New bill in GA to make picketing/protesting illegal.

[.blank cd]

I mean, really? There are actually children in the GA legislature. Sad.


http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/812313/new_georgia_bill_includes_$10,000_fine,_felony_for _%22conspiracy%22_for_picketing,_protest/#paragraph3

[WhiteAccord]

Our rights slowly being removed.

[Vteckidd]

i absolutely agree with it. you can thank OCCUPY and the Labor Unions for causing this kind of reaction.

Far too long have people hid under the blanket of PROTESTING. OCCUPY likes to say they are just PROTESTING, but thats simply not true. They are squatting, harassing, destroying public and private property, combating police, destroying local businesses, vandalising, etc.

Remember the OCCUPY OAKLAND camp that went into BURGER KING and demanded free food, and when they didnt get it they destroyed the inside and heckled and yelled at customers inside the store. That shouldnt be allowed, that is not protesting, that is harassment.

All the bill says is that:

includes felony penalties for "criminal trespass" and, unbelievably, "conspiracy to commit criminal trespass"--the punishment being a $10,000 fine or a year in jail, or possibly both. That this is specifically included in a bill that cracks down on organizations' right to picket outside a workplace or company seems to indicate that a union or other group engaged in picketing could be charged with a crime for the activity of one member who crosses the line.

Remember the protesting in Wisconsin, where all they were doing was trying to enact the will of the VOTERS which was to abolish the collective bargaining process and the unions got violent and threatened the lives of state legislators, destroyed and vandalised state property?


OR

A person, or organization that he or she is affiliated with or acting on behalf of, commits an offense when he or she engages in targeted picketing of a private residence that has or intends the effect of interfering with the resident's right to quiet enjoyment, or when such targeted picketing has or intends the effect of violence or intimidation.

Why do you think they have this? Because occupy was picketing and protesting outside Bank CEOs PRIVATE residences, and workers just trying to collect a paycheck. Or when they started OCCUPYING forclosed homes and living in them in neighborhoods and disturbing other people who rightfully lived there.

No one is saying you cant picket, but they are saying you cant hide under the umbrella of the 1st amendment and use that to arbitrarily create anarchy.

[Vteckidd]

The tactics used by OCCUPY and the UNIONS created this, reap what you sow

[.blank cd]

i absolutely agree with it. you can thank OCCUPY and the Labor Unions for causing this kind of reaction.

I can accept this. Occupy exposing the craziness of the republican party.

No one is saying you cant picket, but they are saying you cant hide under the umbrella of the 1st amendment and use that to arbitrarily create anarchy.

Riiiiiiiiiiight...I'm not sure you know what anarchy means, but its far from a few people being disorderly. Fortunately the 1st amendment will trump this the moment someone gets arrested for protesting, provided this bill even makes it to law.

[Vteckidd]

I can accept this. Occupy exposing the craziness of the republican party.

Answer me this, who had a "protesting movement" that had zero arrests and ended up getting a congressional caucus?
Who had a movement that is so politically unattractive it has no supporters anymore? It had hundreds of arrests, violence in the street? had every left wing democrat mayor against it?

Just saying.

Occupy didnt do anything but show that there is a vast section of this country that want anarchy. That want to destroy property because "ITS NOT FAIR" or disrupt the lives of others because "ITS NOT FAIR" or shit on a cop car because "ITS NOT FAIR".

You can say craziness of the republican party all you want, but they werent the ones being "crazy", occupy was.

Riiiiiiiiiiight...I'm not sure you know what anarchy means, but its far from a few people being disorderly.

Ignorance is bliss i suppose. If you honestly think "few people being disorderly" is the correct words to describe the OCCUPY MOVEMENT, then you are just delusional. Id hardly call destroying oakland and provoking police "disorderly"

Fortunately the 1st amendment will trump this the moment someone gets arrested for protesting, provided this bill even makes it to law.

first amendment is for freedom of speech, not freedom to trample on the constitution aka Free housing (squatting) free jobs, free money, free food and destruction of public property.

Thats what youll never get. all you see is FREE SPEECH. you ignore the fact that they are stealing , disobeying laws, and bothering other peoples lives because all they want is a free lunch.

[bu villain]

I don't care if it is anarchists, occupy wall streeters, the KKK, or anyone else. Trespassing or conspiring to trespass should NOT be a felony. That is ridiculous to me. You lose your right to vote, the ability to obtain many jobs, pay a ten thousand dollar fine, and lose a number of other liberties because you are standing in the wrong place? That is the definition of draconian.

[.blank cd]

Draconian.

That about sums it up right there.

[.blank cd]

Answer me this, who had a "protesting movement" that had zero arrests and ended up getting a congressional caucus?

Zero arrests? Guess you're not talking about the Tea Party. Lol

Who had a movement that is so politically unattractive it has no supporters anymore? It had hundreds of arrests, violence in the street? had every left wing democrat mayor against it?

If you're protesting against something the government is doing wrong and exposing corruption, and they're not happy with you, you're doing it right.

first amendment is for freedom of speech, not freedom to trample on the constitution aka Free housing (squatting) free jobs, free money, free food and destruction of public property.

You're right. The first amendment protects freedom of speech, protesting and picketing is protected by the first amendment. It doesn't matter what you feel like they did.

[Vteckidd]

Zero arrests? Guess you're not talking about the Tea Party. Lol

As much as the left wing media HATED the Tea Party, you never saw video of the so called racial slurs, and people rioting in the streets. Im POSITIVE there were bad apples, people that were probably against Obama because hes black and prob said some other racist remarks, but it wasnt the party as a whole. The Mainstream Media has zero things to compare it to when it comes to OCCUPY which it largely IGNORES the violence and vandalism.

Tea Party never needed police in RIOT GEAR
Tea Party never needed to be kicked out of the SAME PUBLIC PARK that OCCUPY uses in DC.

If you're protesting against something the government is doing wrong and exposing corruption, and they're not happy with you, you're doing it right.

so the guy that owned the burger king is the govt establishment?

Why arent they protesting at the white house? Why are they protesting companies that have NOTHING to do with the govt ? So because they are against the "govt" that gives them the right to set trash cans on fire, SHIT on a cop car, destroy public property all in the name of the 1st amendment?

You're right. The first amendment protects freedom of speech, protesting and picketing is protected by the first amendment. It doesn't matter what you feel like they did.

you can protest all you want, but you cant infringe upon anothers right to live and prosper. Thats where you dont understand quite frankly.

Ill come sit on your front lawn with 50 of my friends and make noise and call you a liberal commie 24 hours a day, and follow you around town all day. How would that make you feel?

[Vteckidd]

What Peaceful Protestors look like to the LEFT




















Occupy wall street anti establishment people with $2000 laptops LOL





Oh but they are just being a LITTLE DISORDERLY

[.blank cd]

As much as the left wing media HATED the Tea Party, you never saw video of the so called racial slurs, and people rioting in the streets. Im POSITIVE there were bad apples, people that were probably against Obama because hes black and prob said some other racist remarks, but it wasnt the party as a whole. The Mainstream Media has zero things to compare it to when it comes to OCCUPY which it largely IGNORES the violence and vandalism.

Tea Party never needed police in RIOT GEAR
Tea Party never needed to be kicked out of the SAME PUBLIC PARK that OCCUPY uses in DC.

Hmmmm....

so the guy that owned the burger king is the govt establishment?

That situation was blown totally out of proportion by Fox and friends. The BK refused service to some people because they were part of the occupy group. Not because someone wanted free food.

Why arent they protesting at the white house?

They are.

Why are they protesting companies that have NOTHING to do with the govt ?

There are two sides to govt corruption. The govt, and those engaged in the corruption.

So because they are against the "govt" that gives them the right to set trash cans on fire, SHIT on a cop car, destroy public property all in the name of the 1st amendment?

Well, as you so eloquently put it...

Im POSITIVE there were bad apples...but it wasnt the party as a whole

you can protest all you want, but you cant infringe upon anothers right to live and prosper.

Ill come sit on your front lawn with 50 of my friends and make noise and call you a liberal commie 24 hours a day, and follow you around town all day. How would that make you feel?

Nobody was followed around. But come on out! No sweat off my ass. I'm sure you'll tire of it before I'm tired of hearing it

[Julio]

Im with Vteckidd.... I think is BSand hope they pass the bill..

[.blank cd]

Im with Vteckidd.... I think is BSand hope they pass the bill..

That's really terrifying, and I'm being serious.

[Vteckidd]

Free speech doesn't = lawlessness

/thread

[.blank cd]

Bill making free speech criminal does not = constitutional

"Congress shall make no law infringing on freedom of speech/assembly..."

We have some legislators in GA who apparently have not read the constitution. That should scare you.

If they passed a bill that said you couldn't own a gun, you guys would go batshit crazy. Funny how when parts of the constitution inconvenience the right, it's cool to abridge them...unconstitutionally. Lol

[Vteckidd]

Can't argue with someone who thinks the above pictures =free speech.

This isn't removing anyone's right to free speech, its saying if you gather in a public place and try to take it over under the umbrella of free speech, you can be cited for criminal trespass.

You should really read the bill.

Not all free speech is protected either.

[.blank cd]

Can't argue with someone who thinks the above pictures =free speech.

I take it you werent at the top of your debate class. Im not gonna respond to the pictures because it's a pretty bad way to prove your argument when you have pictures with absolutely zero context.

I mean, look at these tea party patriots, these guys must be evil







Ill give it to em though, at least theyre organized.

This isn't removing anyone's right to free speech, its saying if you gather in a public place and try to take it over under the umbrella of free speech, you can be cited for criminal trespass.

Its not removig anyones right to free speech, its removing rights to free assembly and making it a felony. I read the bill. Thats why I posted the thread. You should really read the constitution, or did you also flush your copy down the toilet? Here. I'll highlight the good parts for you

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.

[Vteckidd]

you have yet to win 1 argument against me, so i wouldnt worry about how well i did in debate class. You never stick to the issues, i just posted 20 pictures of OCCUPY people destroying public property, and your answer was "im going to ignore it and compare the NAZIs to the Tea Party".

Do this, google OCCUPY DESTRUCTION and see what comes up, then google TEA PARTY DESTRUCTION and see what comes up. How can the 5 photos from different angles with people hold OCCUPY signs and breaking out a glass window at a bank be "taken out of context"???

Maybe you should pull your head out of your ass and try to actually understand what you type. Dont quote me the constitution and try to be all high and mighty when you want to compare the right to PEACFULLY ASSEMBLE with the anarchy i posted above.

Frankly i think you just post these threads for attention. Its obvious you couldnt hold an argument in person, so you hide behind the computer and wikipedia to start trouble and bait people into discussions that you like to distort and lie about.

All you have to blame for this bill is OCCUPY, because they took the right to assemble and the right to free speech and THEY set it on fire and caused all this. They are the ones rioting in the streets, setting trash cans on fire, causing police to come out in riot gear, breaking windows, vandalizing public businesses , etc. Then, when they are told to disperse they claim PEACEFUL FREE SPEECH.

They are cowards, and i hope this passes, and i hope they throw them all in jail

[Vteckidd]

Frankly you dont have the intelligence to debate me. The only problem i have is continuing responding to your posts. On a forum behind a computer you can hide and go google left wing talking points and pick apart everything i write (or try to). In person, you wouldnt have that luxury.

Its obvious you are in the VAST minority of people who view things as slanted and liberal as you do

[.blank cd]

you have yet to win 1 argument against me

Heh. So far you're losing this one, among others, since you typically don't use facts to base your argument, only feelings and opinions, which will get you lambasted in a real debate.

You never stick to the issues, i just posted 20 pictures of OCCUPY people destroying public property, and your answer was "im going to ignore it and compare the NAZIs to the Tea Party".

You posted pictures of riots with ZERO context. I know you can do better than that.

Do this, google OCCUPY DESTRUCTION and see what comes up, then google TEA PARTY DESTRUCTION and see what comes up. How can the 5 photos from different angles with people hold OCCUPY signs and breaking out a glass window at a bank be "taken out of context"???

Can you show me in the pictures you posted which the people depicted are holding OCCUPY signs? Not a single picture you posted provides context to it.

I'll wait......

Frankly i think you just post these threads for attention. Its obvious you couldnt hold an argument in person, so you hide behind the computer and wikipedia to start trouble and bait people into discussions that you like to distort and lie about.

Havent distorted or lied about anything. Once. But yeah, I do post these threads out of boredom.

We can however set up a formal debate with an audience, I'd be more than happy to participate in. Make sure you get your facts game straight though...

All you have to blame for this bill is OCCUPY, because they took the right to assemble and the right to free speech and THEY set it on fire and caused all this. They are the ones rioting in the streets, setting trash cans on fire, causing police to come out in riot gear, breaking windows, vandalizing public businesses , etc. Then, when they are told to disperse they claim PEACEFUL FREE SPEECH.

I like the part where you said theres a few bad apples in the Tea Party protests, but then the Occupy protests, which you for whatever reason disagree with, must be held with the utmost scrutiny. Pretty laughable.

They are cowards, and i hope this passes, and i hope they throw them all in jail

::facepalm::

[.blank cd]

Frankly you dont have the intelligence to debate me.

You're right about one thing. I do not have your kind of intelligence. LOL

[bu villain]

Vteck, the pictures you posted include acts which are already illegal. How does this new bill help stop any of that?