The 1st Amendment, The GOP, Cops and Asset Seizure

#1
Rasputin_Vol

Rasputin_Vol

"Slava Ukraina"
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
70,882
Likes
38,904
#1
The party of The Constitution strikes again...

What First Amendment? Arizona Wants Power To Seize The Assets Of Protesters | Zero Hedge

“Claiming people are being paid to riot, Republican state senators voted Wednesday to give police new power to arrest anyone who is involved in a peaceful demonstration that may turn bad — even before anything actually happened.

“SB1142 expands the state’s racketeering laws, now aimed at organized crime, to also include rioting. And it redefines what constitutes rioting to include actions that result in damage to the property of others.

“But the real heart of the legislation is what Democrats say is the guilt by association — and giving the government the right to criminally prosecute and seize the assets of everyone who planned a protest and everyone who participated.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 11 people
#5
#5
Rasputin_Vol said:
The party of The Constitution strikes again...

What First Amendment? Arizona Wants Power To Seize The Assets Of Protesters | Zero Hedge
Click to expand...

Unfortunately when you have bad apples who are rioting, looting, and destroying other people's property then something like this is bound to happen.

If Mr. Obama and the liberal cronies would have condemned this behavior when it started in ferguson then this nonsense would not have gotten out of hand.

You act civilized and peaceful and maybe people will take you serious but when you start looting and burning that b$tch down then it's time for drastic measures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#7
#7
MOOOOONEY said:
Unfortunately when you have bad apples who are rioting, looting, and destroying other people's property then something like this is bound to happen.

If Mr. Obama and the liberal cronies would have condemned this behavior when it started in ferguson then this nonsense would not have gotten out of hand.

You act civilized and peaceful and maybe people will take you serious but when you start looting and burning that b$tch down then it's time for drastic measures.
Click to expand...

So to be clear so that I can understand, but are you justifying these "drastic measures"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#9
#9
This strikes me as a similar measure to much of the "you can run over protesters on roads" legislation being proposed in predominantly red states as of late.

The measures present themselves as public safety steps, but are really anti-liberal and anti-democratic in intent. These lawmakers can see the writing on the wall and know that the protests are only going to become larger, eventually incorporating moderates and even some conservatives. They want to do what they can, legally, to circumvent the democratic spirit of the Republic.

These are all really just scare tactics designed to keep the masses in control as they're being railroaded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10 people
#14
#14
Rasputin_Vol said:
So to be clear so that I can understand, but are you justifying these "drastic measures"?
Click to expand...

No to be clear- if a group of people are having a peaceful protest then no one should bother these said people.

If a group of people are looting and destroying other people's property they all should be locked up and everything they have should be taken to pay for the damage.

What we have now are riots in the guise of protest and over the last 8 years liberals have allowed this. If mr. Obama, the liberal media and liberals in general would have denounced this behavior this would be a none issue.
 
#15
#15
MOOOOONEY said:
Unfortunately when you have bad apples who are rioting, looting, and destroying other people's property then something like this is bound to happen.

If Mr. Obama and the liberal cronies would have condemned this behavior when it started in ferguson then this nonsense would not have gotten out of hand.

You act civilized and peaceful and maybe people will take you serious but when you start looting and burning that b$tch down then it's time for drastic measures.
Click to expand...

It's never time for the sweeping measures in the OP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#17
#17
MT LeConte said:
Yeah, my bad should have said Nazi. Authoritarian may actually more accurate though when speaking of the Trump lead GOP.
Click to expand...

Nationalist/popular authoritarian

It's the nationalist aspect that even allowed me to vote for him vs 3rd party throw away vote.
 
Last edited:
#18
#18
MOOOOONEY said:
No to be clear- if a group of people are having a peaceful protest then no one should bother these said people.

If a group of people are looting and destroying other people's property they all should be locked up and everything they have should be taken to pay for the damage.

What we have now are riots in the guise of protest and over the last 8 years liberals have allowed this. If mr. Obama, the liberal media and liberals in general would have denounced this behavior this would be a none issue.
Click to expand...

"seize the assets of everyone who planned a protest"
Click to expand...

Again I ask, just so we are all clear, do you support this action or not?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#20
#20
You have the constitutional right to peacefully assemble. You don't have a constitutional right to riot or infringe on others constitutional rights.

Retards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#21
#21
FLVOL_79 said:
You have the constitutional right to peacefully assemble. You don't have a constitutional right to riot or infringe on others constitutional rights.

Retards.
Click to expand...

And the punishment for just planning a protest or participating in a protest that may turn violent is forfeiture of assets?

What else would the govt be justified in taking a citizen's assets? Speaking out against global warming?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people
#22
#22
Rasputin_Vol said:
And the punishment for just planning a protest or participating in a protest that may turn violent is forfeiture of assets?

What else would the govt be justified in taking a citizen's assets? Speaking out against global warming?
Click to expand...

If it turns violent I don't see the problem. We are a Republic, ruled by laws. If law X states don't act like an a-hole and you lose your sh!t yet you act like an a-hole and lose your sh!t I don't see the problem. I can see maybe a grey area with the unreasonable search and seizure aspect of the constitution yet I would have to refer back to the laws already in place with defined punishments.

With your original post it all depends on how the people protest. Part of peaceful assembly in many cities is applying for a permit. It might sound lame (it is) and it might not be as organic as people want but thats just the rule of the land. I have no problem with a crackdown on "spontaneous" protests.

Crackdowns on a protest that was legally created because of some unknown "Fear"..yeah..thats BS.
 
#23
#23
FLVOL_79 said:
If it turns violent I don't see the problem. We are a Republic, ruled by laws. If law X states don't act like an a-hole and you lose your sh!t yet you act like an a-hole and lose your sh!t I don't see the problem. I can see maybe a grey area with the unreasonable search and seizure aspect of the constitution yet I would have to refer back to the laws already in place with defined punishments.

With your original post it all depends on how the people protest. Part of peaceful assembly in many cities is applying for a permit. It might sound lame (it is) and it might not be as organic as people want but thats just the rule of the land. I have no problem with a crackdown on "spontaneous" protests.

Crackdowns on a protest that was legally created because of some unknown "Fear"..yeah..thats BS.
Click to expand...
The only time taking a citizens property should be on the table is for restitution of an actual loss by a victim. But just like in any other asset forfeiture, I would bet that the state would benefit from this asset seizure, and not the victims.

Outside of restitution or repayment of real damage or loss, the govt has no business seizing property in the USA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#24
#24
Rasputin_Vol said:
And the punishment for just planning a protest or participating in a protest that may turn violent is forfeiture of assets?

What else would the govt be justified in taking a citizen's assets? Speaking out against global warming?
Click to expand...

Being nonpartisan, I'll answer.
The law is complete bull$hit. It is absolutely no different than suggesting taking away someones firearem because they MIGHT use it for violence sometime. If this legislation was being proposed by a Democrat, the same ones defending it would be freaking out... and with good reason.
No true conservative would ever justify forfeiting an amendment just to gain a partisan advantage.


This is how the true end to our freedoms takes place. Not from support for the idea but support for trying to get "the other side".
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people
#25
#25
I say fine the organizations that organize these protests the amount of damage done.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top