Revised Patriot Act Restricts Freedom of Speech

Revised Patriot Act Has Provision That Restricts Freedom of Speech



In the midst of the fight in Congress to renew the USA Patriot Act, a provision in the latest version gives the Secret Service greater authority to restrict freedom of speech at presidential and other high-profile events.



Currently, the Secret Service is authorized to charge suspects with breaching security or disruptive behavior at National Special Security Events, but only if the president or another person under the protection of the service is in attendance, the Washington Post reported. Now, the revised USA Patriot Act allows the Secret Service to prohibit individuals from entering a restricted area during national security special events, even when the president or other high-profile administration officials are not present.



If passed, the bill will give Secret Security the authority to arrest protesters who enter the restricted area of an "event with national significance." For example, anti-war protesters would be arrested at a presidential event even if the president was not there.



This little-know provision in the revised Patriot Act has drawn heavy criticism from civil liberties advocacy groups. The American Civil Liberties Union stated that the provision would lead to even tighter security restrictions at major events like the Super Bowl and the Olympics and subject protesters to harassment from federal law enforcement officers, as reported in the Washington Post.



Timothy H. Edgar, the ACLU's national security counsel, stated, "It's cementing the trend of the Secret Service basically acting to arrest or harass or control dissenters, and now not at presidential events but at other events."



"The right to free speech enshrined in the Constitution includes the right to dissent. This little-known provision in the renewal of the Patriot Act is another example of how the Bush administration is intruding on our personal freedoms," stated Shane Cory, Chief of Staff for the Libertarian Party.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Breaching the barriers would imply they arent peacfully protesting would it not?

I dont see how this is a restriction of freedom of speach.



[edit on 14-12-2005 by C0le]

Do you have a link to the assumption that this is even real or is this just a "rumor?'"

What defines a "restricted" area? They could designate a 2 mile radius restricted area around the event and arrest anyone in it. If they define a restricted area correctly, then your statement would be correct.

[edit on 12/15/2005 by Forgiven]

Frankly, the restricted area can be just about any area they want it to be.

2 miles isn't really that big of a distance.

There are plenty of people in this world that can kill you from over 1 mile away with the right rifle or equipment.

No one is taking away the right to protest.

While the 21st. Century is still young to our country, the Founders of this great land we call America, should be rolling in their collective graves knowing how the Govt. is doing it's best to undercut the Constituiton in which they formed. Every day that goes by our rights are slowly vanishing from sight. This Patriot Act gives way too much power to the govt. and it's branches that were intended to in the first place to keep them in check.
It will not be long before we have very few rights if any at this current pace. Everyone should know that once the Fed. takes something away from it's people they will play hell in getting anything back other than a hard time.
I was just reading an article on drudgereport.com about now how a new part of the Patriot Act is calling for the retail stores in the U.S. to keep and maintain a list of those who purchase over-the-counter cold meds. in an effort to combat the growing use of Meth. This also holds true to those who sell precurser ingredients to make the stuff. This is not a Fed. issue and should be taken care of on the state level. Before you know it the Fed. will be in our beds. It will not be long until they start regulating our vitimines and other supplements we need to maintain our health. I really do not see too many positives in the whole Patriot Act at all for the people. Sucks.

[edit on 15-12-2005 by FLYIN HIGH]

Flyin High, Can you give me one example on how youre rights have been infringed by our government. I cant give you one of mine because it hasnt happened. I live in a part of my state(mountains of NC) where meth busts happen very frequently. I understand that you think your rights are being infringed, but do you have anything to hide, cause I sure dont. Meth is one of the worst drugs out there. It literally destroys people, something like this doesnt bother me that much, even though I doubt itll get passed anyhow so I dont think you have much to worry about.

ludaChris

So I guess since you have nopthing to hide then I assume you wouldnt mind them searching your and everyone elses house for illegal guns, drugs, etc?

After all if they didnt arrest you they wouldnt be violating your rights right? If you think its ok for them to know everything you buy, read, think, say, eat, etc, why stop there?

I totally agree. I have being saying for years now that we are losing our natural born rights everyday and that our forefathers really must be spinning in their graves. The worst part is is that there are quite a few people in the world who don't even realize what is going on with our government and the Patriot Act.

What? And you're surprised?

It must be that misleading patriotic name of the bill. I suggest you use your freedom of speech while you can!

Youre blowing my statement out of proportion, I was being sarcastic with the statement, I dont have anything to hide. I shoulda added the rolling eyes for the effect. But what I'm saying is, my rights have not been infringed and I asked for and example of your rights being infringed upon. I havent gotten it yet. I dont see this happening. To me it seems it is just another product of the paranoid internet generation, how long have people been saying this kind of thing is coming? Its been said forever and more often than not, it just doesnt happen. Thats just my opinon based on reason. Say what you will.

[edit on 12/15/2005 by ludaChris]

Any person that thinks reasonably and clearly deserves a WATS in my opinion, the fear mongering that goes on in here is based on speculation, assumption, and what If’s.





[edit on 15-12-2005 by WestPoint23]

It is a good idea to arrest people who are causing problems! Americans have the right to free speech not the right to disrupt public events.

This is no big deal at all.

Also, the founding fathers would not want a mob of people to be able to stop government events. Again, nothing is wrong with this Act.



-- Boat

You mean like the Boston Tea Party? We know how much our Founding Fathers believed in doing exactly as told by there betters......LOL

With this new provision the rights to any type of protest either organized or spontaneous, either peaceful or violent will be completely make illegal under any circumstances.

So sad to see fellow Americans so willing to give away their constitutional rights just to defend their political leaders that are taken them away.

What many Fellow Americans are forgetting is . . . that all political leaders are supposed to be elected by We the people and taken away when they do not respect The will of the people

The brainwashing of American is going better than any power in the country would ever have hope for it.

Very sad.

You are missing the point. Everytime the people give a little, the government takes a little bit more. The founders were clear that a democracy, or in our case a republic, is only one small step away from a dictatorship. Our rights aren't going to be taken away in one day, they are slowly going to be pulled out from under our feet until it's too late. You may not be feeling the effects now because the movement is slow. As Benjamin Franklin said, "They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."

[edit on 12/15/2005 by Forgiven]

Just like always Marge provides us with her amazing insight into the future Like I said, assumptions, speculation, and what If’s. When you have something more than that, let me know

So we should wait till they start shotting us in the streets or doing house to house searches before we dare to question those that we pay to be outr servents? When do you think we should be allowed to disagree with the Government? Or should we just shut up and do as we are told by our betters? Maybe I am mistaken but I thought we had not only a right but a DUTY to watch those crooks, theives and traitors like a hawk.

And before anyone starts whining about the democrats did it too, I agree.

They are crooks, thieves and traitors too.

Ah.. Amuk is my hero. I wonder what makes people think our government is infallible. We have seen repeatedly throughout the entire history of our species how governments become corrupt and oppresive, yet some people chose to ignore this... Tragic.

Perhaps West Point turns one into to much of a step in line do as your told robot to understand.

- Attero

[edit on 16-12-2005 by Attero Auctorita]

Ha ha ha...

The Boston Tea party was of couse before the U.S. government was set up and the Constitution was drafted.

-- Boat