To: Fresh Wind
Here's the text of H.R. 347 . . . I don't see anything out of the ordinary.
One Hundred Twelfth Congress
of the
United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the third day of January, two thousand and twelve
An Act
To correct and simplify the drafting of section 1752 (relating to restricted buildings or grounds) of title 18, United States Code.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011'.
SEC. 2. RESTRICTED BUILDING OR GROUNDS.
Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
-`Sec. 1752. Restricted building or grounds
`(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
`(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
`(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or
`(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
`(b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is--
`(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if--
`(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or
`(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118(e)(3); and
`(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.
`(1) the term `restricted buildings or grounds' means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area--
`(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President's official residence or its grounds;
`(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or
`(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and
`(2) the term `other person protected by the Secret Service' means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.'.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.
25 posted on
03/13/2012 5:21:49 AM PDT by
1rudeboy
To: 1rudeboy
So, what this is saying that someone who “disrupts” the “orderly conduct of Government business”, even if no weapon is used or carried, and no personal injury occurs, is subject to a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both.
Who decides what is disruption? Obama’s DOJ?
According to this, Joe Wilson’s “You Lie” outburst during the SOTU Obamafest could have landed him in jail for a year.
Yep. Nothing out of the ordinary.
32 posted on
03/13/2012 5:31:50 AM PDT by
Fresh Wind
('People have got to know whether or not their president is a crook.' Richard M. Nixon)
To: 1rudeboy
This article addresses it...
http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/2483-House-and-Senate-Passed-Bill-Could-Help-Feds-Crack-Down-on-Protesters-
“It amends a long-standing law againt willfully and knowingly trespassing on restricted grounds without lawful authority so that criminal penalties can be applied in a case where a person knowingly trespasses. Willfully has been dropped from the law by the bill.”
...
“But readings of the legislative text, federal statute, and legal precedent suggest that the bills supporters are simply unaware of the significance of the bills subtle changes in wording. As always with bills in Congress, its important to look at the potential for how it could be used and abused, not simply the intention of the members of Congress who sponsored it.”
39 posted on
03/13/2012 5:39:01 AM PDT by
deks
("...the battle of our time is the battle of liberty against the overreach of the federal government")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson