It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Arizona Senate Votes to Seize Assets of Those Who Plan, Participate In Protests That Turn Violent

page: 1
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:15 AM
link   
Arizona Capitol Times


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. And what’s worse, said Sen. Steve Farley, D-Tucson, is that the person who may have broken a window, triggering the claim there was a riot, might actually not be a member of the group but someone from the other side.


I realize there's quite a few authoritarians around ATS and many Conservatives are sick of all the protesting lately but I would hope anyone would be able to understand that this law and any similar laws break the 1st Amendment and are dangerous to toy with.

Laws such as these don't just affect liberals or the left but anyone wanting to protest for any reason... that means you right wingers too. All anyone would have to do to shut a protest down and get everyone arrested is do something considered violent.




posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Agreed. I think charging them with something like assault or vandalism or whatever correlates and throwing the in prison for the night is enough. Maybe have a 3 strike and you earned a harsher penalty clause.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

There's a big reason I moved from Arizona and never looked back. Their laws are some of the worst antiquated laws on the books. Now they are introducing updated versions of them.


+7 more 
posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

How about just arresting those showing up wearing masks to conceal their identities? I mean FFS! If you are there to protest peacefully, why hide your face?


Antifa and all of the other Marxist groups will make certain to ruin any peaceful protests and THEY are the ones that agitate and cause most of the problems from what I have observed!


And not for nothing? If you are there to protest peacefully and these clowns show up to agitate? You have 2 options, shut them down OR leave! If you hang out to watch them or join in? Then you go down with them!


Enough is enough!



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Um. You can't arrest someone because they "might" commit a crime.

And they need to prove their claim of "paid protestors" first, before using that to justify destroying the Constitution.

How un-American is this? Okay right wingers, imagine the police could arrest you and take away your guns because you MIGHT become involved in a shooting.

Dear defenders of the Constitution, I'm begging you, please help before it's too late.


edit on 24-2-2017 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Here's a link to the actual Bill for anyone interested.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74


Sen. Sylvia Allen, R-Snowflake,


Ironic.

This is ridiculous. Prosecute people who commit crimes. Do not prosecute people who might commit crimes.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:27 AM
link   
Like if you drive without insurance or suspended license or find a bit of green they take your work truck and leave you friggging standing on the side of the road in the rain?

If you are pulled over and have "too much cash" they take that.

Like if you're at home and they find something they take everything you own.

And now folks get ready, if they catch you in a photo at a demonstration they sanction your bank account.

Hummm Deee, get ready for a revolt you greedy control freaks. You thought a 'peaceful' demonstration was threatening, just keep squeezing the populace the way you do.

They no longer see the blindness of their oppressive, bureaucratic actions. Like that off duty cop who guards his lawn and wrestles with children, look what happened to his house. The whole town showed up with pitch forks and torches.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Ugh. Legal Mumbai jumbo.

Not sure but if it does what you say it does, they are using everything but the kitchen sink to get to where they can arrest citizens for protesting before they've done anything.

It's confusing at best.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963



How about just arresting those showing up wearing masks to conceal their identities?


Liberty?

The majority of mask wearers don't do anything violent they are just protecting their identity from government persecution, public persecution... as well as their jobs.



You have 2 options, shut them down OR leave!


Why would you let anyone dictate what you do or don't participate in? It's not anyone's job and in fact could violate the law... to interfere with the actions of another person.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

I'm glad you used the words you did. The language directly reflects language used by right wing media to smear current protest. I hope this serves as a vaccine against that type of propaganda.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard
Um. You can't arrest someone because they "might" commit a crime.

And they need to prove their claim of "paid protestors" first, before using that to justify destroying the Constitution.

How un-American is this? Okay right wingers, imagine the police could arrest you and take away your guns because you MIGHT become involved in a shooting.

Dear defenders of the Constitution, I'm begging you, please help before it's too late.



Hey buddy I'm right wing and completely against this. I am still wondering if this is true, being that it's so idiotic.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: rockintitz

Ha! Didn't even notice that.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Time to bring in a Phalanx of ACLU lawyers and sue the state.

Seriously. This is scary.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Speaking of racketeering, right?



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: rockintitz

I'm glad to hear it. Sincerely. I wasn't being snarky, just trying to relate it to RW Constitutional concerns, and since "the left" are the ones who are protesting and therefore the intended target of the law.

eta The Right has the real power at the moment. Your voices mean more than ours due to who is in office. That's why I'm hoping your side will call out crap when they see it.

Thank you.


edit on 24-2-2017 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-2-2017 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

Why don't you post the actual text of the bill so we can see for ourselves what it says?

Because it looks like it applies to a protest that becomes a riot after the fact.

I. E. Anyone arrested at a riot can have assets siezed even if they were arrested before the protest became a riot. It was still a riot which means property was damaged.

Funds will be needed to repair. I think it's better than taxpayers footing the bill.

I think my take sounds more likely to be the case than what some Senator putting his spin on it says.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:42 AM
link   

A. A person commits conspiracy if, with the intent to promote or aid the commission of an offense, such person agrees with one or more persons that at least one of them or another person will engage in conduct constituting the offense and one of the parties commits an overt act in furtherance of the offense, except that an overt act shall not be required if the object of the conspiracy was to commit any felony upon on the person of another, or to commit an offense under section 13‑1508, or 13‑1704 or 13‑2903.

The above quote is taken directly from the first line of the bill. The bolding is mine.

OK guys let's not just blanket attack the right. I am right leaning and I think this is wrong!.

Read the first section of the bill that I have quoted above. This is wrong on soooo many levels. I hope someone sues AZ to reverse this before other states get any bright ideas.

If the government begins arresting the people for crimes they "might" commit. We have lost all control. Welcome to 1984!



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn
I still not sure that is a good thing. What happens when I am videoed walking across my college campus, 30 minutes before all hell breaks loose.

Are they taking my money to fix the damage?

Nope, not cool at all! If you want to use security cameras to see who was captured on film rioting and then arrest and seize that's different. We can't start arresting people and seizing assets because they went to a peaceful protest and rugrats showed up.



posted on Feb, 24 2017 @ 07:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Martin75

Then the protesters intent on remaining peaceful should police their own and point out agitators to the police before they start shenanigans.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join