In the most recent article, I had suggested that we show up at the political events of the politicians and would-be candidates that would continue the same false divisive dialog and be civilly and peacefully disruptive. To basically say we want the dialogue to be about real issues affecting us all. However, I was amiss to not inform my readership that doing so you could risk criminal behavior. SAY WHAT? Yes it is true that the “new” law of the land that probably is the most egregious stomping of our constitutional rights is HR 347, which passed by the most significant majority in both houses of the 112th Congress and was signed by President Obama.
The three sole dissenters of HR 347 when the House vote tally which took place 02/28/12, and passed 338 for and 3 against were Rep. Paul Broun R-Georgia, Rep. Justin Amash R-Michigan and Rep. Keith Ellison D-Minnesota. Rep. Ron Paul was reported earlier as having voted against the bill, but that was based on the original vote conducted 02/28/11. Rep. Ron Paul ABSTAINED on the final vote.
Rep. Amash, a rising star in the Tea Party, explained his position on Facebook. “Current law makes it illegal to enter or remain in an area where certain government officials (more particularly, those with Secret Service protection) will be visiting temporarily if and only if the person knows it’s illegal to enter the restricted area but does so anyway. The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it’s illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it’s illegal. (It expands the law by changing “willfully and knowingly” to just “knowingly” with respect to the mental state required to be charged with a crime.”
I have included the entire language of the bill below. I did so for two reasons. First, I want to be sure to fully inform my readers about the real impacts of what we would consider a part of our assumed given right to peacefully protest and to also illustrate how MSM totally neglects to inform us of “Our Government and CONgress” and how, thanks to their actions, we are moving closer and closer to the reality of living in a fascists oligarchy.
If you were to tell any American, even ten years ago, that organizing a protest at a political rally could land you in jail for ten years, and one year at minimum, they would have said, “you’re nuts, this isn’t Russia.” No it isn’t Russia; it is a little worse actually. Read the bill very carefully, especially the areas I have bolded and highlighted. Then let that sink in a bit. To me calling this bill ‘Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011’ is the most hypocritical aspect of it. This is especially true when you consider that ‘Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds’ means ‘(1) the term ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area–.
HR 347 was introduced on Jan 19, 2011 (112th Congress, 2011–2013) and sponsored by Rep. Thomas Rooney [R-FL16]. It was signed into law by President Obama and became Pub.L. 112-98.
“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.
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
‘(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.’.”
I don’t know about you but this just isn’t what we are about. As a veteran this sure as hell isn’t what I fought for and personally I wonder what it is going to take to wake folks up! Really, is it going to take watching Grandma go to jail? This law should be repealed and we should be outraged that it exists in the first place. How could this law be constitutional when viewed in the context of our VERY First and most important constitutional right?
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.