Just when you think the government can't possibly violate the First Amendment anymore than they already have, they up and surprise you.
Last week the House of Representatives approved a bill that outlaws protests where some government officials are nearby. Oh, and by the way this applies whether you know the officials are there or not!
They voted 388-3 in favor of HR347. The bill is being referred to as the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act or as we'll refer to it as it should be called, “The Treasonous Trampling of the First Amendment Rights of American Citizens Under the Constitution Act” (TTFARACCA).
Now hold onto your hats here folks because this bill does not just apply to protests where you are in Washington, DC on a tourist escapade or some such vacation where you wish to engage in peaceful protest as your God-given inalienable right. No, no my friends, this bill is written in such a way that is gives power to the government to bring charges against any American engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.
Currently, trespassers of the White House can be arrested and prosecuted under a local ordinance and obviously just as with any property such laws can and should be in place. However, to restrict peaceful protests simply because a government official might be within earshot of it is ridiculous. What is the point of protesting if the people you are protesting against don't hear it?
The finalized bill is short and to the point. Sure, you won't see the words “peaceful protest” used and this is intentional, but if you read the one page bill you will see how it speaks of:
“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”
or like this one:
“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;”
Obviously, I can agree with number four concerning physical violence, but honestly, does that need to be in this bill? Aren't there probably say, another 10,000 laws these people have made that would deal with that? Furthermore, is it necessary for a federal law to be made for that? Doesn't the local municipalities have laws that deal with violence?
Just remember, that if you enter a building or room you are not supposed to or are protesting you could be arrested now and charged with a Federal crime. That's right, and lest you think me a bit too sensitive to this issue, just remember it was a few weeks ago that a protester silently holding a cardboard sign on the steps of the Supreme Court Building was arrested because he would not move and was told he was doing just what the bill lists.
February 16th saw numerous Christians arrested for a pro-life demonstration in front of the White House!
It is notable in the current campaign that hours after the bill passed, former Senator Rick Santorum received Secret Service protection. Former governor Mitt Romney has already been receiving such and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich also sought out Secret Service protection.
Apparently, Texas Congressman Ron Paul feels at home among the protesters, since he is one himself.
Oh and a word of advice:
If you don't agree with the bill, don't take it to the White House or the Capital building as you might find yourself thrown in some DC jail for the weekend and charged with a Federal offense. Welcome to the United States of Amerika.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.