our attention! I was not even aware of this! Good grief, the garbage they've been pulling is priceless!

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is just a codification of an odious policy that has been in practice since the Clinton Administration. That is, the cordoning off of protesters in an area usually three or four
    blocks away from the president’s appearance. In the diabolically twisted irony of George Orwell’s 1984, these areas would be called “free speech zones”.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The explanations of you accusations appear to be addle minded and confused. Your posted link offers no clear immediate proof of your proclamations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you are just looking to insult someone, try posting on the DailyKos or Huffington Post websites.

      Do the work. Research. Find the text. Get more than one source of information.

      The link to the bill is:
      "http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr347enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr347enr.pdf"

      From the Law:

      ‘‘(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;
      ‘‘(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.

      ‘‘(1) the term ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area—
      ‘‘(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;
      ‘‘(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.’’

      This public law is very short and should be easy to understand.

      Did you really say "addle minded"?

      Delete
    2. Hey Buffalo, where is your link to refute it? I'd like to see it.

      Delete
  4. A suggestion... let's get someone in the LP (me if no one else wants to) to monitor these things while in congressional committee so that a protest can be organized before the measure is put to a house/senate vote.
    The NDAA was coming down the pike at Christmas and Conaway should have been read the riot act. I'll try to get a lead on these issues and get the word out before these things become an accomplished fact.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like that idea! I would like you to expand. Please email me at babs1053@yahoo.com.

      Barb Pratt
      Chair, Tom Green County Libertarian Party

      Delete
  5. You people are idiots. Take the matter to court, where people who understand the First Amendment will tell this is no infringement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HI! And thank you, we try!

      But, I have three close lawyer friends who beg to differ with your "highly educated" opinion. But I will certainly note it.

      Have a great day!

      Barb Pratt
      Chair, Tom Green County Libertarian Party

      Delete
    2. @ anon

      "You people are idiots. Take the matter to court, where people who understand the First Amendment will tell this is no infringement."

      Take it to court you say? Like the Supreme Court?
      The same Supreme Court that just ruled 6 to 3 in favor of the Justice Dept in "Holder v. Humanitarian Law"?
      That court? The one that took such a big chunk out of the First Amendment that it can now be called the First One Half Amendment? Idioys indeed!

      Delete
  6. @ Anonymous, 5:10 Post:

    Very nicely done!!!

    Also, "the First One Half Amendment?" That is hilarious! I have never heard that one before, but I may have to steal that term!

    ReplyDelete