It has recently been drawn to the attention among groups within social media as well as the ever reliable Fox News program that the government is restricting the first amendment rights of United States citizens. Signed in to legislature and overwhelmingly supported by both parties on January 3rd, 2012, act H.R. 347 has been declared unconstitutional in that it is, as Fox news analysts state, “[making] free speech a felony.” While I never aim to directly target any particular group, primarily one that relates with the majority of citizens as well as the hyper conservative tea party types, please allow me to politely tell these people to remove their heads from their asses. Knowing they probably can’t find the way out on their own, I’ll shine some light into the rectums of ambiguity.
Act H.R. 347 is an amendment to article 1752 of title 18 of the constitution regarding the act of protestation within restricted buildings or on restricted grounds. Part one deals with the barring of knowledgeable entrance of an individual onto restricted grounds or into a restricted area. Though I’m not one hundred percent sure of this, I would wager a large amount in the fact that entering and remaining in a restricted area also known as trespassing was already illegal. Not only that but I believe the right to own and protect private property is a big deal to my ultra conservative pals down at the tea party.
Following on this, part two of the amendment deals with the issue of intending to knowingly impede and disrupt government functions while on previously stated restricted grounds or within proximity such that is disrupts government conduct. “HA” you scoff, or at least you do in my head, you seem to think you’ve caught me. This statement clearly denies the right to assembly. Wrong. It denies the right to assemble in a manner that disrupts the orderly conduct of our government. It simply means if you’re gonna protest you can’t stand on the front lawn of the white house.
The thing that seams to be the issue is the government restricting the right to protest. This isn’t the case, all it does it enforce rules that were already in place. Protesters have never been allowed to protest in a disorderly, disruptive, or violent manner and trespassing laws have always been in place. Those who wish to claim, as Fox news has, that the government is unconstitutionally making the enforcement of these laws a felony, need to perhaps read act H.R. 347, for while it does state that the issue of protesting on restricted grounds may result in a fine, the actual acts in which the protestation becomes a felony are in regard to ending statements in which it is stated that no more than 10 years imprisonment may occur should a protester use or carry a deadly weapon or firearm during relations with protesting group or if the above offenses result in serious bodily injury. Both carrying and using a weapon during peaceful assembly and causing serious bodily injury are already illegal within the United States. The government has done absolutely nothing other than provide further protection for elected officials. Rather than lashing out as many of the conservative and tea party supporters have, perhaps more effort should be put into silencing the radical members of your group, for which these laws are designed to protect government officials from.
If the government wasn’t under threat of every AK47 toting moron, laws like this wouldn’t have to be put into effect. In conclusion your rights are not be denied. You can still go protest to your hearts content and you will be heard about the same amount as you were heard before. But for those who have taken this amendment as a serious movement by the government to enslave you, it may be wise to just stay home. As always I recommend that every citizen makes an effort to stay informed before they go flying off the handle as a result of everything the media throws at them. Journaling from Minneapolis, Minnesota, I’m Aaron Brandt, and this is the Brandt America.
ACT H.R. 347