Should we prosecute sedition? (Ben Shapiro says YES)

Townhall.com ^ | 2/15/06 | Ben Shapiro

[Bigh4u2]

It would have to be worded a heck of a lot better than the old Sedition act!

http://www.law.ou.edu/hist/sedact.html

Way to much of it can be misinterpretted!

[Ace of Spades]

At some point, opposition must be considered disloyal.

And who determines where that point is? The people in power, who have the most interest in silencing opposition? Sorry, I can't go along with that, no matter what nut jobs like Algore are spewing in foreign countries. It's a tremendously slippery slope, and the potential for abuses of power are endless.

[desertlily]

WOW!!!! Great picture!

Speaking like Gore did, should have been countered openly and loudly, by the President. Or at least by Rumsfeld.

Our leaders' silence is like saying, "Yeah.....we're guilty as charged."

[TalBlack]

There is no such thing as 'sedition' in no-balls America.

[Austin Willard Wright]

It is also forgotten by the right that FDR often went after conservatives such as Robert McCormick, publisher of the Chicago Tribune.

[gunnedah]

No question but you still have to convict. Running from this scum most certainly assures a Democrat President next time. I would rather be in jail of for that matter dead than to give in to this bunch of scum. Did any of you see the Democrat from San Francisco last night on Hannity and Colmes. He was advocating doing away with the military and leave it up to the police to protect America. These wimpy idiot liberals would surrender quicker than the French if they were in charge and we were attacked. I trust Castro and Chaves more than I do any Democrat in position to win the WhiteHouse and anyone in the Democrat Party that goes against the left is left tied in knots.In my opinion the Democrat Party as a whole is a dangerous subversive organization.

[hophead]

Hang this traitor. And to think he was almost our President!!!!!!!!

[river rat]

Actually, I prefer the legalization of dueling..

Offended gentlemen should have the right to call the offender into the street to face the consequences for his offensive behavior...

There was a time -- when folks understood the consequences of slander, lies, deceit, treason, sedition, messing with the wrong woman or just being a major pain in the ass...

An armed and dueling society is a polite society...

Semper Fi

[milford421]

I say yes.

[weegee]

There are currently no laws against sedition. TREASON in a time of war is defined in the Constitution.

Added benefit, traitors can't run for President.

[blitzgig]

That's a good point. At the very least, it would be great to see prohibitions of treason actually enforced!

[weegee]

Do you mean The House Committee On Un-American Activities? That's HCUA. HUAC was the left's name for it.

The targets of HCUA won in the end. Socialism is ingrained in America now.

[D-Chivas]

We don't want to go there... not for some moonbat loser like Al Gore.

Let him slowly twist in the wind using a rope of his own making.

[dljordan]

Good. We can start with LaRaza and Mecha.

[Eagle of Liberty]

No. The next president is likely to be a democrat, and would love to charge everyone on this site with sedition. Don't set the precedent.

That's the answer. Avoid setting the precedent because a future President MAY abuse the power. /endsarcasm

Guess what? Presidents in the past have ALREADY abused their power. What stopped a former First Lady from hijacking FBI files?

Holding Gore accountable for what he said overseas is NOT setting an incorrect precedent. It is applying what our Constitution currently calls as the proper action.

[afnamvet]

John Walker Lindh (Taliban Johnny) comes to mind as someone that deserved to be charged and convicted for treason. John Ashcroft and the Justice Department did not charge him.

I have many personal favorites that I would like to see charged with treason and sedition but it will not happen.

[TalBlack]

"It's a tremendously slippery slope, and the potential for abuses of power are endless."

Another way of saying this is:'we can't be reasonable because who is to say what is reasonable'. (Hence the 2nd amendment) You can't codify right and wrong, you can only make law and hope that reasonable people apply it. If whom ever is in power goes off the reservation THAT must be handled by reasonable people.

To refuse to be reasonable because you're afraid that down the line someone WON'T be is to not know right from wrong (or not apply it).

See NV Gen. Giap for how many Americans died SOLEY BECAUSE AN INSIGNIFICANT ACTRESS GAVE THE NV HEART AND HOPE TO FIGHT ON.

[rfreedom4u]

I think a good start would be a huge letter writing campaign and protests. This could be followed by prosecution. That could send the message to future treasonous scum that they had better be careful. Of course the premier fight would probably be against the aclu.

[afnamvet]

BTTT

[DeaconRed]

"Jane Fonda, John Kerry, Al Gore and Congressmen Jim McDermott and David Bonior"

I'll have to agree.
If we haven't tried any of those for at least Sedition then why strart now.
Who was the last person charged and convicted of Treason?