General Discussion

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)

13. I'm confused, are we into commentary now?

Tue Mar 6, 2012, 04:33 PM

Mar 2012

I'm suppose to care whether you've ever wanted to protest on the wrong side of a SS line?

The grounds can extend as far as they desire. The can, and do, use this to push folks back from in front of the White House. They closed off that street for a reason. You can now be pushed well back into Lafayette park. Bush used this law, amongst others, to take people well away from where ever he was. They used it to control the "optics".

It's a really bad law. And it's been on the books since '71 but somehow Nixon's version suddenly wasn't complete enough and had to be perfected by Obama. Probably because they've had so much trouble controling the White House and VP buildings and grounds. That occupy the Rose Garden movement had become such a terrible problem.

Change we can believe in.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

24 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Go read the bill and the law it changed. (HR347) [View all] MineralMan Mar 2012 OP

K & R. n/t FSogol Mar 2012 #1

Shined the manure zipplewrath Mar 2012 #2

The bill and the law speak for themselves. MineralMan Mar 2012 #3

Yes they do zipplewrath Mar 2012 #4

Yes it's "bad" to add the Whitehouse and VP Residence to the definiton SunsetDreams Mar 2012 #7

And the grounds zipplewrath Mar 2012 #8

oh my "the grounds" that's just "bad" SunsetDreams Mar 2012 #11

I'm confused, are we into commentary now? zipplewrath Mar 2012 #13

Or maybe it was because after the Salahi's pulled their gate crashing stunt onenote Mar 2012 #20

No I'm just into reading the actual law SunsetDreams Mar 2012 #21

You expect people to read? snooper2 Mar 2012 #5

No, actually, I don't. MineralMan Mar 2012 #18

I received an e-mail about this law yesterday from a Republican acquaintance. blue neen Mar 2012 #6

And yet, this was passed by unanimous consent in the Senate, MineralMan Mar 2012 #19

That's it. blue neen Mar 2012 #24

What's the legal difference between "willfully and knowingly" vs. just "knowingly" ? limpyhobbler Mar 2012 #9

Perhaps that's because Willful and Intent SunsetDreams Mar 2012 #12

It will depend on how it is enforced. mmonk Mar 2012 #17

It's now "knowingly" and "without lawful authority"... SidDithers Mar 2012 #15

This is about the 50th time there have been people trying to get others treestar Mar 2012 #10

Whenever someone posts something on DU about a bill or law, MineralMan Mar 2012 #16

Here is the change and explained difference in court. mmonk Mar 2012 #14

From my own experience, it's pretty hard to miss an area MineralMan Mar 2012 #22

Well, I do see one thing that jumps out at me. Leftist Agitator Mar 2012 #23