Uh oh, South Dakota is banning more "civil liberties"

Damien435

Active member
[FONT=sans-serif, Times New Roman, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica] S.D. governor signs bill restricting funeral protests [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] By The Associated Press
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica] 02.14.06 [/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica] PIERRE, S.D. — A new law restricting protests during funerals was put on the books yesterday as South Dakota lawmakers sped the measure through both legislative chambers in a few hours to make sure it would protect families who will bury fallen soldiers in the next week.
The House State Affairs Committee voted unanimously late yesterday morning to approve a new version of the bill, which was rewritten over the weekend to try to make sure it complies with the constitutional guarantees of free speech and the right of assembly.
The House and Senate then passed the measure, and Gov. Mike Rounds signed it into law by mid-afternoon, completing in a few hours a process that normally would take several days. Most bills passed by the Legislature take effect on July 1, but the funeral-protest measure contains language that put it into effect as soon as the governor signed it.
SB156 was prompted by protests in recent months at funerals in Huron, Rapid City, and Yankton for servicemen who died in Iraq. The Rev. Fred Phelps' small fundamentalist church based in Topeka, Kan., has also picketed solders' burials in other states, arguing that American soldiers are dying because the nation harbors homosexuals.
The new law bans protests within 1,000 feet of a funeral, memorial service, burial, or other ceremony from one hour before the service until one hour after the service. Lawmakers said they speeded up the measure's passage to make sure it covers the funerals of two soldiers later in the week.
Meanwhile in Oklahoma yesterday, a bill to restrict funeral protests sailed to approval in the state Senate after one senator said it was un-American to picket at services for fallen soldiers.
State Rep. Mary Easley's bill now goes to the House for consideration. It is among five measures introduced in reaction to protests by Phelps' Westboro Baptist Church.
Easley's bill would make it a misdemeanor to protest within 500 feet of a funeral and prohibits demonstrations an hour before and an hour after services.
The vote was 46-0 for the legislation.
State Sen. Mike Mazzie, R-Bixby, said the group has shouted obscenities during the solemn occasions and he finds its activities "despicable, un-American and unconscionable."
Mazzie said Westboro protests, such as one staged in January near a church where services were held for 1st Sgt. Tobias C. Meister, are hurtful to family members.
Easley patterned her bill largely after a Kansas law and says she believes it will pass constitutional muster.
Although restricting Westboro's activities appears to have universal support among House and Senate members, some lawmakers have warned that sponsors need to make sure the bill does not infringe upon First Amendment rights.
As for the new South Dakota law, state Rep. Tom Hennies, R-Rapid City, says the measure does not violate the U.S. Constitution, but will protect mourning families from the protesters.
"So we have grieving families subjected not only to the loss of their loved ones, but to a bunch of bigots who come to funerals and cheer the deaths of these people," Hennies said. "I think we owe some protection to the families of these soldiers. These men and women have given their very lives so bigots could take advantage of the freedoms they've died for."
A number of states are considering similar measures because of protests by members of the Westboro Baptist Church, which has about 75 members, made up mostly of Phelps' extended family. The church is an independent congregation that preaches a literal reading of the Bible. Church members have held signs that read "God Hates Fags" and other messages during soldiers' funerals.
"I think it's absolutely despicable we have to deal with this issue, and I'm ready to explode," South Dakota House Speaker Matthew Michels, R-Yankton, said during yesterday's committee hearing.
Michels said he was proud of Yankton residents who mounted a counter-demonstration against picketers during a Feb. 12 memorial service for Sgt. Allen Kokesh Jr., 21, who died Feb. 7 after being injured in Iraq in December.
"We are free because these people have fought and died for us," Michels said. "Everybody's entitled to their opinion. Everybody's entitled to protest, but you are not entitled to cause grief upon grief" for family members who are mourning the loss of soldiers who died defending freedoms such as the right to protest.
The measure's main sponsor, state Sen. Tom Hansen, R-Huron, said he and other lawmakers worked over the weekend with officials from the attorney general's office and the governor's office to make the bill comply with the U.S. Constitution.



Apparently this state is full of disidents. There's an old saying "Keep your Confederate bills because one day the South will rise again." and it looks like the time is now, except this time South Dakota, not South Carolina, will lead the charge.

[/FONT]
[/FONT]
 
These people are out to do nothing but stir trouble and if they're so bored and feel the need to be careless morons, I've got no problems with stuff like this. It isn't hurting their civil liberties, it's requiring them to stop being assholes and upsetting already grieving families..

There is no reason whatsoever to protest at a funeral other than to cause trouble. It's only a matter of time before some family member shoots into a crowd of these idiots or beats one to death.

Good for SD for finally putting a stop to this crap.

You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, does that infringe upon your civil liberties?

 
The same laws have been enacted recently in Illinois, Wisconsin and Indiana. So, SD is just following the others...
 
No, Boris, South Dakota was the first, followed by Wisconisin, Illinois and Indiana are amongst.... 11? other states considering a similar ban.
 
Good for South Dakota for finally putting a stop to this BS.
Wish there were many more states doing the same thing.

:salute:
 
Actually, there be a lot of states that are considering emplacing restrictions on protesting the funerals of soldiers. I think the figure was in the 20's. Of course, the ACLU will challenge these laws so the courts will decide the final outcome.
 
My philosophy.

Physical abuse and mental abuse should be crimes that carry the same punishment.

Going along those lines, if Person A has a right to protest VIA shouting their discontent in the form of a rhyme at a funeral then Person B should be allowed to protest VIA cracking Person A's skull with a 2 X 4, baseball bat and/or a 9 iron.

But that's just me.
 
Damien435 said:
My philosophy.

Physical abuse and mental abuse should be crimes that carry the same punishment.

Going along those lines, if Person A has a right to protest VIA shouting their discontent in the form of a rhyme at a funeral then Person B should be allowed to protest VIA cracking Person A's skull with a 2 X 4, baseball bat and/or a 9 iron.

But that's just me.

:lol:

I am with u
:drunkb:
 
Ya know it's one thing to voice your non-support of the current conflict by prtesting in front of a State Capitol (or in D.C.).

But to protest at the funerals of those who have lost their lives to protect that right to protest is absured.

Maybe I'll camp out near a funeral with a rifle....and shoot the assholes protesting.
 
jedi078 said:
Ya know it's one thing to voice your non-support of the current conflict by prtesting in front of a State Capitol (or in D.C.).

But to protest at the funerals of those who have lost their lives to protect that right to protest is absured.

Maybe I'll camp out near a funeral with a rifle....and shoot the assholes protesting.

I heard on CNN that a group called Patriot Guard Riders or some thing like that will confront these idiots wherever they go from now on and they will support military families whenever they need their support

--------------------------------------

UPDATE

I got it

Check here
http://www.kearneyhub.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16193659&BRD=268&PAG=461&dept_id=551037&rfi=6

http://www.newmediajournal.us/guest/woodrick/02252006.htm

Kearney-Area News
Motorcyclists shield funeral
02/24/2006

Wearing their leather vests and straddling motorcycles, the Patriot Guard Riders plan to shield the memorial service of a soldier killed in Iraq from a group that plans to picket the event.

A group from Topeka, Kan., that calls itself a church said it will picket the service of U.S. Army 1st Lt. Garrison Avery, which is scheduled for Saturday in Lincoln.

Avery was buried at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. He and two other soldiers were killed in Baghdad when a roadside bomb exploded near their Humvee on Feb. 1.

Avery’s parents live in Lincoln.

The Patriot Guard Riders, American Legion Riders and others have planned to stand behind the family at the service in Lincoln, shielding and protecting those in mourning from the picketers.

The riders are nonviolent, said Bob Swanson, vice commander of American Legion Post 1 in Omaha and a member of the Patriot Guard Riders and the American Legion Riders.

“The mission of the Patriot Guard Riders is twofold,” said Swanson. “One is to show respect for the fallen heroes and their families. The second is to shield the mourning family from any interruptions.”

Members of the Westboro Baptist Church, led by Rev. Fred Phelps, picket funerals and memorial services for fallen soldiers, contending that American troops are being killed in Iraq as vengeance from God because the United States abides homosexuals.

Nebraska and at least 13 other states are considering laws aimed at the funeral protesters, who at a recent memorial service at Fort Campbell, Ky., wrapped themselves in upside-down American flags. They danced and sang vulgar impromptu songs that condemned homosexuals and soldiers.

The American Legion Riders and others are fighting back. About 5,000 strong nationwide, the riders have provided the service across the country, including the Kentucky funeral.

The riders normally cheer and sing patriotic songs for the soldiers, to cover the jeers from the protesters.

A group of churches also plans to help shield the Avery family, said Rev. Peter Frazier-Koontz.

They plan to hold a silent vigil, Frazier-Koontz said, “as a barrier between what we really consider terrorists from Topeka.”

Swanson said his attendance at other funerals and memorials targeted by the church group taught him the value of shielding the families.

“I get chills just thinking about it,” he said. “The widow of a young sergeant in Topeka came over to our group sobbing and looked across the street at these people and just said, ‘Why?’”
 
Last edited:
phoenix80 said:
I heard on CNN that a group called Patriot Guard Riders or some thing like that will confront these idiots wherever they go from now on and they will support military families whenever they need their support

Saw that article a week or so ago. But thanks for putting it up here for those who have not seen it.
 
Damien435 said:
No, Boris, South Dakota was the first, followed by Wisconisin, Illinois and Indiana are amongst.... 11? other states considering a similar ban.

Then the credit goes to South Dakota!
 
Overhere we have a system where we grant the local police hte ability to institute binding actions. If they expect trouble or wish to ban something they can make a "police ruling". These are binding unless they infringe on civil liberties. But they can be dissolved only by a judge and untill that point they are binding.
That would make things easier, wouldn't it? Use a good attorney and a proces could go on for months if not years. And the families could bury their dead in peace and quit for a long time.
 
Ted said:
Overhere we have a system where we grant the local police hte ability to institute binding actions. If they expect trouble or wish to ban something they can make a "police ruling". These are binding unless they infringe on civil liberties. But they can be dissolved only by a judge and untill that point they are binding.
That would make things easier, wouldn't it? Use a good attorney and a proces could go on for months if not years. And the families could bury their dead in peace and quit for a long time.

But that only pushes the problem off to the side for a bit, it doesn't solve the real problem, which is that we have a bunch of self-hating Americans, who are unworthy of calling themselves that, who are going around the country trying to fight for a cause that they are doing far more harm to than good, and the only way to truly fight for their "cause" is to keep their mouths shut and abide by the status quo.
 
I often how the protesters would react if people from funeral party attacked them, I bet they would soon be screaming for their civil rights and police protection
 
Damien435 said:
But that only pushes the problem off to the side for a bit, it doesn't solve the real problem, which is that we have a bunch of self-hating Americans, who are unworthy of calling themselves that, who are going around the country trying to fight for a cause that they are doing far more harm to than good, and the only way to truly fight for their "cause" is to keep their mouths shut and abide by the status quo.

But they are free to hate their country if they want to, aren't they? It is a very pragmatic solution to a very specific problem. You can't create a law quick enough to work, and the problem might no exist anymore by tht time the law passes congress. This way you can prohibit things at very short notice, and scrutinize it later. If the real problem is that they hate America, what are you going to do? Are you going to make a law which prohibits hating the country you live in? And how will you enforce that law......
 
Well, Ted, like I said before, beat the stupidity out of them. Like my daddy used to say "If you don't stop crying I will give you something to cry about."
 
Back
Top