Marti Oakley

_________________________________________________________________

I believe it is highly indicative of the level of corruption in our government when bills such as this piece of crap are passed with virtually every congressman/woman voting to pass it.  This is another of those bills for which their was no need.  Our government, now with the complicity and collusion of our local law enforcement domestic military units, routinely violates our rights and commit acts of aggression and violence against the public, without penalty or punishment.

In addition to making it illegal (not unlawful) to supposedly trespass the hallowed grounds of the White House lawn, it also means protesting such events such as the 2012 G8 and NATO summits could be a federal offense.

National Special Security Events

In what has clearly morphed into a full frontal assault on the First Amendment and the right to assemble, National Special Security Events (NSSA’s)created under Clinton,  are now the signature for squashing first amendment rights.  Anything can be deemed an NSSA.  Funerals, weddings, visits from the current dictators of foreign countries that we haven’t decided to blow off the global map yet.  This crap even applies to Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum because they have secret service protection (although I have no idea why we should be footing the bill for this).  I have no idea why they even need such protection when there are only a handful of people at their big fancy public meetings which is why the cameras are kept close in.  That way you won’t know there are only ten people there instead of the huge crowds you are led to believe are in attendance.

Of special interest to me in this abomination was this”

     `(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds;

Does this mean that our militarized police will now be arrested for causing a disturbance or committing violence against those assembled?  What I find interesting to note is that the only people who show up at rally’s, protests and other assembled events prepared for committing violence is [law enforcement].  Everyone else might be carrying signs, but police show up looking like they are going into combat in Iraq and they act the same way.  Virtually every instance of chaos in public gatherings is initiated by law enforcement.

But you don’t have to be violent or disruptive……you just have to be in close proximity to whomever this really special person that requires US taxpayers for some reason, to have to pay for the Secret Service protection.

Now get this part:

“In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection.”

This means that even if you didn’t know one of these really important and special people were anywhere around, or, if one was just bussed in to facilitate the attack by law enforcement, you could be committing a federal offense.  What if none of them were there?  What if they just say they were?  And, if no announcement is made and the NSSA designation isn’t made public how are you supposed to know?  Sounds like a big giant trap to me and one being set to curb the rising public dissatisfaction with the criminal nature of our government.

This is another of those bills that we all know will be twisted and contorted to mean whatever they need it to mean at the moment.  And god knows as corrupt as our court system is right up through SCOTUS, what comes out the other end will bear little resemblance to these few words in this bill and amendment.

No one should be given a status above the law and no one should be provided special status that is not applied across the board to all of us.  Since when are government officials, political candidates or other individuals so damn special that we cannot be in close proximity to them?  And who is going to define “close proximity”?

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-347

Feb 28, 2011

: This bill passed in the House of Representatives by roll call vote. The vote was held under a suspension of the rules to cut debate short and pass the bill, needing a two-thirds majority. This usually occurs for non-controversial legislation. The totals were 399 Ayes, 3 Nays, 30 Present/Not Voting. Vote Details.

Feb 6, 2012

: This bill passed in the Senate with changes by Unanimous Consent. A record of each senator’s position was not kept.

Feb 27, 2012

: A vote in the House of Representatives to agree with the other chamber’s changes passed by roll call vote. The totals were 388 Ayes, 3 Nays, 42 Present/Not Voting. Vote Details.　

`Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011′

In the Senate of the United States,

February 6, 2012.

Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 347) entitled `An Act to correct and simplify the drafting of section 1752 (relating to restricted buildings or grounds) of title 18, United States Code.’, do pass with the following

AMENDMENT:

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the `Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011′.

SEC. 2. RESTRICTED BUILDING OR GROUNDS.

    Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`Sec. 1752. Restricted building or grounds

    `(a) Whoever–

        `(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;

        `(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of government business or official functions;

        `(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or

        `(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds;

    or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).

    `(b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is–

        `(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if–

            `(A) the 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.

    `(c) In this section–

        `(1) the term `restricted buildings or grounds’ means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area–

            `(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds;

            `(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or

            `(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and

        `(2) the term `other person protected by the Secret Service’ means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.’.

Attest:

Secretary.

112th CONGRESS

2d Session

H.R. 347

_______________________________________________________________

 http://rt.com/usa/news/348-act-tresspass-buildings-437/

About these ads