More GOP values - fascism!

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

blocking the streets is at most a mild inconvenience.

Tell that to the people that live in those cities. Blocking the streets causes HUGE economic damage.

Freedom to publicly express ones political opinions is more important. This goes for pro-war protestors as well as anti-war demonstrators.

Um... blocking streets on purpose IS criminal intent.

And you are supposed to be a law student. This is like saying that combat soldiers are murderers because they kill people. Context is everything.

You wish! It just shows that they don't want to lose anymore money from blocked streets.

I doubt it. The protests are politically inconvenient. Many retailers in Toronto are all for the protests because they've been making a wad of cash with the influx of people to the downtown area - who usually go shopping or buy a meal after the protests.

[edit] and to add to that on the last three marches I have been on bystanders have cheered and clapped and occasionally joined in the protest.

Besides - 25 years for blocking a street is clearly too much.

[Jules]

Originally posted by Sava
How can the US be on the side of the people of the MidEast when they are all opposed to this war?

Because apparently Woolsey took a bad dose of LSD back in the 60s. Go figure.

[Sava]

If creating traffic problems is criminal, the Illinois Tollway Authority needs to be arrested.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Freedom to publicly express ones political opinions is more important.

As long as it does not infringe on someone else's freedoms. This is a basic idea of freedom.

And you are supposed to be a law student.

Um.. yeah, and that is why I know much, much, much more about the law than you. When you block streets on purpose, you know it is a criminal act to do so, and you intend to do it. Criminal intent right there, lock, stock, and barrel.

Why do you think the people that block streets during protests get arrested?

This is like saying that combat soldiers are murderers because they kill people.

If there was a law enforced internationally that it is illegal to kill someone if not in self-defense, then yeah, they would be. But there isn't, so they are not.

I doubt it. The protests are politically inconvenient.

Why would Oregon care about their politics? Oregon is more liberal than California!! It costs them money; they remember Seattle.

[Sava]

If there was a law enforced internationally that it is illegal to kill someone if not in self-defense, then yeah, they would be. But there isn't, so they are not.

Ah HA! But then Bush would have to prove that this war is self-defence.

[ajbera]

Originally posted by Agathon
Freedom to publicly express ones political opinions is more important. This goes for pro-war protestors as well as anti-war demonstrators.

There is no reason why you can't speak your mind on the side of the road or the sidewalk. There is absolutely no reason to block the daily affairs of others to make yourself heard. None.

Besides - 25 years for blocking a street is clearly too much.

This is certainly true. The proposed bill is hyperreactive crap. Traffic blockers should be charged with disorderly conduct, whatever, and given a few days in jail and a fine.

[Ming]

You have the right of free speech... you don't have the right to restrict other people rights.

Yeah... 25 years is a joke... arrest them to get them out of the way, book them, fine them, and let them go.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Sava: Funny .

[Jules]

Don't protestors get arrested already anyway? I don't see the need for new, harsher laws here.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Yeah, GePap, it seems that Boris is suprised that a legislator could propose a stupid law .

When did I express surprise? I'm not surprised at all, considering he's a Republican!

[Imran Siddiqui]

*points at Hillary Clinton or Charley Rangel in your neck of the woods*

[MichaeltheGreat]

Actually, there's been at least two threads on this, if not three.