It says *or* not *and*. Small difference but tyrants have a way of twisting words (and laws) like a pretzel to fit their political ends. Why give them more rope?
You still haven’t addressed my basic point that there are enough laws on the books already to completely shut down this rioting. Local leaders simply choose not to do this for political reasons.
More simply, I will use this quote to articulate where I am coming from on this "No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the Legislature is in session." - Gideon John Tucker
Yes, it does say “or.” So what? It doesn’t matter.
1. Any assembly (disorderly, orderly, or violent) that damages public or private property.
2. Any assembly (disorderly, orderly, or violent) that causes injury to others.
3. Any assembly (disorderly, orderly, or violent) that restricts the movement of others.
4. Any assembly (disorderly, orderly, or violent) that intimidates others.
Which one of those 4 are constitutionally protected actions?
You can define orderly and disorderly however you want. Twist it to mean anything you can think of. That still won’t erase the other element necessary for making the action illegal. The law does not make a “disorderly protest” illegal so the definition of “disorderly protest” does not matter in the absence of the the other elements of the crime.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk