ARIZONA--infringes on Free Speech--Protest we'll seize your property.

[esthermoon]

Just when you think the 4th Reich of the Republican party can't get any worse. Arizona comes up with this law. It's to oppress free speech in this country. Protesters can now be arrested and their property seized if a protest turns violent, even though they may not be involved in the violence.

"Arizona’s police officers will be able to arrest and seize the assets of any protest attendee, even before any crime or riot has taken place, under a new law voted through by state senators on Wednesday.

The legislation was originally established for racketeering but was expanded in definition to include rioting, allowing for the prosecution of everyone planned or participated in a protest that turns violent.

Democrats have criticized the bill, which allows demonstrators to be arrested and have their property seized. The legislation does not require discrimination as to who may have, for example, thrown a punch in a crowd or broken a window. As soon as a riotous action has occurred, all protesters are deemed broadly associated and therefore guilty.

Further to that, due to processes afforded authorities who investigate racketeering and the renewed definition of rioting, police are permitted to preemptively arrest those planning a protest."
New Arizona 'riot' law lets police arrest peaceful protesters—and seize their property

The 4th Reich of the Republican party is in full swing with Trump in office. Make certain they pay hell for it in 2018 and 2020.

Regardless of this law the point is that you don't have to use violence to express your opinions.
Violence is always bad (unless you're defending your own life or sombebody else's life)

 

[oreo]

Just when you think the 4th Reich of the Republican party can't get any worse. Arizona comes up with this law. It's to oppress free speech in this country. Protesters can now be arrested and their property seized if a protest turns violent, even though they may not be involved in the violence.

"Arizona’s police officers will be able to arrest and seize the assets of any protest attendee, even before any crime or riot has taken place, under a new law voted through by state senators on Wednesday.

The legislation was originally established for racketeering but was expanded in definition to include rioting, allowing for the prosecution of everyone planned or participated in a protest that turns violent.

Democrats have criticized the bill, which allows demonstrators to be arrested and have their property seized. The legislation does not require discrimination as to who may have, for example, thrown a punch in a crowd or broken a window. As soon as a riotous action has occurred, all protesters are deemed broadly associated and therefore guilty.

Further to that, due to processes afforded authorities who investigate racketeering and the renewed definition of rioting, police are permitted to preemptively arrest those planning a protest."
New Arizona 'riot' law lets police arrest peaceful protesters—and seize their property

The 4th Reich of the Republican party is in full swing with Trump in office. Make certain they pay hell for it in 2018 and 2020.

Regardless of this law the point is that you don't have to use violence to express your opinions.
Violence is always bad (unless you're defending your own life or sombebody else's life)

Everyone agrees with that, no violence or property damage. But the law is written so vaguely it is inclusive of peaceful protesters--and I think that Arizona state legislators wrote this bill with the intent to do just that. To infringe and or limit free speech.

It will be struck down by a Federal District court judge because of the way it is written.

 

[esthermoon]

Just when you think the 4th Reich of the Republican party can't get any worse. Arizona comes up with this law. It's to oppress free speech in this country. Protesters can now be arrested and their property seized if a protest turns violent, even though they may not be involved in the violence.

"Arizona’s police officers will be able to arrest and seize the assets of any protest attendee, even before any crime or riot has taken place, under a new law voted through by state senators on Wednesday.

The legislation was originally established for racketeering but was expanded in definition to include rioting, allowing for the prosecution of everyone planned or participated in a protest that turns violent.

Democrats have criticized the bill, which allows demonstrators to be arrested and have their property seized. The legislation does not require discrimination as to who may have, for example, thrown a punch in a crowd or broken a window. As soon as a riotous action has occurred, all protesters are deemed broadly associated and therefore guilty.

Further to that, due to processes afforded authorities who investigate racketeering and the renewed definition of rioting, police are permitted to preemptively arrest those planning a protest."
New Arizona 'riot' law lets police arrest peaceful protesters—and seize their property

The 4th Reich of the Republican party is in full swing with Trump in office. Make certain they pay hell for it in 2018 and 2020.

Regardless of this law the point is that you don't have to use violence to express your opinions.
Violence is always bad (unless you're defending your own life or sombebody else's life)

Everyone agrees with that, no violence or property damage. But the law is written so vaguely it is inclusive of peaceful protesters--and I think that Arizona state legislators wrote this bill with the intent to do just that. To infringe and or limit free speech.

It will be struck down by a Federal District court judge because of the way it is written.

Oh well if they really want to constrain peaceful protests that's absolutely wrong
Maybe some judge can declare this law unconstitutional who knows!

 

[Vandalshandle]

I live in AZ, and have witnessed for years the legislature's reactionary nature. If it is signed, it will eventually fail to meet free speech tests, and will be struck by the courts. They know this, but do it anyway. It is mostly theatrical. In this case, there was an anti-Trump rally that blocked a highway in Phoenix. Instead of dealing with the protesters who broke the law by blocking the highway, they just effectively tried to make protestors in general into gangsters.

 

[JBond]

Just when you think the 4th Reich of the Republican party can't get any worse. Arizona comes up with this law. It's to oppress free speech in this country. Protesters can now be arrested and their property seized if a protest turns violent, even though they may not be involved in the violence.

"Arizona’s police officers will be able to arrest and seize the assets of any protest attendee, even before any crime or riot has taken place, under a new law voted through by state senators on Wednesday.

The legislation was originally established for racketeering but was expanded in definition to include rioting, allowing for the prosecution of everyone planned or participated in a protest that turns violent.

Democrats have criticized the bill, which allows demonstrators to be arrested and have their property seized. The legislation does not require discrimination as to who may have, for example, thrown a punch in a crowd or broken a window. As soon as a riotous action has occurred, all protesters are deemed broadly associated and therefore guilty.

Further to that, due to processes afforded authorities who investigate racketeering and the renewed definition of rioting, police are permitted to preemptively arrest those planning a protest."
New Arizona 'riot' law lets police arrest peaceful protesters—and seize their property

The 4th Reich of the Republican party is in full swing with Trump in office. Make certain they pay hell for it in 2018 and 2020.

Regardless of this law the point is that you don't have to use violence to express your opinions.
Violence is always bad (unless you're defending your own life or sombebody else's life)

Everyone agrees with that, no violence or property damage. But the law is written so vaguely it is inclusive of peaceful protesters--and I think that Arizona state legislators wrote this bill with the intent to do just that. To infringe and or limit free speech.

It will be struck down by a Federal District court judge because of the way it is written.

Oreo, you know this isn't a law, right? There is nothing to strike down because it has not passed. Damn, you are one slow cookie.

 

[oreo]

The republican president has appeared in porno films, is on his third marriage to a woman who poses nude, and talks about grabbing women by the pussy.

Republican values

Wow. YOu mean you suddenly realized that the Religious Right did not get their way this time?

This just hit you NOW?!

Trump is the religious right, they voted for him overwhelmingly. No morals yet yeah we actually care about god and stuff. What a bunch of hypocrites lol, the religious right is a joke, basically a scam now

Trump is not the Religious Right.

He did reach out to them and made some decent points about why he would be better than Hillary, a very low bar, but I'm sure they are not enthused about him as a role model for their children.


Your attempt to make hay out of this is merely you showing that you have no clue about the role the RR has in the GOP.

No no--Evangelicals kicked their favorite Ted Cruz to the curb for Donald Trump. They are fake Christians and the only time they bring up Christianity is when they want to make a political or social point that they favor. They picked and voted for the most anti value Christian candidate in the bunch. They're nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. Mike Huckabee the biggest hypocrite of all.

What Christian could vote for a candidate that wrote in his book: That his personal Viet Nam was sleeping around with married women and avoiding STD's? You had white pastors all over this country praising Trump's win. They're nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. They've lost all credibility.
Draft-Dodger Trump Said Sleeping Around Was My ‘Personal Vietnam’

 

[FA_Q2]

I live in AZ, and have witnessed for years the legislature's reactionary nature. If it is signed, it will eventually fail to meet free speech tests, and will be struck by the courts. They know this, but do it anyway. It is mostly theatrical. In this case, there was an anti-Trump rally that blocked a highway in Phoenix. Instead of dealing with the protesters who broke the law by blocking the highway, they just effectively tried to make protestors in general into gangsters.

The text of the law has been posted.

Show where it violates free speech and/or what a court will strike it down for.

 

[WheelieAddict]

The republican president has appeared in porno films, is on his third marriage to a woman who poses nude, and talks about grabbing women by the pussy.

Republican values

Wow. YOu mean you suddenly realized that the Religious Right did not get their way this time?

This just hit you NOW?!

Trump is the religious right, they voted for him overwhelmingly. No morals yet yeah we actually care about god and stuff. What a bunch of hypocrites lol, the religious right is a joke, basically a scam now

Trump is not the Religious Right.

He did reach out to them and made some decent points about why he would be better than Hillary, a very low bar, but I'm sure they are not enthused about him as a role model for their children.


Your attempt to make hay out of this is merely you showing that you have no clue about the role the RR has in the GOP.

No no--Evangelicals kicked their favorite Ted Cruz to the curb for Donald Trump. They are fake Christians and the only time they bring up Christianity is when they want to make a political or social point that they favor. They picked and voted for the most anti value Christian candidate in the bunch. They're nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. Mike Huckabee the biggest hypocrite of all.

What Christian could vote for a candidate that wrote in his book: That his personal Viet Nam was sleeping around with married women and avoiding STD's? You had white pastors all over this country praising Trump's win. They're nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. They've lost all credibility.
Draft-Dodger Trump Said Sleeping Around Was My ‘Personal Vietnam’

The republican president has appeared in porno films, is on his third marriage to a woman who poses nude, and talks about grabbing women by the pussy.

Republican values

Wow. YOu mean you suddenly realized that the Religious Right did not get their way this time?

This just hit you NOW?!

Trump is the religious right, they voted for him overwhelmingly. No morals yet yeah we actually care about god and stuff. What a bunch of hypocrites lol, the religious right is a joke, basically a scam now

Trump is not the Religious Right.

He did reach out to them and made some decent points about why he would be better than Hillary, a very low bar, but I'm sure they are not enthused about him as a role model for their children.


Your attempt to make hay out of this is merely you showing that you have no clue about the role the RR has in the GOP.

No no--Evangelicals kicked their favorite Ted Cruz to the curb for Donald Trump. They are fake Christians and the only time they bring up Christianity is when they want to make a political or social point that they favor. They picked and voted for the most anti value Christian candidate in the bunch. They're nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. Mike Huckabee the biggest hypocrite of all.

What Christian could vote for a candidate that wrote in his book: That his personal Viet Nam was sleeping around with married women and avoiding STD's? You had white pastors all over this country praising Trump's win. They're nothing but a bunch of hypocrites. They've lost all credibility.
Draft-Dodger Trump Said Sleeping Around Was My ‘Personal Vietnam’

Trump is "prosperity gospel" type christian.

Just sow your seed here with Trump university and the Lord will make you a success!!

 

[WheelieAddict]

Plant a seed! For a donation I can tell you how Jesus sowed your seed that will help you on the road to salvation! If you follow me and read my book you will learn to become one with god!

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Seizing property is going a bit too far in my opinion. I don't agree with this. Dangerously Totalitarian.

How about you give the rioters a choice?
Pay for the damage or we seize your property and sell it to pay for the damage you caused?

 

[Vandalshandle]

I live in AZ, and have witnessed for years the legislature's reactionary nature. If it is signed, it will eventually fail to meet free speech tests, and will be struck by the courts. They know this, but do it anyway. It is mostly theatrical. In this case, there was an anti-Trump rally that blocked a highway in Phoenix. Instead of dealing with the protesters who broke the law by blocking the highway, they just effectively tried to make protestors in general into gangsters.

The text of the law has been posted.

Show where it violates free speech and/or what a court will strike it down for.

It is not necessary for me to do that. If signed into law, the courts will, just like they have on so many other AZ reactionary laws, including their effort to enforce federal law regarding illegal immigrants, and just like they did against Sheriff Joe on profiling without probable cause (That one cost the Phoenix are citizens millions of dollars in penalties).

 

[FA_Q2]

I live in AZ, and have witnessed for years the legislature's reactionary nature. If it is signed, it will eventually fail to meet free speech tests, and will be struck by the courts. They know this, but do it anyway. It is mostly theatrical. In this case, there was an anti-Trump rally that blocked a highway in Phoenix. Instead of dealing with the protesters who broke the law by blocking the highway, they just effectively tried to make protestors in general into gangsters.

The text of the law has been posted.

Show where it violates free speech and/or what a court will strike it down for.

It is not necessary for me to do that. If signed into law, the courts will, just like they have on so many other AZ reactionary laws, including their effort to enforce federal law regarding illegal immigrants, and just like they did against Sheriff Joe on profiling without probable cause (That one cost the Phoenix are citizens millions of dollars in penalties).

No, they will not because the bill does nothing that is unconstitutional. You made the claim that it will be struck. You have to back that up. Stating that it has happened to other bills is meaningless - this bill does not do anything that is unconstitutional unlike bills that are struck.

 

[BlindBoo]

I live in AZ, and have witnessed for years the legislature's reactionary nature. If it is signed, it will eventually fail to meet free speech tests, and will be struck by the courts. They know this, but do it anyway. It is mostly theatrical. In this case, there was an anti-Trump rally that blocked a highway in Phoenix. Instead of dealing with the protesters who broke the law by blocking the highway, they just effectively tried to make protestors in general into gangsters.

The text of the law has been posted.

Show where it violates free speech and/or what a court will strike it down for.

FACT SHEET FOR S.B. 1142


riot; planning; participation; racketeering


Purpose



Adds rioting to the list of offenses that can be pursued under racketeering statutes. Expands the definition of riot and specifies that to prove conspiracy to commit a riot, an overt act is not required.

SB1142 - 531R - Senate Fact Sheet


Arizona bill punishes even peaceful protesters when events turn violent

If the bill becomes law, prosecutors could seize the assets of protesters, even if they didn't participate in any violence. The bill would add rioting to the list of offenses that could be charged under Arizona's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization laws.

The bill, according to a Senate fact sheet, stipulates that an "overt act is not required as proof of a riot offense."

 

[FA_Q2]

I live in AZ, and have witnessed for years the legislature's reactionary nature. If it is signed, it will eventually fail to meet free speech tests, and will be struck by the courts. They know this, but do it anyway. It is mostly theatrical. In this case, there was an anti-Trump rally that blocked a highway in Phoenix. Instead of dealing with the protesters who broke the law by blocking the highway, they just effectively tried to make protestors in general into gangsters.

The text of the law has been posted.

Show where it violates free speech and/or what a court will strike it down for.

FACT SHEET FOR S.B. 1142


riot; planning; participation; racketeering


Purpose



Adds rioting to the list of offenses that can be pursued under racketeering statutes. Expands the definition of riot and specifies that to prove conspiracy to commit a riot, an overt act is not required.

SB1142 - 531R - Senate Fact Sheet


Arizona bill punishes even peaceful protesters when events turn violent

If the bill becomes law, prosecutors could seize the assets of protesters, even if they didn't participate in any violence. The bill would add rioting to the list of offenses that could be charged under Arizona's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization laws.

The bill, according to a Senate fact sheet, stipulates that an "overt act is not required as proof of a riot offense."

No, an overt act is not required because a THREAT qualifies as well.

I posted the text already. It does NOT apply to a peaceful protester. You cannot threaten violence to others and then claim you are being peaceful.

Threats being illegal is not a new concept - it has been this way for a long time.

 

[WheelieAddict]

If there is an extremely authoritarian law to be signed, Republican "patriots" will be lined up. They are all about freedom and the constitution you know, baaaahahahaaa

 

[Vandalshandle]

The AZ legislature is a joke. I have lived all over the US, and the only state legislatures that are worse are S. Carolina (with their constantly trying to reinstate their right to fly the confederate flag on state property), and Louisiana, which is so corrupt that it is considered a rare event to retire from it without some sort of indictment against a member. Back in the 1960's, Georgia took the cake with their anti desegregation efforts.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I live in AZ, and have witnessed for years the legislature's reactionary nature. If it is signed, it will eventually fail to meet free speech tests, and will be struck by the courts. They know this, but do it anyway. It is mostly theatrical. In this case, there was an anti-Trump rally that blocked a highway in Phoenix. Instead of dealing with the protesters who broke the law by blocking the highway, they just effectively tried to make protestors in general into gangsters.

The text of the law has been posted.

Show where it violates free speech and/or what a court will strike it down for.

FACT SHEET FOR S.B. 1142


riot; planning; participation; racketeering


Purpose



Adds rioting to the list of offenses that can be pursued under racketeering statutes. Expands the definition of riot and specifies that to prove conspiracy to commit a riot, an overt act is not required.

SB1142 - 531R - Senate Fact Sheet


Arizona bill punishes even peaceful protesters when events turn violent

If the bill becomes law, prosecutors could seize the assets of protesters, even if they didn't participate in any violence. The bill would add rioting to the list of offenses that could be charged under Arizona's Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization laws.

The bill, according to a Senate fact sheet, stipulates that an "overt act is not required as proof of a riot offense."

No, an overt act is not required because a THREAT qualifies as well.

I posted the text already. It does NOT apply to a peaceful protester. You cannot threaten violence to others and then claim you are being peaceful.

Threats being illegal is not a new concept - it has been this way for a long time.

If this were to become law, I could peacefully attend a protest, only to find that, unknown to me, some guy had decided in advance to set fire to a billboard; and simply because of my presence, could have my property confiscated. You don't have to have a law degree to recognize that is a violation of my free speech.

 

[Tom Horn]

The AZ legislature is a joke. I have lived all over the US, and the only state legislatures that are worse are S. Carolina (with their constantly trying to reinstate their right to fly the confederate flag on state property), and Louisiana, which is so corrupt that it is considered a rare event to retire from it without some sort of indictment against a member. Back in the 1960's, Georgia took the cake with their anti desegregation efforts.

Our legislature reflects us Arizonans....we don't care what you think of us...just come on down, spend your money in our beautiful state, and then go home.

 

[12icer]

Arresting and seizing assets of protesters that aren't rioting, which most don't, is in violation of the 1st amendment. You'll note the article also states that police can arrest people for planning a protest.

There is no doubt that this is going to be challenged in court and immediately struck down, but again it shows the mindset of the 4th Reich of the Republican party. We are going to oppress free speech in order to protect the ASS CLOWN, that Republicans have installed in the oval office is what this is about.

Anyone involved in a protest that becomes a riot is complicit in the RIOT, and EVEN (especially people from out of the state) are subject to the Riot act, and are included in any and all persons to be charged. If you commit a crime and someone is killed, even one of the people with you committing the crime, you are culpable for the death and can be charged for aggravated murder in the first degree. So you liberal dogshit had better watch out who you protest with, anyone dies in the right state with new coming laws everyone fries.

 

[12icer]

If this were to become law, I could peacefully attend a protest, only to find that, unknown to me, some guy had decided in advance to set fire to a billboard; and simply because of my presence, could have my property confiscated. You don't have to have a law degree to recognize that is a violation of my free speech.

If you had a law degree you would know that any action you take in a group makes every person in the group responsible for that action. Complicity, is the term. The action taken is at the discretion of the person who charges the arrested people. In fact anyone involved in the planning of the act can also be charged as a codefendant.