• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

This Oregon Anti-Terrorism Law should please anyone who hates war protesters

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,501
1
81
An Oregon anti-terrorism bill would jail street-blocking protesters for at least 25 years in a thinly veiled effort to discourage anti-war

PORTLAND, Oregon (Reuters) - An Oregon anti-terrorism bill would jail street-blocking protesters for at least 25 years in a thinly veiled effort to discourage anti-war demonstrations, critics say.


The bill has met strong opposition but lawmakers still expect a debate on the definition of terrorism and the value of free speech before a vote by the state senate judiciary committee (news - web sites), whose Chairman, Republican Senator John Minnis, wrote the proposed legislation.


Dubbed Senate Bill 742, it identifies a terrorist as a person who "plans or participates in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.


The bill's few public supporters say police need stronger laws to break up protests that have created havoc in cities like Portland, where thousands of people have marched and demonstrated against war in Iraq (news - web sites) since last fall.


"We need some additional tools to control protests that shut down the city," said Lars Larson, a conservative radio talk show host who has aggressively stumped for the bill.


Larson said protesters should be protected by free speech laws, but not given free reign to hold up ambulances or frighten people out of their daily routines, adding that police and the court system could be trusted to see the difference.


"Right now a group of people can get together and go downtown and block a freeway," Larson said. "You need a tool to deal with that."


The bill contains automatic sentences of 25 years to life for the crime of terrorism.


Critics of the bill say its language is so vague it erodes basic freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism under an extremely broad definition.


"Under the original version (terrorism) meant essentially a food fight," said Andrea Meyer of the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) (ACLU), which opposes the bill.


Police unions and minority groups also oppose the bill for fear it could have a chilling effect on relations between police and poor people, minorities, children and "vulnerable" populations.


Legislators say the bill stands little chance of passage.


"I just don't think this bill is ever going to get out of committee," said Democratic Senator Vicki Walker, one of four members on the six-person panel who have said they oppose the legislation.






Email Story
Post/Read Msgs
Print Story

Ratings: Would you recommend this story?
Not at all 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 Highly






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next Story: Rumsfeld Complains Syria Still Helping Iraq (Reuters)

More Top Stories Stories
· Rumsfeld Asks Iraqi Military to Turn on Saddam (Reuters)
· Is Hussein Still Alive? Speculation Intensifies (The New York Times)
· Iraqi fighters sacrificing what could be civilians to probe U.S. Army position near school (USA TODAY)
· US forces poised outside Baghdad, Iraq remains defiant (AFP)
· A Hunt for `The Pilot' (U.S. News & World Report)



 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
1
0
"anti-terrorism bill" <<--that will not pass --- so could ya fix your title

Anyhow... there should be a law that stops these people from thinking it is their "right" to behave violently and kidnap people (ie. stopping traffic)
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Those protesters annoy me but they'll have to fix that bill if they ever want it to pass. Jailing someone for 25 years if they block the street is too much. A few months would be better. It's long enough to teach them a lesson not to block the streets.


 

flavio

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,824
0
76
It doesn't specify what is a peaceful assembly and what is disruptive. You could prosecute a school field trip under this ordinance. It's very vague and therefore very dangerous.

Want my freedoms? Here....I had way too much.
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
1
0
Our Mayor is a stupid b!tch

She told the police not to arrest any protesters because it might cause a riot.
Now she let the protesters TAKE OVER OUR CITY

They have burn barrels outside city hall so the protesters can sleep there
they have coffee brought to them in the mornings by the mayor
they come into city hall and use the bathrooms as showers

They threw caustic acid into the face of a policeman here and it almost burned through his protective face shield
they hit a policeman in the face with a baseball bat
they smashed 4 policemen into their cars with a 4' X 8' sign they were carrying
thy organized to block a few MAJOR highways in Portland
they burn flags and harass Troop Supporters
 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,983
0
0
The bill contains automatic sentences of 25 years to life for the crime of terrorism.


blocking the street is not terrorism, but it should be a crime. Personaly, my momma taught me not to play in the street.

there are no restrictions being placed on those who want to assemble and protest, they just can't

"plan or participate in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.

"or participate in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants"

theres the big problem with this bill. I could go and "participate" in an anti-war rally that has 10,000 people, if ONE of those has something like this planned I am somehow equally liable? How would I even know?
 

phokaz

Member
Mar 23, 2003
41
0
0
Originally posted by: dahunan
Our Mayor is a stupid b!tch

She told the police not to arrest any protesters because it might cause a riot.
Now she let the protesters TAKE OVER OUR CITY

They have burn barrels outside city hall so the protesters can sleep there
they have coffee brought to them in the mornings by the mayor
they come into city hall and use the bathrooms as showers

They threw caustic acid into the face of a policeman here and it almost burned through his protective face shield
they hit a policeman in the face with a baseball bat
they smashed 4 policemen into their cars with a 4' X 8' sign they were carrying
thy organized to block a few MAJOR highways in Portland
they burn flags and harass Troop Supporters
No, protesters have not taken over your city. Assault on policemen with bats and caustic acid for attempting keep order, burning flags and blocking highways? Those are rioters you got there.


 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
2
0
Originally posted by: phokaz
Originally posted by: dahunan
Our Mayor is a stupid b!tch

She told the police not to arrest any protesters because it might cause a riot.
Now she let the protesters TAKE OVER OUR CITY

They have burn barrels outside city hall so the protesters can sleep there
they have coffee brought to them in the mornings by the mayor
they come into city hall and use the bathrooms as showers

They threw caustic acid into the face of a policeman here and it almost burned through his protective face shield
they hit a policeman in the face with a baseball bat
they smashed 4 policemen into their cars with a 4' X 8' sign they were carrying
thy organized to block a few MAJOR highways in Portland
they burn flags and harass Troop Supporters
No, protesters have not taken over your city. Assault on policemen with bats and caustic acid for attempting keep order, burning flags and blocking highways? Those are rioters you got there.
Exactly.

Still...that 'law' is over the top.
 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,983
0
0
"plan or participate in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.

"or participate in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants"

theres the big problem with this bill. I could go and "participate" in an anti-war rally that has 10,000 people, if ONE of those has something like this planned I am somehow equally liable? How would I even know?

anyone else see the problem with the wording there?
 

ConclamoLudus

Senior member
Jan 16, 2003
572
0
0
That law is ridiculous, but I wouldn't disagree that something shouldn't be done to keep people from disrupting the city by blocking its streets. What if we had a terrorist attack or even just a major accident in one of these cities and poeple were dying while protestors were having firemen unchain them. If you want to protest, speak up, if you want to turn everyone away from your cause and insure that your views are seen as radical, violent, and hateful then go tie up the streets and punish the wrong people. Its like a toddler kicking and screaming to get what they want.
 

dahunan

Lifer
Jan 10, 2002
18,191
1
0
Originally posted by: phokaz
Originally posted by: dahunan
Our Mayor is a stupid b!tch

She told the police not to arrest any protesters because it might cause a riot.
Now she let the protesters TAKE OVER OUR CITY

They have burn barrels outside city hall so the protesters can sleep there
they have coffee brought to them in the mornings by the mayor
they come into city hall and use the bathrooms as showers

They threw caustic acid into the face of a policeman here and it almost burned through his protective face shield
they hit a policeman in the face with a baseball bat
they smashed 4 policemen into their cars with a 4' X 8' sign they were carrying
thy organized to block a few MAJOR highways in Portland
they burn flags and harass Troop Supporters
No, protesters have not taken over your city. Assault on policemen with bats and caustic acid for attempting keep order, burning flags and blocking highways? Those are rioters you got there.
That is understandable, but while they are rioting they are carrying their "no blood for oil" and their "regime change is needed here" signs.

What about all the protesters/rioters who blocked streets in Chicago and SanFran et al. ? Are they rioters because they blocked the streets and shouldn't rioters be arrested for their activites?

P.S.Not one arrest was made on the first night here in Portland ..the night the cops were beat up and had acid thrown at them and had a giant wooden sign thrown on top of them and tons of damage was caused to Private and public property
 

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
you could throw enter Labor Day parades in prison for two and a half decades with a law like that. :D
 

yowolabi

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
4,185
2
81
Originally posted by: Alistar7
The bill contains automatic sentences of 25 years to life for the crime of terrorism.


blocking the street is not terrorism, but it should be a crime. Personaly, my momma taught me not to play in the street.

there are no restrictions being placed on those who want to assemble and protest, they just can't

"plan or participate in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants, to disrupt" business, transportation, schools, government, or free assembly.

"or participate in an act that is intended, by at least one of its participants"

theres the big problem with this bill. I could go and "participate" in an anti-war rally that has 10,000 people, if ONE of those has something like this planned I am somehow equally liable? How would I even know?
You and I probably had similar thoughts when we read it. My biggest problem is also that if I simply show up at something where one of the people gets out of control, I might spend the next 25 years in jail. This bill seems intended to scare people away from any type of protest even if it is organized to be peaceful. It makes you responsible for the actions of every single person who also attends the protest, and history and chances tell you that whenever there is a group of people, some of them will be idiots.

This law won't be passed. If it did, I suspect that the first time someone was prosecuted as a terrorist who didn't take part in the disruptive activities, but was simply there, the law would be struck down.
 

yowolabi

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
4,185
2
81
Originally posted by: TheSnowman
you could throw enter Labor Day parades in prison for two and a half decades with a law like that. :D
That's true. As soon as one person destroys something, everyone in the parade is a terrorist.
 

Conky

Lifer
May 9, 2001
10,709
0
0
People holding up traffic and assaulting others who disagree with them are terrorists and need to do time.

Smoke that, hippy!

:)
 

Bleep

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
3,972
0
0
Look to the past for a guide to the future. This is the same kind of law that were in effect in some of our southern cities some years ago to stop civil rights protestors. Over the years these kind of laws have all been either repealed or overturned by the Supreme Court.

Arrest those that do the crime, look at some of the riots by college students over nothing more than a football or basketball game, total distruction of a lot of property, I did not see any outcry on any BBS to pass special laws to prevent this.

Bleep
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY