They went into Vandenberg, Lawrence Livermoore, and also a Minuteman missle site.
Bah.
Just break up their protests if they get to be an issue, i.e. they block traffic or disrupt the said businesses. Logical enough.
They just want people to be scared into liking this war…
Honey, that’s a clarification, not a cite. Who’s “they”? Can you link to a news article or something?
[copy of my previous post]
Well here, I think, is an idea that will eventually get its’ legs once the following is done…
-
Codify an ordinance based upon state law that states something like…
" Any person interfering with the normal and just activities of another person by means of protest shall be ticketed, for (enter state law/local ordinance here) and fined by this municipality a fee of no less than (enter arbitrary number here) and no more than (ditto). -
Once this is done, then the failure to pay will act as a revocation of rights in the issuance of a civil bench arrest warrant, enforceable by police departments.
-
We’ll create then, an entire sub-class of low-level criminal in protesters who choose to block streets, and throw paint on people, and interrupt commerce beneficial to the greater good.
IMO, I think there ought to be a flat fine for disruptive protestors of any stripe. Speak your mind, wave signs, sing, write letters, whatever, but your right to protest ends, where my right to pursue happiness begins. As a protestor, you’re guaranteed free speech, and I am guaranteed the right to enjoy a nice walk down the street without being involved in a gathering mob.
Well, after we dispose of all the fascist/Nazi rhetoric on this, let’s try to examine what exactly is wrong with this proposal:
- Defines destroying property or interfering with people’s ability to travel as “terrorism.”
Well, here’s a definition of “terrorism”:
terﾷrorﾷism n. The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
Seems like the proscribed actions in fact fall right into that definition. So this ain’t just Nazi/Republican hyperbole…
- Allows for prison terms of up to 25 years for these actions.
Under standard Oregon sentencing guidelines (which one can read about here: http://www.ocjc.state.or.us/SG.htm) depending on the type and circumstances of the property felony, you can get up to 30 years.
So this proposal falls right in line with what the law already is.
But of course, this is nothing but Republican fascism, because if you oppose this war, you ought to be able to shut down the freeway and trash a couple of big corporate stores, because you’ve got a constitutional right to do that!
BTW, this has no chance of passing, and Lars Larson – the chief proponent of this bill – is a local radio host who likes to stir up “controversy” like this for ratings…
So violence isn’t a crucial part of the definition of terrorism? What’s so terrorizing about standing in the street?
BUZZ! Imposes a MINIMUM of 25 years.
This is a significant departure from the status quo.
They’re gonna have to nuke Eugene.
Can we keep these terrorist legislators safely contained in Oregon? I’d hate for their idiocy to spread up here to Washington.
Maybe a pre-emptive strike on Oregon is in order…
While we are at it, we may as well throw out the fair trials for these folks and just have a private “tribunal” decide whether they should be imprisoned . . .
As I recall reading, 4 of the 6 members of the Senate Judiciary Committee in Oregon oppose the bill, suggesting that it won’t pass. This sort of bill is similar to ones that the left and right use in my home state all the time, in which the proponents are more interested in expressing views on a subject than in getting legislation passed.
Nuns Convicted for Protesting Weapons of Mass Destruction
historical background:
Transfiguration Plowshares
related:
Nuns Didn’t Threaten Nation
Additional information, a piece which provides a lot from the perspective of the nuns:
Nuns Holding Up O.K.
Boy, do you look silly now. 'Tis not nice to be condesending on a topic that is fairly common knowledge