MrApples

Applies to Unitedstatians only



There is a lot of big words and the guy telling it may not be the best auditor, but that's really how our government works. Big words and bad speaking skills.

The last bit is saying Ron Paul committed a terroristic act if your not getting that, and yes the guy with all the action sounds is not on your side.

Titan

Its not necessary taking away your freedom of speech.. its outlawing such acts as 'civil disobedience', which in essence undermine the ideas our country is based from.

MrApples

The point is it gives them the power to prosecute anyone who doesn't agree with the government. IE. People who use "Freedom of Speech". Really you could go to jail for making fun of Bush with this Bill.

Titan

Its not that doesn't agree, but conspires against. Although with corruption in the government, things could get out of hand.

King Stubby

which means... people shouldn't vote for people that keep secrets. because they're the kind of sneaky people who would use that. There's good news though. they literally CAN'T violate the bill of rights.

Titan

Well, you do realize this isnt even a real bill yet?

MrApples

It was passed 154 - 6 though, that's saying something about our government. That their either corrupt, slow, or not-caring. Either one deserves a good replacing.

Titan

Not sure where you get your info from.. but it was passed in the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES with a 404-6-22 (y-n-u) vote. It hasn't gone through the senate yet, and since this is a mainly demo adopted bill, theres no assurance that the pres will sign it.

Information from this site

LordForcystus

Good one!

Treason is civil disobedience right?

Titan

No. Civil Disobediance is to knowingly break laws to act against an injustice, willing to accept the punishment, and peaceful in nature. Look up Henry David Thoreau.

LordForcystus

I don't know if there's been a miscommunication, but what I meant is that our country was founded on civil disobedience. More or less. So it was a joke (which I'm pretty sure you got, and I'm the confused one)

LlamaNamedOsama

Ho-hum, nice video. How much cash the maker get for airing that? Mucho publicity.

Honestly, the slippery slope reasoning they use is mostly speculative, and taking things quite to a stretch. Not only must it still pass through congress, as well as receive presidential approval, there is always the Supreme Court which can rule it as unconstitutional were the bill to ever be abused.

I'd also like to see where he got his definitions of force. There's almost a nonexistent chance of the authors knowing of force being defined intellectually, and the "or" seems to be nitpicking at the most minor mistake made creating the bill. And if anyone were to even exploit the little loophole of "or" and the strange definition of "force", not only would the supreme court shoot down this bill, but journals, media, and citizens everywhere would cry out in outrage. The very fact that this video has been made shows that the youtube-generation today would have access to any disturbing use of this law nearly immediately.

"If ignorance is bliss, you must be very happy!" - Anonymous