The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > Elections

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-24-2012, 08:26 AM
Mahaloth Mahaloth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 地球
Posts: 21,908
How big a deal is HR347(the anti-protest law)

A friend of mine, who is uber-conservative, posted a youtube video about this new bill that Obama signed that bans/changes some protest laws. My friend's post ended with "1984 is here!!!", so you get the kind of...uh, person he is.

Here is the video.

Does anyone have a more rational, well-rounded view on this? Anyone know a good place to find an article or video that is more calm/intelligent?

I hope this is the right forum. I don't post in Debates/Elections ever and I thought this being politics meant it goes here.
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 04-24-2012, 09:26 AM
Ca3799 Ca3799 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
I looked this up about a month or two ago following some Facebook posting by both Occupy supporters who thought the bill was directed at them and by some right wingers/Tea Party types who thought it was directed at them. Since that time, I cannot now locate the link I was reviewing as all the new Google hits take me to all kinds of postings about the bill but not the legislative history link I viewed at the time.

That link was a history of the bill. It provided the old text and the new and the changes it has undergone over the years. The old bill was 1752 and the new one 347.

I noted the bill had been around for quite some time and modified occasionally. One modification came shortly after Reagan was shot and I presumed the bill was updated in response to that incident. The current reiteration of this bill seemed to be just another update that specifically added a restriction to 'special events' and/or the Blair House/Veep's residence, and/or anybody under Secret Service protection, if I recall correctly.

My reading of the issue at the time was that it was just an update of a boring legal code and I kinda felt like it could have been an effort to beef up security for the President, which I unfortunately think is both prudent and necessary (looking at you, Ted Nuget).

My feeling was that this was another case of folks having an outsized response to a benign issue.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-24-2012, 10:19 AM
Boyo Jim Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 30,614
Here's the ACLU's take on it -- I'm going to need to give some thought before I have an opinion on it.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-24-2012, 02:21 PM
Ca3799 Ca3799 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Snopes link: http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/restricted.asp
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-24-2012, 03:31 PM
Cliffy Cliffy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Due to the Internet, political theatre has staged a comeback in recent years, and I assume this is a response to that. As the ACLU suggests, the real issue is that, as always, lessening the required elements of a crime give more discretion to law enforcement. And that typically yields privileging of establishment viewpoints and disproportionate enforcement as to racial minorities.

The government's interest is always in minimalizing protest, regardless of party, and one of the bothersome aspects of this kind of thing is that it's a ratchet -- it always gets more restrictive, never less. But any conservatives who think this is directed against them need a hubris check -- it's always, always, always the fringe left (and to be fair, probably some abortion nutjobs too) who are the targets of this kind of thing.

--Cliffy
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-24-2012, 03:41 PM
Boyo Jim Boyo Jim is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 30,614
Also interesting that this is "Obama's Law" since he signed it -- but it passed by a veto-proof majority in both houses.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-25-2012, 12:46 PM
Mahaloth Mahaloth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: 地球
Posts: 21,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ca3799 View Post
Thanks, I searched there first but obviously missed it.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.