Why Aren't Mexicans Who March Against America Arrest For Sedition?

[Bullfighter]

Sedition is a term of law which refers to overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.

Typically, sedition is considered a subversive act, and the overt acts that may be prosecutable under sedition laws vary from one legal code to another. Where the history of these legal codes has been traced, there is also a record of the change in the definition of the elements constituting sedition at certain points in history. This overview has served to develop a sociological definition of sedition as well, within the study of state persecution.

The difference between sedition and treason consists primarily in the subjective ultimate object of the violation to the public peace. Sedition does not consist of levying war against a government nor of adhering to its enemies, giving enemies aid, and giving enemies comfort. Nor does it consist, in most representative democracies, of peaceful protest against a government, nor of attempting to change the government by democratic means (such as direct democracy or constitutional convention).

Sedition is the stirring up of rebellion against the government in power. Treason is the violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or state, giving aid to enemies, or levying war against one's state. Sedition is encouraging one's fellow citizens to rebel against their state, whereas treason is actually betraying one's country by aiding and abetting another state. Sedition laws somewhat equate to terrorism and public order laws.

Sedition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Madeline]

Too bad you cannot understand what you read. Americans are free to agitate against the government, a right guaranteed in the constitution. We have known since 1800 or so that laws against "sedition" are unconstitutional.

The Sedition Act expired on March 3, 1801, coinciding with the end of the Adams administration. While this prevented its constitutionality from being directly decided by the Supreme Court, subsequent mentions of the Sedition Act in Supreme Court opinions have assumed that it would be ruled unconstitutional if ever tested in court. For example, in the seminal free speech case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the Court declared, "Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history." 376 U.S. 254, 276 (1964). In a concurring opinion in Watts v. United States, which involved an alleged threat against President Lyndon Johnson, William O. Douglas noted, "The Alien and Sedition Laws constituted one of our sorriest chapters; and I had thought we had done with them forever ... Suppression of speech as an effective police measure is an old, old device, outlawed by our Constitution."[2]

Alien and Sedition Acts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm so sorry you missed the Joe McCarthy era, Bullfighter. You'd have loved his loyalty oath approach to American life.

 

[HUGGY]

Why Aren't Mexicans Who March Against America Arrest For Sedition?


Why aren't people like you arrested for being criminally missinformed ?

 

[Bullfighter]

Too bad you cannot understand what you read. Americans are free to agitate against the government, a right guaranteed in the constitution. We have known since 1800 or so that laws against "sedition" are unconstitutional.

The Sedition Act expired on March 3, 1801, coinciding with the end of the Adams administration. While this prevented its constitutionality from being directly decided by the Supreme Court, subsequent mentions of the Sedition Act in Supreme Court opinions have assumed that it would be ruled unconstitutional if ever tested in court. For example, in the seminal free speech case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the Court declared, "Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history." 376 U.S. 254, 276 (1964). In a concurring opinion in Watts v. United States, which involved an alleged threat against President Lyndon Johnson, William O. Douglas noted, "The Alien and Sedition Laws constituted one of our sorriest chapters; and I had thought we had done with them forever ... Suppression of speech as an effective police measure is an old, old device, outlawed by our Constitution."[2]

Alien and Sedition Acts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm so sorry you missed the Joe McCarthy era, Bullfighter. You'd have loved his loyalty oath approach to American life.

And are Mexicans who aren't Americans protected by those laws? What gives that foreign army the right to march on the streets of America?

 

[goldcatt]

Too bad you cannot understand what you read. Americans are free to agitate against the government, a right guaranteed in the constitution. We have known since 1800 or so that laws against "sedition" are unconstitutional.

The Sedition Act expired on March 3, 1801, coinciding with the end of the Adams administration. While this prevented its constitutionality from being directly decided by the Supreme Court, subsequent mentions of the Sedition Act in Supreme Court opinions have assumed that it would be ruled unconstitutional if ever tested in court. For example, in the seminal free speech case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the Court declared, "Although the Sedition Act was never tested in this Court, the attack upon its validity has carried the day in the court of history." 376 U.S. 254, 276 (1964). In a concurring opinion in Watts v. United States, which involved an alleged threat against President Lyndon Johnson, William O. Douglas noted, "The Alien and Sedition Laws constituted one of our sorriest chapters; and I had thought we had done with them forever ... Suppression of speech as an effective police measure is an old, old device, outlawed by our Constitution."[2]

Alien and Sedition Acts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm so sorry you missed the Joe McCarthy era, Bullfighter. You'd have loved his loyalty oath approach to American life.

And are Mexicans who aren't Americans protected by those laws? What gives that foreign army the right to march on the streets of America?

Read it again. You can't charge anybody under the terms of a law that no longer exists. That's your answer.

 

[Barb]

Harriet Frothingham, is that you ?
Federal Bureau of Investigation - Freedom of Information Privacy Act

 

[rdean]

Free speech?

 

[rdean]

Palin responded, “I think they look at us as another Alaska family, that adapts to job situations and enjoys Alaska. So they can relate to us. You know, we’re just another family that, you know, juggles kids’ busy schedules, juggles jobs, and still has fun doing all that stuff. And so, you know, there’s, there’s lots of Alaskan families that do that and then really there’s a lot of American families that do the same." (Note: You really have to see and hear how he says it to get the full effect.)

News Hounds: Todd Palin, The Former Secessionist, Suggests Alaskans Are Not Americans

 

[Angelhair]

'And are Mexicans who aren't Americans protected by those laws? What gives that foreign army the right to march on the streets of America?'

A parade?

 

[goldcatt]

'And are Mexicans who aren't Americans protected by those laws? What gives that foreign army the right to march on the streets of America?'

A parade?

I know. Silly, isn't it?

There are real immigration problems that need to be dealt with. Letting people of Mexican descent or nationality have a parade, carry some signs and wave some flags is not one of them.

 

[kellyjack]

Just treat them like they treat their illegal immigrants.

 

[syrenn]

The beauty of this country is that you are allowed to hate this country. You are allowed to protest and yell as loud and as much as you want.

We are a free country. mexicans who come here legaly are part of this country and have EVERY right to protest.

 

[ConHog]

Up to a poiint we DO have the right to say ANYTHING we want

IMO this video shows a rally that pushed the limit if not crossed it

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGqPo5ofk0s]YouTube - L.A. Teacher Calls for Mexican Revolt in the U.S.[/ame]

Under United States federal law, a riot is defined as A public disturbance involving (1) an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons, which act or acts shall constitute a clear and present danger of, or shall result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual or (2) a threat or threats of the commission of an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons having, individually or collectively, the ability of immediate execution of such threat or threats, where the performance of the threatened act or acts of violence would constitute a clear and present danger of, or would result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual. 18 U.S.C. § 2102

 

[Bullfighter]

Up to a poiint we DO have the right to say ANYTHING we want

IMO this video shows a rally that pushed the limit if not crossed it

YouTube - L.A. Teacher Calls for Mexican Revolt in the U.S.

Under United States federal law, a riot is defined as A public disturbance involving (1) an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons, which act or acts shall constitute a clear and present danger of, or shall result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual or (2) a threat or threats of the commission of an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons having, individually or collectively, the ability of immediate execution of such threat or threats, where the performance of the threatened act or acts of violence would constitute a clear and present danger of, or would result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual. 18 U.S.C. § 2102

And yet Americans aren't paying attention to this and it is not shown on the media to inform Americans of the evil Mexicans who seek to destroy Americans of all races. Show this in the black community and they will understand perfectly. Mexicans are evil!

 

[ConHog]

Up to a poiint we DO have the right to say ANYTHING we want

IMO this video shows a rally that pushed the limit if not crossed it

YouTube - L.A. Teacher Calls for Mexican Revolt in the U.S.

Under United States federal law, a riot is defined as A public disturbance involving (1) an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons, which act or acts shall constitute a clear and present danger of, or shall result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual or (2) a threat or threats of the commission of an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons having, individually or collectively, the ability of immediate execution of such threat or threats, where the performance of the threatened act or acts of violence would constitute a clear and present danger of, or would result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual. 18 U.S.C. § 2102

And yet Americans aren't paying attention to this and it is not shown on the media to inform Americans of the evil Mexicans who seek to destroy Americans of all races. Show this in the black community and they will understand perfectly. Mexicans are evil!

LOL not all Mexicans are evil. My wife is of Latino descent, her family has been here for a long time, legally, she was born here, and they are good honest, decent people.

 

[Bullfighter]

Up to a poiint we DO have the right to say ANYTHING we want

IMO this video shows a rally that pushed the limit if not crossed it

YouTube - L.A. Teacher Calls for Mexican Revolt in the U.S.

Under United States federal law, a riot is defined as A public disturbance involving (1) an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons, which act or acts shall constitute a clear and present danger of, or shall result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual or (2) a threat or threats of the commission of an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons having, individually or collectively, the ability of immediate execution of such threat or threats, where the performance of the threatened act or acts of violence would constitute a clear and present danger of, or would result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual. 18 U.S.C. § 2102

And yet Americans aren't paying attention to this and it is not shown on the media to inform Americans of the evil Mexicans who seek to destroy Americans of all races. Show this in the black community and they will understand perfectly. Mexicans are evil!

LOL not all Mexicans are evil. My wife is of Latino descent, her family has been here for a long time, legally, she was born here, and they are good honest, decent people.

Did Mexico care about all the innocent people who had to die in WW2?

50 million people?

Where was the Mexican Army?​

 

[syrenn]

LOL not all Mexicans are evil. My wife is of Latino descent, her family has been here for a long time, legally, she was born here, and they are good honest, decent people.

Look at that we agree. The VAST MAJORITY of latinos are very good people. There are however some really BAD ones.

 

[strollingbones]

Ten recipients were born outside the United States mainland, one each in Chile and Spain, four in Mexico and four in Puerto Rico. Seaman Philip Bazaar from Chile received the medal in January 1865 and Seaman John Ortega from Spain in December 1865. The first native Mexican recipient was Staff Sergeant Marcario Garcia and the first Puerto Rican was PFC Fernando Luis Garcia.[5] 1st Lt. Rudolph B. Davila, of Hispanic-Filipino descent, was the only person of Filipino ancestry to receive the medal for his actions in the war in Europe during World War II.[6] Private Joe P. Martinez was the first Hispanic-American recipient to be awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously for combat heroism on American soil during the same conflict.[7] 1st Lt. Baldomero Lopez, is the only Hispanic graduate of the United States Naval Academy recipient of the Medal of Honor[8]. Captain Humbert Roque Versace was the first recipient of the Medal of Honor to be given to an Army POW for his actions during captivity in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War.


List of Hispanic Medal of Honor recipients - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Months later as young Private First Class Silvestre Herrera was fighting for survival in France, he was also studying to become a United States Citizen. Survival took precedence over study, and he still had a long way to go before taking his citizenship test.

Silvestre's unit was operating in the vicinity of Mertzwiller, France when on March 15, 1945 events occured that changed Silvestre's life forever. As his platoon was moving down a road they came under heavy enemy fire from the woods, forcing most of the men to seek cover. Not Silvestre. His one man charge on the enemy stronghold ended the threat and resulted in his single-handed capture of 8 enemy soldiers. But Silvestre's day was just beginning.

The immediate threat ended, the platoon continued down the road. Suddenly they came under fire again, from a second enemy stronghold. This time a mine field stood between the soldiers and the enemy gun emplacement. The pinned down platoon was at the mercy of the enemy guns.....Silvestre's fellow soldiers were helpless before inevitable disaster. With incredible courage the young PFC stood to his feet and entered the mine field to attack the enemy. Mines exploded around him but he continued on, attempting to not only attack the enemy but to draw their fire away from his comrades. Suddenly a mine exploded beneath him, severing his leg below the knee. Enemy fire continued to rake the field as Silvestre collapsed to the ground, then struggled back up on his one good leg and the shattered remains of the other to continue the attack.

Private Herrera couldn't be stopped. He was determine to attack the enemy that threatened to destroy his platoon. Then another mine exploded, this one beneath his remaining good leg, severing it below the knee. Unable to continue his advance, despite intense pain and the unchecked bleeding of the stumps below his knees, Silvestre lay in the minefield to pin down the enemy while others of his platoon skirted the minefield to flank and capture the enemy. Later Silvestre said, "I was protecting my squad with a machinegun. I was trying to draw their fire. I stepped on one (land mine), it blew me up. Then I stepped on another one with another foot. I was fighting them on my knees."

Silvestre Herrera, Medal of Honor

 

[syrenn]

Up to a poiint we DO have the right to say ANYTHING we want

IMO this video shows a rally that pushed the limit if not crossed it

YouTube - L.A. Teacher Calls for Mexican Revolt in the U.S.

Under United States federal law, a riot is defined as A public disturbance involving (1) an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons, which act or acts shall constitute a clear and present danger of, or shall result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual or (2) a threat or threats of the commission of an act or acts of violence by one or more persons part of an assemblage of three or more persons having, individually or collectively, the ability of immediate execution of such threat or threats, where the performance of the threatened act or acts of violence would constitute a clear and present danger of, or would result in, damage or injury to the property of any other person or to the person of any other individual. 18 U.S.C. § 2102

UCLA what did you expect?

 

[bodecea]

Just treat them like they treat their illegal immigrants.

That's right...let's model our laws and customs after Mexico's....