Posted on 07/26/2007 7:00:47 AM PDT by HoosierGirl25
Should citizens -- acting in good faith to report suspicious activity -- be subjected to lawsuits by Islamic activists? Democrats think so. Last week, they attempted to strip away the John Doe provision from the new Homeland Security Department legislation. For now, they have failed.
Reps. Peter King (R-NY) and Steven Pearces (R.-NM) John Doe amendment was crafted after a group of Muslim activists filed a lawsuit against U.S. Airways and the undisclosed passengers who complained about abnormal behavior that resulted in the now-infamous flying imams removal from the plane on November 20, 2006. The King-Pearce amendment, which creates a legal immunity for citizens who report suspicious behavior in good faith, was initially approved 304-121 in March.
Thanks to the hard work of Sens. Joe Leiberman (I-Conn.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) along with co-sponsor King, the amendment was upheld in a House-Senate conference Wednesday. The new bills, HR.1 and S.4, will improve cargo inspection on passenger planes and ships, increase security distribution funds to the highest risk locations, and most importantly, grant legal protection for citizens who report suspicious behavior.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
It would be interesting to know how “good faith” will be defined/determined.
Another one of those devil in the details kind of thing.
Don’t get me wrong I am for this amendment.
That will be up to juries, not dem lawmakers.
It’s not only a detail it is also a loophole.
Think it over.
A good definition is better than a loophole.
Think it over.
Think it over.
****When arguing with a fool make sure he isn’t doing the same thing.****
Don’t argue with a fool.
Think it over.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.