Indiana criminalizes dissent
We read:
"Standing on a table and shouting at public meetings is a felony in Indiana and amounts to “Racketeering” if the offender is a member of an organized citizens group, according to arrest warrants issued April 17 in Pike County for two anti-NAFTA Highway protesters.
In the documents, Pike County Prosecutor Darrin McDonald and a state police officer allege that direct actions by members of the Roadblock EarthFirst! group between June 2007 and August 2008 are felonies under the Indiana Corrupt Business Influence Act, punishable by up to eight years in state prison. The law is Indiana’s version of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a.k.a. RICO.
Two activists – Hugh F. Farrell and Gina. A. “Tiga” Wertz – were arrested on April 26 and charged with four misdemeanors and felony racketeering for anti-Interstate 69 actions in Petersburg, Oakland City, Evansville and Bloomington. Farrell was released April 28 on bond. Wertz remained in jail as of …
According to the documents, the state believes that citizens organized to discourage public projects like I-69 are organized criminals.
Source
And the 1st Amendment was nowhere to be found, apparently.
7 comments:
I read the full article. If the charges are true ("evictions" from project offices, etc.) then these people went quite a bit further than mere "free speech".
Even the portion quoted mentions that they weren't interested in debating the issues at the public meeting. Instead, they attempted to shut down the discussion and trample the free speech of everyone involved.
Hate to say it, but they went WAY beyond "redressing the Government for grievances."
Bogus eviction notices, disruptive behavior at planning meetings, interference with lawful behavior of others, theft - all going well beyond the typical "nut with a placard" case.
I don't care how "righteous" your cause, forging court documents and stealing property are both prosecutable offenses.
Yep. Sorry there is a lot of stuff you post that is fantastic but these folks don't deserve your defense.
I think this simply shows the incredible amout of frustration being felt by people these days as they have less and less voice in "their" governments operations. What they fail to realize is that this is no longer an America where the people control the government, but quite the opposite.
Many may feel this is not the right way to go about protesting, but many others feel it's not enough. BTW, i don't recall hearing about a law like this being used against radical leftists and anarchists who routinely engage in violent demonstrations. Do you?
I think this simply shows the incredible amout of frustration being felt by people these days as they have less and less voice in "their" governments operations.Or is simply shows that when some people disagree with the decisions of the government, they feel that they can still try to disrupt things.
In other words, they feel that if things don't go the way they want, they can throw a temper tantrum.
Given that these guys are members of a known terrorist organisation, they no doubt have done quite a bit more than just shouting slogans and holding up some plaquards.
At the very least I'd expect destruction of property, vandalism, threats to life and limb of citizens and government employees, breaking and entering, etc. etc.
Both Anon 3:52 and 4:38 are apparently (and quite accurately) describing leftists.
Post a Comment