Oregon bill would classify street-blocking protestors as terrorists

[Roddimus]

Oregon Law Would Jail War Protesters as Terrorists

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, 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 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 (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.

Luckily it probably won't pass. But it's still chilling nonetheless.
Just another attempt to use the "only if you're a terrorist" loopholes of the Patriot Act...

[Star_Dancer]

Hahahaha

Actually I'm kinda hoping this passes just so Critical Mass will go away.

I hate yous guys, I hate them guys

[marc_shrpnl]

One way to look at it...

what is a terrorist? Someone who causes harm to another well-being, safety, or way of life.

When these protests block traffic without authorazation,People are affected.

Say you call 911 needing assistance.Say this group has blocked major roadways keeping emergency help from reaching the target.Well, youve just endangered someones health.

one step further.Lets say this person died due to a heart attack, wich could have been saved if med assitance had reached them in time.Well, the persons family has now been hurt.there is the well being aspect of it.

Even further.Say this person was a big brother, nurse or anyother person who helps people everyday they are alive.Now little timmy doesnt have his big brother to help him out when he needs that guidance. Way of life.

Now its does seem a little severe, but when it comes down to it, people,regardless of it being a protest, or just a large mass of people clogging the roadways, can be taken as a threat.

Now with that in mind, what if that person was your family.

[Star_Dancer]

I think the protestors would move for an amulance and/or firetruck. They aren't *that* stupid. Unless they are riding bikes with critical mass, I'd believe any ammount of stupidity from them.

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Roddimus
Oregon Law Would Jail War Protesters as Terrorists

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, 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 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 (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.

Luckily it probably won't pass. But it's still chilling nonetheless.
Just another attempt to use the "only if you're a terrorist" loopholes of the Patriot Act...

Yeah the wording is too broad. this actually popped up a couple of weeks ago and supposedly its going back for a re-write.

Also rodd. Other than in your abundant imagination. Would you please directly connect this bill's inception to the Patriot Act.

The author of the bill has a point in that unlawfully holding the activities of the residents of a city hostage to your political activities and causing harm can be terrorism. Just at what point does that activity cross that line. Is laying in the streets terrorism. No. Is laying in the streets, blocking traffic and causing for someone to die. Maybe. Regardless..when you do something like that you should pay with our freedom being stripped away for a very very long time.

MS

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Star_Dancer
I think the protestors would move for an amulance and/or firetruck. They aren't *that* stupid. Unless they are riding bikes with critical mass, I'd believe any ammount of stupidity from them.

I believe this entire thing came about due to antiwar protestors blocking the streets and an ambulance not being able to get through. No one died but it took the ambulance much longer to get to the hospital with the patient. IF this patient would have been in an extremely critical condition there is the possibility that patient could have died.

So much for protesting to save lives at that point... huh.

MS

[Star_Dancer]

Originally posted by Mike S


I believe this entire thing came about due to antiwar protestors blocking the streets and an ambulance not being able to get through. No one died but it took the ambulance much longer to get to the hospital with the patient. IF this patient would have been in an extremely critical condition there is the possibility that patient could have died.

So much for protesting to save lives at that point... huh.

MS

I didn't hear about that. THat's pretty fucked up.

[Roddimus]

Originally posted by Mike S

The author of the bill has a point in that unlawfully holding the activities of the residents of a city hostage to your political activities and causing harm can be terrorism. Just at what point does that activity cross that line. Is laying in the streets terrorism. No. Is laying in the streets, blocking traffic and causing for someone to die. Maybe. Regardless..when you do something like that you should pay with our freedom being stripped away for a very very long time.

I can see them as being considered criminals based on some of their actions, but not terrorists.
Arrest them, put 'em on trial, punish them accordingly.
Why do they need to be considered terrorists?
What possible advantage to law enforcement would this sort of categorization offer?

[Cedwyn]

oh look! mike made a contentious statement without providing any references!

who'da thunk it?

[ijji]

I have friends that couldn't pay the rent thanks to all the fucking protesters. More on this later but...I basically want to say MOST of the time the actions of protesters are more selfish than selfless. This being said from someone who has participated in many, been peppersprayed & hit with bean bag rounds. Protesters suck.

I'll add more later when I have time.

[Effendi]

.
Your a Terrorist if you drive an SUV....
Your a Terrorist if you smoke pot......
Your a Terrorist if you don't agree with your government and protest...

So basiclly your a Terrorist if your an American.......maybe the Arab world IS onto something.

You know I agree with it being unlawful to hold up Ambulances or alter others ways to work and so on, but 25 years is a bunch of shit...

One year would be MORE than enouph to make ANYONE think twice before attending another rally, especially if they are going with nepharious plans, but 25 years to life is so far past stupid, it is perfect for the United States. No wonder the whole world thinks we are stupid, look at the bullshit notions we entertain.

We are SUPPOSED to be a Democracy, and I know that means respecting others, but 25 to life?

I would rather get caught stealing something in Saudi and loose my hand then spend 25 years in Prison, what does that tell you?

I sure Love what this country USED to be before we lost our freedoms to this "War" on Terror.

Scott!!

[MO]

Originally posted by Mike S

I believe this entire thing came about due to antiwar protestors blocking the streets and an ambulance not being able to get through.
MS

I believe this thing came about due to the fact that money means more than anything in this country. An extreme capitalistic society like America won't stand by as protests try to stop business, no matter what it means in terms of civil liberties. That's how a lot of people see it, actually..
I think that's why people are havingn a problem with the wording. It's the inclusion of the word "commerce" that gets me. Infringing upon people's right to safe living is one thing, but infringing upon people's right to shop or drive is another.

[Cedwyn]

work!
consume!
reproduce!

[Kosmicdog]

Originally posted by marc_shrpnl

what is a terrorist? Someone who causes harm to another well-being, safety, or way of life.

WHAT? Under your definition if I punch someone in the face I'm a "terrorist".

I am so sick of the term "terrorist" being so freely tossed around.

ter·ror·ist __ (_P_)__Pronunciation Key__(trr-st)
n.

One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism.
adj.

Of or relating to terrorism.

ter·ror·ism __ (_P_)__Pronunciation Key__(tr-rzm)
n.

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

That's a little more like it.

[nate]

Originally posted by Mike S
I believe this entire thing came about due to antiwar protestors blocking the streets and an ambulance not being able to get through.
This is a bunch of horseshit. I was there when this happened. When I read and heard some of these wild accusation about several minutes delays were crap. I was sitting in the bar across the street (I'm not a big fan of the war, but a guy's gotta drink :D) and I had just stepped outside to see what was up when the ambulance came through and the protesters were out of the way in ten seconds flat (well, maybe 20, but it was pretty damn fast). Anyway, this time was probably made up when they could drive 80mph across the bridge because there was no traffic in the eastbound lanes at all. So, yeah, I was there (and not soooooo hammered that I couldn't watch what was happening).

I don't really like this idea anyway, but the 25-life MINIMUM sentence takes it from a bad idea to a ludicrous miscarriage of common sense.

If I'm pissed off about something and sit down in the street for five minutes, they lock me up and throw away the key? Please..

Peace.

[Boyd Main]

Not to mention that "terrorists" can be held incommunicado, lose their miranda rights, etc etc etc. Dangerous stuff.

[Carley]

Under your definition if I punch someone in the face I'm a "terrorist".

:D SONDR'S A TERRORIST!!! SONDR'S A TERRORIST!!!

Originally posted by Boyd Main
Not to mention that "terrorists" can be held incommunicado, lose their miranda rights, etc etc etc. Dangerous stuff.

Very!



You know I agree with it being unlawful to hold up Ambulances or alter others ways to work and so on, but 25 years is a bunch of shit...

One year would be MORE than enouph to make ANYONE think twice before attending another rally, especially if they are going with nepharious plans, but 25 years to life is so far past stupid, it is perfect for the United States. No wonder the whole world thinks we are stupid, look at the bullshit notions we entertain.

We are SUPPOSED to be a Democracy, and I know that means respecting others, but 25 to life?

I would rather get caught stealing something in Saudi and loose my hand then spend 25 years in Prison, what does that tell you?

I sure Love what this country USED to be before we lost our freedoms to this "War" on Terror.


I COMPLETELY agree (ok well... not about the Saudi business... :eek: ).

Or an even better alternative... 1 year community service.

I can't even imagine the cost of keeping some god damned hippy ( ;) ) locked up for 25 years. And not even for smoking potness!!! We can't even afford to keep RAPISTS locked up for 25 years! Makes me sick to think about.

[superkool]

thats the plan, lock up peacefull protesters for 25 years and let the rapers and murders out...good plan

[ijji]

Originally posted by MO


I believe this thing came about due to the fact that money means more than anything in this country. An extreme capitalistic society like America won't stand by as protests try to stop business, no matter what it means in terms of civil liberties. That's how a lot of people see it, actually..
I think that's why people are havingn a problem with the wording. It's the inclusion of the word "commerce" that gets me. Infringing upon people's right to safe living is one thing, but infringing upon people's right to shop or drive is another.

Did you ever think that it MORE THAN SHOPPING? What about the people that work in those shops? What about the people just trying to make their living, pay their rent, feed their kids - SURVIVE! It is a domino effect...

1. Streets blocked
2. People can't get to job, school, appointment, emergency, pick up kids from school, etc.
3. Commerce halted
4. People relying on commerce lose money, especially those relying on tips
5. Days go by
6. Rent is due
7. Money short
8. Everything falls behind
9. Stress, negativity
10. This is real - it did happen - it IS happening - PEOPLE ARE STILL AFFECTED by those protests that blocked traffic & kept people from coming downtown for pretty much a week.

Also, so many of those protesters probably dont even know what they were protesting for. They just wanted to join the big fuckin party & have an excuse to enjoy civil disobedience. BULLSHIT. I was there - those fuckers were partying at the expense of others. ASSHOLES.

So much for your theory about it being all about capitalism.

On the other hand - I fucking love America - ya fucking hoo that we are free to fuck up other peoples lives by excercising our rights granted to us by the constitution. That is NOT sarcasm. It is a sad paradox.

That said, fuck that bill too. Regardless of how pissy protesters make me, they should be able to do so without fear of imprisonment. I love our freedoms, please don't take them away!

[Carley]

Originally posted by ijji


Did you ever think that it MORE THAN SHOPPING? What about the people that work in those shops? What about the people just trying to make their living, pay their rent, feed their kids - SURVIVE! It is a domino effect...

1. Streets blocked
2. People can't get to job, school, appointment, emergency, pick up kids from school, etc.
3. Commerce halted
4. People relying on commerce lose money, especially those relying on tips
5. Days go by
6. Rent is due
7. Money short
8. Everything falls behind
9. Stress, negativity
10. This is real - it did happen - it IS happening - PEOPLE ARE STILL AFFECTED by those protests that blocked traffic & kept people from coming downtown for pretty much a week.

So much for your theory about it being all about capitalism!

Hence the neo-socialists grasp on the "anti-war" movement. EVERYTHING 'wrong" in this world IS about capitalism to them.

They would like to overthrow capitalism in the United States and then revert our country into a land of government workers & farmers.

Although it's nice to see that some of the "anti-war" "protesters" (Socialists) know what they're really doing this for, it really shocks me that they are so eager... and angers me that continue to portray themselves as "anti-war" when they are “protesting” a different issue entirely. Stopping commerce has not stopped the war. It has angered and disturbed people, kicked our already weakend economy (<~for this threads sake, let's get this over with: it was Clintons fault, it's because of the money hungry capitalist right, Bush is an alien, if those god damned hippies hadn't <insert here> everything would be fine ~ Now. Everyones' expert economic opinions have been represented, please stay on topic!) in the ass, and perpetuated a frightening us/them mentality… spurring even more redundant an ineffective (for anti-war) riots.

P.S. I am obviously not referring to genuine anti-war protesters who don’t allow themselves to be sucked into all of this "me too" bullshit.

Also, so many of those protesters probably dont even know what they were protesting for. They just wanted to join the big fuckin party & have an excuse to enjoy civil disobedience. BULLSHIT. I was there - those fuckers were partying at the expense of others. ASSHOLES

But hey... but those drum circles are fun. It’s not fun to march around all somber like! AND you can have some really intriguing conversations with other LIKE MINDED people. Yep. Really does something man. Influences world peace you know.. :eye roll:

[superkool]

yeah protest never brought about any good like civil rights,womens rights,chinese rights,etc,etc


protests are just a waste of time......to think with no protest we could of stayed in vietnam 10 more years and really got our ass kicked.

[Mike S]

Originally posted by Roddimus

I can see them as being considered criminals based on some of their actions, but not terrorists.
Arrest them, put 'em on trial, punish them accordingly.
Why do they need to be considered terrorists?
What possible advantage to law enforcement would this sort of categorization offer?

That's why I said I thought the wording was too broad. I think we're actually in agreement on this one. Of course the first time one of these wankers gets popped for laying in the streets and the judge gives him/her 3 months in the slammer you know whats gonna happen.. they're be people screamin' a police state/free speech trampled/ blah blah.
cant wait.

MS

[Mike S]

Originally posted by superkool
yeah protest never brought about any good like civil rights,womens rights,chinese rights,etc,etc


protests are just a waste of time......to think with no protest we could of stayed in vietnam 10 more years and really got our ass kicked.

Those protestors brought good superkool.. these protestors arent and are totally motivated by selfish reasons. You're assuming a hell of a lot by putting these people today in the same boat as others who have protested in the past.

MS

[Carley]

Originally posted by superkool
yeah protest never brought about any good like civil rights,womens rights,chinese rights,etc,etc


protests are just a waste of time......to think with no protest we could of stayed in vietnam 10 more years and really got our ass kicked.


That is comparing apples to rocks. And NO ONE has yet to show anyone the money (http://www.nwtekno.org/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52322).

[superkool]

lets see, protesting the governments wrong doings, then and protesting the governments wrong doings now....nope, same boat.

[Mike S]

*Shakes head*

Carley there's an abundance of things we don't agree on.. hell there's probably an abundance of things regarding this war we don't agree on.. regardless .. I can relate (I think) to you on this being frustrating.

MS

[Carley]

Heh, completely!! :)

[MO]

Originally posted by ijji
Did you ever think that it MORE THAN SHOPPING? What about the people that work in those shops? What about the people just trying to make their living, pay their rent, feed their kids - SURVIVE! It is a domino effect...

yeah and it really sucks that Iraqis can't go pay their rent and make it to work on time....I stand corrected :rolleyes:
and i'm not a socialist...to paraphrase J. Lennon, I don't believe in [isms] I just believe in me
and "me" thinks at a time of war, we all need to make sacrifices...didn't Bush say something that..anyway..maybe if people would just chill out on "stressing" about selfish issues they'd realize that the protests as inconveniences are nothing compared to the "inconveniences" of dying in battle or losing our rights as american citizens..

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by Cedwyn
work!
consume!
reproduce!

You need to get a life then.. <G>

-J

[ZupanGOD]

Originally posted by MO


I believe this thing came about due to the fact that money means more than anything in this country. An extreme capitalistic society like America won't stand by as protests try to stop business, no matter what it means in terms of civil liberties. That's how a lot of people see it, actually..

You radicals kick ass!

[lafs]

[LordWoon]

I believe this thing came about due to the fact that money means more than anything in this country. An extreme capitalistic society like America won't stand by as protests try to stop business, no matter what it means in terms of civil liberties. That's how a lot of people see it, actually..

and

yeah protest never brought about any good like civil rights,womens rights,chinese rights,etc,etc

These protests aren't about "civil liberties."

Protesting is fine, as long as the protestors aren't vandalizing and aren't blocking roads. What makes you people think you have the right to hold other people up just because they don't agree with you? If you truly believe you have the right to protests, then you must agree that people have the right to not want to agree and to not want to be bothered.

Now, that having been said, if you still insist to make people listen by breaking the law (that's right kiddies, protesting is legal- blocking the roads and vandalizing property is not) then you need to be prepared to deal with the consequences.

Of course, you guys could always go protest this bill... :p

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

That sounds like what the protestors are doing fits the bill to me.

Oh yeah, and yes, if you went and punched, say, a politician in the face telling him to change his policies, then you could be classified as a terrorist.






:D

[DJ Rawkus]

I love how Carley keeps ranting about how much she disagrees with Socialists. She sounds like Macarthy bitching about communism and that "evil" Castro guy. So Carley, why the double standard? How come you haven't said ANYTHING about being bothered by military recruiters tactics? Do you know they target minorities and children less than age? How is that any worse than some 'dishonest' Socialist protester? I find it more disheartening that people are frustrated by imposed selfishness rather than imposed aristocracy. When will you people get it? This war is not ABOUT Iraq; Iraq is only a pawn. Thus, protestors fight the root, not the cause.

[Carley]

Originally posted by DJ Rawkus I love how Carley keeps ranting about how much she disagrees with Socialists. She sounds like Macarthy bitching about communism and that "evil" Castro guy. So Carley, why the double standard?

I love how you post "to me" in old threads that I haven't posted on in 5 days. I love how you intentionally INSULT me, and then act like a whiney victimized bitch when others insult you. I love how you assume my stance on everything-in-the-world because of my well formed opinion (that I backed with evidence, per your rude & SEXIST request). I love how you act like an arrogant high horsed cock, yet STILL HAVEN'T PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR BIG FUCKING MOUTH IS (http://www.nwtekno.org/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52322)

Get the net Nathan. If you are going to continue "addressing me" in this puppyesque manner then don't expect another response. But for the love of everything sane, stop acting like such a little fucking bitch. It’s OK for us to disagree without resorting to this pre-school bullshit.

How come you haven't said ANYTHING about being bothered by military recruiters tactics?

Because THERE HASN'T BEEN A TOPIC ABOUT MILITARY RECRUITERS?
Because NOBODY HAS ASKED MY FUCKING OPINION ON MILITARY RECRUITERS?
BECAUSE NOBODY HERE HAS GLORIFIED MILITARY RECRUITERS?

How come you haven’t acted like a big-boy & provided EVIDENCE to the contrary of my opinion (that I posted what… a MONTH AGO!?) instead of PASSIVE AGGRESSSIVELY ADDRESSING ME IN COMPLETELY SEPARATE THREADS, WHILE STILL CARRYING OVER THE BULLSHIT INSULTS OF THE ORIGINAL?

IS THIS BULLSHIT GETTING


OLD TO ANYONE ELSE?


I am DONE Nathan ~ I am tired of tracking down your snotty little PERSONAL comments to me. Next time you have a question about my fucking opinion you can pm me. Till then.