HR 347, anti-Occupy bill

**CivilWars** · 03-05-12, 06:50 AM

On my phone, so I don't have a link, but I read about this on a friend's Facebook page. From what I have read it makes even peaceful protest a felony if done under certain conditions. The main ones being basically if the secret service is present protecting "important" political figures. I only read one article, and it seemed pretty slanted, but thought it strange I hadn't heard much about it anywhere, including here.

Sent from my UrMoms using Tapatalk

**AetheLove** · 03-05-12, 08:30 AM

Behold the power of the internets:

Read The Bill: H.R. 347 - GovTrack.us

Æ

**Fovezer** · 03-05-12, 08:41 AM

From reading the bill, it seems to be about people willfully and intentionally interrupting government business and that you cannot impede or block any building the President or Vice President is in. I don't see anything extremely controversial in the bill myself. Thats why I always read bills for myself and don't take the word of hysterical blog posts, which seems to happen a lot on both right and left blogs.

**DJ Ms. White** · 03-05-12, 09:39 AM

First article ( and really the only article) I could find...we're supposed to be a 1st world country in the West right? Not Iran...not pakistan...not Saudi fuckingArabia. Fucking twats. Although, that's an insult to the beautiful thing that is the twat.

**DJ Ms. White** · 03-05-12, 09:40 AM

Outlawing Occupy: H.R. 347 Makes Free Speech A Felony - Watching Frogs Boil - Open Salon

**CivilWars** · 03-05-12, 09:45 AM

I am sure I will get some, "but they would never..." replies, but based on how the bill is written what prevents them from prosecuting someone(s) from peacefully protesting at the DNC, RNC, or inauguration?

Sent from my UrMoms using Tapatalk

**DJ Ms. White** · 03-05-12, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by Fovezer

From reading the bill, it seems to be about people willfully and intentionally interrupting government business and that you cannot impede or block any building the President or Vice President is in. I don't see anything extremely controversial in the bill myself. Thats why I always read bills for myself and don't take the word of hysterical blog posts, which seems to happen a lot on both right and left blogs.

Right...cause peaceful protesters deserve 10 YEARS in prison.

**Fovezer** · 03-05-12, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by DJ Mr. White

Right...cause peaceful protesters deserve 10 YEARS in prison.

Read the bill.

"‘(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if--

‘(A) any person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or

‘(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118(e)(3); and

‘(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case."

The only way you get up to 10 years is if you use a deadly weapon or cause bodily harm, otherwise it's a misdermeanor. I'm not saying I necessarily support the bill, but it also doesn't do what some are claiming. If they try and use this bill as an excuse to ban or break up peaceful protests, then I'll definitely have a huge problem with it. But at the same time, I don't see anything extremely egregious in it. If I'm wrong, and this is used as a pretext to stop protesting, I'll be the first to admit I should have been upset when this bill passed.

**CivilWars** · 03-05-12, 12:16 PM

So I should be subject to a year in prison if I oppose Romney, Paul, or Obama at a public even they are attending?

Sent from my UrMoms using Tapatalk

**DJ Ms. White** · 03-05-12, 12:19 PM

Well, you see, my atheism logic says that since your a fundie, that implies that your a relgizus extremist, which implies that your muslem, which implis that your a terrorist. So yes, you deserve it.