It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A Republican state lawmaker who was an outspoken supporter of President-elect Donald Trump is proposing a bill that would allow authorities to charge protesters with committing "economic terrorism."
“I respect the right to protest, but when it endangers people’s lives and property, it goes too far,” Washington state Sen. Doug Ericksen said in a statement. “Fear, intimidation and vandalism are not a legitimate form of political expression. Those who employ it must be called to account.
“We are not just going after the people who commit these acts of terrorism,” he added. “We are going after the people who fund them. Wealthy donors should not feel safe in disrupting middle-class jobs.”
The proposed bill would make protesting a class C felony should it cause any sort of "economic disruption" or "jeopardize human life and property." Such a proposal would mean violators could face five years in prison, a $10,000 fine or both.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TrueBrit
Plus driving is a privilege, not a right. And protesting IS a right. Right trumps privilege ANY day.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: rickymouse
I don't see a problem with this bill, it states people have the right to protest but that does not give them the right to block traffic. I have seen a protest where the people were disrupting traffic many years ago and they whacked their signs on the cars as they tried to get through the crowd. I haven't been to a protest since then, that was thirty some years ago. The people in those cars were not doing anything wrong. They were trying to get to where they wanted to go. The whole protest wound up being a gripe that someone had with a business, the ones organizing it had sour grapes.
Protesting is about inconveniencing other people. You don't get your message across when you aren't inconveniencing someone so yes blocking a road way is still fair game.
originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Krazysh0t
If a person is protesting, they are exercising their constitutional rights. Their right to engage in protest, predates the existence of roads, highways, transport of any kind other than by horse, horse and coach, train, or on foot. Therefore, since their right to protest has existed for longer than the automobile, the automobile will have to just shut the hell up and wait, or turn the hell around.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Alien Abduct
So tell me how the police are supposed to arrest all those people in the street.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Ohanka
Easier said than done and not every police precinct is equipped with that. Plus if you started arresting protesters for protesting in the streets, you'd just make them madder, lose respect for the police, and thus more likely to riot.
You may want to think up a better way to disperse protesters than getting them on a technicality of not being able to block a street. It really looks like you are fishing to infringe someone's right to protest instead.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Alien Abduct
So tell me how the police are supposed to arrest all those people in the street.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Ohanka
Easier said than done and not every police precinct is equipped with that. Plus if you started arresting protesters for protesting in the streets, you'd just make them madder, lose respect for the police, and thus more likely to riot.
You may want to think up a better way to disperse protesters than getting them on a technicality of not being able to block a street. It really looks like you are fishing to infringe someone's right to protest instead.
How are you protecting yourself by running someone over with a multi-ton vehicle?