Join BayouShooter For Free
Meplat

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 45
Results 41 to 48 of 48
  1. #41
    On Target

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by thperez1972 View Post
    But the *lack of need* doesn’t exist. What you say shouldn’t be in the legislation isn’t in the legislation.

    I know you could care less about the intent. If you did, you’d have read more than the title and you’d have seen what you don’t think should be in there isn’t actually in there.

    And it is an observation. There are a group of people who form an opinion based on incomplete information. By your posts, you have shown yourself to be in that group. When presented with the correct information, they may do one of a few things. They might take in all the available information and make a more informed decision, even if that decision differs from the one previously made. Or they could reject that information as irrelevant because it doesn’t line up with their opinion. Another option is to get the information, recognize their hasty decision doesn’t make sense, then, afraid to have people think they are wrong, dismiss the entire subject by saying it’s pointless to discuss it.

    It appears you may fit in the last category. Despite multiple people telling you what you were saying wasn’t in the law, you persisted, using the title, rather than the text, to prove your position. When pushed to find the proof in the text, you could care less about it because it’ll get change over time.

    So here’s the substance. The law does not make any assemblies illegal in and of themselves. The law lists no penalties for simply assembling. The law has a purpose, to take laws listed elsewhere and enhance the penalties if the crime was committed during a violent or disorderly protest.

    So feel free to read all of the law. Or don’t. Feel free to reply based on any new information you may have learned. Or don’t. Feel free to discuss something actually in the law. Or don’t. But you’re not fooling anyone by the constant deflection.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    There is no deflection. I explained how this expands power to inhibit free assembly but wouldn’t really add any powers to stop rioting as the crimes being committed in these cities around the country are already crimes.

    I have said my piece but still don’t understand what exactly this new legislation will accomplish. As free citizens these are questions that should be asked of any new legislation. Are the purported benefits worth the costs of the freedom we sacrifice. Maybe I am just thick, but I am really Struggling to see the benefits here.
    Last edited by Horrible; September 26th, 2020 at 01:05 PM.

  2. #42
    ESSAYONS

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Horrible View Post
    There is no deflection. I explained how this expands power to inhibit free assembly but wouldn’t really add any powers to stop rioting as the crimes being committed in these cities around the country are already crimes.

    I have said my piece but still don’t understand what exactly this new legislation will accomplish. As free citizens these are questions that should be asked of any new legislation. Are the purported benefits worth the costs of the freedom we sacrifice. Maybe I am just thick, but I am really Struggling to see the benefits here.
    You never explained how it inhibits free assembly. You said the word “disorderly” could be abused but you refused to explain how that’s relevant to the proposed legislation. You claimed the proposed legislation would make disorderly protests illegal but you refused to state the penalties for those supposed illegal disorderly protests even though the proposed legislation contains any proposed penalties.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #43
    ESSAYONS

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Bosco View Post
    I wonder if them declaring it an unlawful assembly makes any difference in the manner? I'm always in the middle on this type of stuff. The libertarian in me says "don't tread on me" but then the rational human being in me says "don't loot/riot/attack police officers who are just doing their job".



    It seems to be a bit vague though. If you're peacefully protesting and it gets declared unlawful b/c there's too many of you to fit on the sidewalk then everyone can be arrested with felony charges even those who were on the sidewalk? If someone starts throwing glass bottles at police and they deem it disorderly are they then allowed to arrest everyone who is there even if they weren't the ones throwing glass bottles? You would hope only the offenders would be arrested but the wording makes it seem like they could arrest anyone who participated in the protest and even those who just organized it.

    I guess we'll have to see it in action which I'm sure will happen as I'm sure people will protest the bill.
    If there are too many people to fit on a sidewalk, don’t walk 6 wide. Walk 3 wide and 2 deep. While most sidewalks may be relatively narrow, they are frequently deep.

    And the proposed legislation is only what’s been proposed. I have no doubt the proposed legislation will get more legalese to address any ambiguity.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  4. #44
    Newbie

    User Info Menu

    I'm no fan of mandatory mins. in any sense.

  5. #45
    treat never keep keep

    User Info Menu

    That’s easy, what it’s meant to accomplish is making the people who are currently protesting unable to vote. If all the people out protesting now suddenly couldn’t vote, that’s less people to vote against whatever it is they are protesting.

    No one proposed any type of legislation when PWI students were destroying their cities after teams lost...and sometimes won. No one proposed new legislation when Denver was torn up by their fans. Nobody proposed new legislation for people showing up to government facilities with guns to protest. Nor when people actually shot at the government over disputes.

    This legislation is saying if 20 people peacefully protest, and white supremacists come in and incite a riot, everyone would now be engaged in a felony. And now, they can no longer vote.
    The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.


  6. #46
    Newbie

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocko68 View Post
    I see your opinion as well but the actual outcome of these "peaceful protests" in some places have Illustrated that not all Americans know how to act accordingly without looting and destruction of property, even death.
    I figure we all have these rights and a huge majority would and do stay in the realm of the proper way to protest but given the current events, i feel it's clearly obvious that some can't handle the privilege/right.
    And I think you've missed the point, WHY????? are these people protesting????? Address that issue, which has yet to be addressed and then are are no more protests based on this grievance! How hard is that? When the people have a grievance and it is ignored or given lip service by the politicians and then another and another incident occurs, the people are going get pies off!!! Just address the problem that caused the protest, how hard is that???

  7. #47
    ESSAYONS

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by sarky View Post
    And I think you've missed the point, WHY????? are these people protesting????? Address that issue, which has yet to be addressed and then are are no more protests based on this grievance! How hard is that? When the people have a grievance and it is ignored or given lip service by the politicians and then another and another incident occurs, the people are going get pies off!!! Just address the problem that caused the protest, how hard is that???
    What if the people are protesting a problem that doesn’t reasonably exist? How can the politicians address that? As a case in point, people protested because a cop didn’t let himself get stabbed by a guy running after him with a knife. How should the politicians address that?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #48
    On Target

    User Info Menu

    Thumbs up DeSantis

    Quote Originally Posted by Bosco View Post
    If you are like me and don't wanna watch a video here's an article

    https://www.flgov.com/2020/09/21/governor-ron-desantis-announces-the-combatting-violence-disorder-and-looting-and-law-enforcement-protection-act/


    The Combatting Violence, Disorder and Looting and Law Enforcement Protection Act has three components, outlined below:
    New Criminal Offenses to Combat Rioting, Looting and Violence

    1. Prohibition on Violent or Disorderly Assemblies: 3rd degree felony when 7 or more persons are involved in an assembly and cause damage to property or injury to other persons.
    2. Prohibition on Obstructing Roadways: 3rd degree felony to obstruct traffic during an unpermitted protest, demonstration or violent or disorderly assembly; driver is NOT liable for injury or death caused if fleeing for safety from a mob.
    3. Prohibition on Destroying or Toppling Monuments: 2nd degree felony to destroy public property during a violent or disorderly assembly.
    4. Prohibition on Harassment in Public Accommodations: 1st degree misdemeanor for a participant in a violent or disorderly assembly to harass or intimidate a person at a public accommodation, such as a restaurant.
    5. RICO Liability: RICO liability attaches to anyone who organizes or funds a violent or disorderly assembly.

    Increased Penalties

    1. Mandatory Minimum Jail Sentence: Striking a law enforcement officer (including with a projectile) during a violent or disorderly assembly = 6 months mandatory minimum jail sentence.
    2. Offense Enhancements: Offense and/or sentence enhancements for: (1) throwing an object during a violent or disorderly assembly that strikes a civilian or law enforcement officer; (2) assault/battery of a law enforcement officer during a violent or disorderly assembly; and (3) participation in a violent or disorderly assembly by an individual from another state.

    Citizen and Taxpayer Protection Measures

    1. No *Defund the Police* Permitted: Prohibits state grants or aid to any local government that slashes the budget for law enforcement services.
    2. Victim Compensation: Waives sovereign immunity to allow a victim of a crime related to a violent or disorderly assembly to sue local government for damages where the local government is grossly negligent in protecting persons and property.
    3. Government Employment/Benefits: Terminates state benefits and makes anyone ineligible for employment by state/local government if convicted of participating in a violent or disorderly assembly.
    4. Bail: No bond or bail until first appearance in court if charged with a crime related to participating in a violent or disorderly assembly; rebuttable presumption against bond or bail after first appearance.

    Outstanding!!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •