Does this mean armed protesters have half the rights of unarmed protesters?

[LoginName]

Or are they twice the threat?

Police said that if five armed people, or 10 unarmed people, are found to be unlawfully assembled, “police can demand that they immediately and peaceably disperse.”

http://www.boston.com/Boston/metrod...0JWIbXTp9Gn4jZKmfo2J/index.html?p1=News_links

Probably a moot point anyways since BPD/Menino would view even a single armed protester (even if carrying an unloaded firearm), as a threat to be dealt with in the swiftest manner possible.

 

[dwarven1]

Article the third [Amendment I]

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.

Is there an amendment that ISN'T trampled on in Meninostan?

 

[atmay]

Is there an amendment that ISN'T trampled on in Meninostan?

Yea, the one that grants unenumerated powers to the STATE. (Oops, the people are mentioned somewhere in there too. Ah well)

 

[MisterHappy]

Well, since a "shod foot" is a dangerous weapon, unless they're barefoot hippies, looks like five is tops.

I wonder....is anyone in the media, or ACLU land, asking what the statutory basis of this pronouncement is? Or is it like it says in the Tarzan books: "The law of the jungle is to boast and to believe"?

Perhaps an NES Open Carry Solidarity With the Protesters Bar=B-Q is in order? Wonder how THAT woudl be reported?

Today, a contingents of legally-armed libertarians showed up at the Occupy Boston protest to show solidarity with others in favor of basic civil rights guaranteed by the Constitution
or

Boston was invaded by revolutionaries intent on upsetting civil order

or

"Mernf durglye sweltyw" (Menino-speak for "call out the national guard" ?

 

[drgrant]

Or are they twice the threat?



http://www.boston.com/Boston/metrod...0JWIbXTp9Gn4jZKmfo2J/index.html?p1=News_links

Probably a moot point anyways since BPD/Menino would view even a single armed protester (even if carrying an unloaded firearm), as a threat to be dealt with in the swiftest manner possible.

I don't think that's what they mean by "armed". If you read it in the context of the paragraph before it, it sounds like they're talking about that hippy group hug protestor s**t where they try to attach themselves to one another so the police can't move them.

Police said they will use video to identify participants deemed to be breaking trespassing and unlawful assembly laws, which could apply to the demonstrators, who planned to encircle the camp, lock arms, and resist ejection.

"Unarmed" in that context means people not "attached" to each other.

-Mike

 

[Pilgrim]

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.

I believe the 1A is 'incorporated' like the 2A.

Police said they will use video to identifyparticipants deemed to be breaking trespassing and unlawful assembly laws, which could apply to the demonstrators, who planned to encircle the camp, lock arms, and resist ejection.

So how can there be unlawful assembly laws?

 

[MisterHappy]

I don't think that's what they mean by "armed". If you read it in the context of the paragraph before it, it sounds like they're talking about that hippy group hug protestor s**t where they try to attach themselves to one another so the police can't move them.



"Unarmed" in that context means people not "attached" to each other.

-Mike

There's a plan in place, no worries:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9ec_1296901185

 

[haynesmic]

no no no.... they're not in the free speech zone! they need to set up a free speech zone! THEN you're entitled to speak your mind...

although given a few of the chick's i've seen at this thing on TV here's hoping that free speech zone turns out like the one in arrested development...

 

[Talon3]

Actually its a state law:

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter269/Section1

CHAPTER 269 CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE

Section 1. If five or more persons, being armed with clubs or other dangerous weapons, or if ten or more persons, whether armed or not, are unlawfully, riotously or tumultuously assembled in a city or town, the mayor and each of the aldermen of such city, each of the selectmen of such town, every justice of the peace living in any such city or town, any member of the city, town, or state police and the sheriff of the county and his deputies shall go among the persons so assembled, or as near to them as may be with safety, and in the name of the commonwealth command all persons so assembled immediately and peaceably to disperse; and if they do not thereupon immediately and peaceably disperse, each of said magistrates and officers shall command the assistance of all persons there present in suppressing such riot or unlawful assembly and arresting such persons. For the purposes of this section, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst shall be considered to be a town.

 

[jarhead66]

Actually its a state law:

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter269/Section1

CHAPTER 269 CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE

Section 1. If five or more persons, being armed with clubs or other dangerous weapons, or if ten or more persons, whether armed or not, are unlawfully, riotously or tumultuously assembled in a city or town, the mayor and each of the aldermen of such city, each of the selectmen of such town, every justice of the peace living in any such city or town, any member of the city, town, or state police and the sheriff of the county and his deputies shall go among the persons so assembled, or as near to them as may be with safety, and in the name of the commonwealth command all persons so assembled immediately and peaceably to disperse; and if they do not thereupon immediately and peaceably disperse, each of said magistrates and officers shall command the assistance of all persons there present in suppressing such riot or unlawful assembly and arresting such persons. For the purposes of this section, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst shall be considered to be a town.

If state laws could overrule the constitution or federal laws, I can think of a few states that would have school prayer and no abortions right now. Just because a state passes a law, doesn't mean it passes muster to the constitution. Chicago and Washington just recently found this out the hard way.

 

[cekim]

So how can there be unlawful assembly laws?

You are talking about people who's command of English does not allow them to understand "shall not be infringed."

Actually, the issue is they don't think the laws (any laws) apply to them including the Constitution.

 

[atmay]

To be fair, that laws seems to have been written to cover assemblies which are NOT peaceful.....peaceful assembly being what's covered under 1A.

 

[MisterHappy]

What, though, is the definition of "peaceful". Apparently the reason the OBs were moved from the second location was to protect the newly-installed plantings....

It's supposed to be "Protect the peace", not "Protect the peas"

I'm sure that unless the weather turn bad and chases them away, this, or some other statue wil be used, as the tents will be considered eyesores, or there will be a scuffle, or something. Soon, the novelty will wear off for both protesters and policy-makers....,

 

[atmay]

What, though, is the definition of "peaceful". Apparently the reason the OBs were moved from the second location was to protect the newly-installed plantings....

It's supposed to be "Protect the peace", not "Protect the peas"

I'm sure that unless the weather turn bad and chases them away, this, or some other statue wil be used, as the tents will be considered eyesores, or there will be a scuffle, or something. Soon, the novelty will wear off for both protesters and policy-makers....,

Personally, I would say that "peaceful" means no one has died yet.

FTR, I'm not defending that statute or its recent application/interpretation by BPD. BUT, it would SEEM that the original intent of said statute is to wrangle up a posse to break up riots.....NOT peaceful (and therefor protected) assemblies.

 

[Talon3]

Actually its a state law:

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter269/Section1

CHAPTER 269 CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE

Section 1. If five or more persons, being armed with clubs or other dangerous weapons, or if ten or more persons, whether armed or not, are unlawfully, riotously or tumultuously assembled in a city or town, the mayor and each of the aldermen of such city, each of the selectmen of such town, every justice of the peace living in any such city or town, any member of the city, town, or state police and the sheriff of the county and his deputies shall go among the persons so assembled, or as near to them as may be with safety, and in the name of the commonwealth command all persons so assembled immediately and peaceably to disperse; and if they do not thereupon immediately and peaceably disperse, each of said magistrates and officers shall command the assistance of all persons there present in suppressing such riot or unlawful assembly and arresting such persons. For the purposes of this section, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst shall be considered to be a town.

This is intended for an unlawful assembly otherwise more commonly known as a riot, or a a lynch mob.

This is not intended for the Lawful Assembly of orderly peaceful persons gathering for a rally or a movie or concert on the common.

 

[rlee]

Actually its a state law:

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartIV/TitleI/Chapter269/Section1

CHAPTER 269 CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE

Section 1. If five or more persons, being armed with clubs or other dangerous weapons, or if ten or more persons, whether armed or not, are unlawfully, riotously or tumultuously assembled in a city or town, the mayor and each of the aldermen of such city, each of the selectmen of such town, every justice of the peace living in any such city or town, any member of the city, town, or state police and the sheriff of the county and his deputies shall go among the persons so assembled, or as near to them as may be with safety, and in the name of the commonwealth command all persons so assembled immediately and peaceably to disperse; and if they do not thereupon immediately and peaceably disperse, each of said magistrates and officers shall command the assistance of all persons there present in suppressing such riot or unlawful assembly and arresting such persons. For the purposes of this section, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst shall be considered to be a town.

This is intended for an unlawful assembly otherwise more commonly known as a riot, or a a lynch mob.
This is not intended for the Lawful Assembly of orderly peaceful persons gathering for a rally or a movie or concert on the common.

But the way it's written, if the city has an ordinance that makes any assembly unlawful, the state law gives them the authority to enforce it if there are enough people, regardless of whether they are peaceful.

 

[inerlogic]

Just because a state passes a law, doesn't mean it passes muster to the constitution.

tell that to the cops while they're tear gassing/clubbing you over the head....
and you won't be able to make a constitutional case over it because they'd likely drop the charges after you spent a few nights in "custody."