PDA

View Full Version : Arkansas Town Tries To Ban Free Speech




DamianTV
07-20-2011, 04:54 AM
http://theintelhub.com/2011/07/18/small-arkansas-town-wants-to-ban-free-speech-no-group-will-be-able-to-meet-without-cities-permission/


A small Arkansas town of 850 is attempting to ban groups from meeting to talk about the city without first getting permission from the city itself.

In a move reminiscent of Nazi Germany, the Gould, Arkansas City Council has moved to ban all groups from discussing the city, even in their own home!

Mayor Earnest Nas, in strong statements supporting the peoples constitutional rights, said he is willing to go to court to stop this plan.

“This is America and even though this is Gould, Arkansas, this is still part of America. And in America, you can’t just vote and violate peoples constitutional rights,” said Nash.

This ordinance would effectively ban citizens from talking about the city at the dinner table, boy scout meetings, and book clubs. In fact, the ordinance is so Orwellian that the interview that the local Fox affiliate did with the mayor would actually be considered illegal under the proposed city ordinance.

A prominent lawyer looked over the ordinance and immediately deemed it unconstitutional.


Spokane Conservative Examiner

John DiPippa, Dean of the Law School at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, expressed disbelief when he first read the proposed law.

“The truth is the city of Gould doesn’t have the authority to tell anyone that they have no right to petition them, no right to speak and no right to exist in their city,” DiPippa told Fox16.

If the precedent is set in Gould, Arkansas it is only a matter of time before it is proposed in a town near you.

If the city council of this town actually believes that they can legally stop citizens from talking about city issues in the privacy of their own home they have another thing coming. This is America not Nazi Germany.

I dont think I need an alternate point of view on articles like this. They think they have the power to come into your home and just tell people that you cant talk about the Govt without the Govt's permission. I dont think so. The People have the Right to Petition the Govt for Redress of their Grievances. That means talking about it when ever the hell they want to talk about it. Im guessing that so far, nobody has anything good to say about what happens in their local Govt, maybe they should try listening to their people instead of trying to pass ordinances that prohibit people from exercising their Freedom of Speech in the first place?

(story taken with a grain of salt...)

roho76
07-20-2011, 05:23 AM
We need Constitution classes everywhere. Tyrants are everywhere and these days we only get fed one side of the equation and that's the government side. People only react when it's almost to late and that's not good. It's a full time job to keep the politicians in line.

Romulus
07-20-2011, 06:15 AM
Less politicians = more freedom.

fearthereaperx
07-20-2011, 07:03 AM
Video:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43w9rg-Nq1E

libertybrewcity
07-20-2011, 09:52 AM
why are city council members so dumb?

fisharmor
07-20-2011, 10:03 AM
Did Nazi Germany ever ban discussions of the state at the dinner table?
If not, is this not more of a violation of free speech?
Why is Nazi Germany always upheld as the worst possible scenario in any given topic, when it is clearly not?

oyarde
07-20-2011, 10:45 AM
Ridiculous . I cannot even drive through arkansas , they have strange laws and there would be things in my vehicle that are legal everywhere else except Seattle maybe , that could be illegal in Arkansas.

LibertyEagle
07-20-2011, 10:49 AM
That is freaking crazy. :eek:

fearthereaperx
07-20-2011, 02:02 PM
City-councils going wild: Quartzsite Az, Cedar Falls Iowa, Gould Arkansas etc.

pcosmar
07-20-2011, 02:48 PM
They need a new city counsel,,,or perhaps NO city counsel at all.

LibForestPaul
07-20-2011, 05:34 PM
Did Nazi Germany ever ban discussions of the state at the dinner table?
If not, is this not more of a violation of free speech?
Why is Nazi Germany always upheld as the worst possible scenario in any given topic, when it is clearly not?

Because it was evil, evil I tell ya. Much worse than communist Russia, fascist spain, and psycho china.

hard@work
07-20-2011, 06:23 PM
We need Constitution classes everywhere.


Now this is a good and noble idea.

TheNcredibleEgg
07-20-2011, 06:45 PM
I can think of only two solutions to stop all these unconstitutional laws from being passed in the first place:

1) Require new laws to be verified as being Constitutional BEFORE becoming law. Instead of forcing an individual (usually at their own expense and risk) to challenge it after the fact.

2) Require politicians to be PERSONALLY liable for laws they voted for - if deemed unconstitutional later. Like loser pays statutes. Not the city liable but the politicians liable themselves for the legal costs of the person who challenges it. Then perhaps they would think twice.

Any other ideas?

kahless
07-20-2011, 07:48 PM
Ridiculous . I cannot even drive through arkansas , they have strange laws and there would be things in my vehicle that are legal everywhere else except Seattle maybe , that could be illegal in Arkansas.

First I am hearing of this. What is it that will be a problem if I decide to drive through and visit Arkansas?

DamianTV
07-21-2011, 03:09 AM
Video:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43w9rg-Nq1E

By the way, this News Article is in Direct Violation of that very same Gould City Council Ordinance.

oyarde
07-21-2011, 10:49 AM
I can think of only two solutions to stop all these unconstitutional laws from being passed in the first place:

1) Require new laws to be verified as being Constitutional BEFORE becoming law. Instead of forcing an individual (usually at their own expense and risk) to challenge it after the fact.

2) Require politicians to be PERSONALLY liable for laws they voted for - if deemed unconstitutional later. Like loser pays statutes. Not the city liable but the politicians liable themselves for the legal costs of the person who challenges it. Then perhaps they would think twice.

Any other ideas?

Yes , yes and yes!!!!

oyarde
07-21-2011, 10:52 AM
First I am hearing of this. What is it that will be a problem if I decide to drive through and visit Arkansas?

Well they had some bill in the house that prohibits hammers , knives etc in your vehicle , in Seattle you cannot have a pocket knife and the cops shot some old deaf guy whittiling who did not drop the illegal pocket knife. Then there is that bill in Alabama which will jail you for giving someone a ride if they are not a citizen....

oyarde
07-21-2011, 10:57 AM
Maybe it is just me , but if some dumbass thinks they are going to jail me for giving someone a ride , think again. Not going to happen . Prepare to defend yourself .

fisharmor
07-21-2011, 10:58 AM
I can think of only two solutions to stop all these unconstitutional laws from being passed in the first place:

1) Require new laws to be verified as being Constitutional BEFORE becoming law. Instead of forcing an individual (usually at their own expense and risk) to challenge it after the fact.

2) Require politicians to be PERSONALLY liable for laws they voted for - if deemed unconstitutional later. Like loser pays statutes. Not the city liable but the politicians liable themselves for the legal costs of the person who challenges it. Then perhaps they would think twice.

Any other ideas?

Yeah, like the only idea that has any chance of improving the situation... elimination of the state.

kahless
07-21-2011, 11:15 AM
Well they had some bill in the house that prohibits hammers , knives etc in your vehicle .

It did not pass, right? So currently the issue with Arkansas is you have some totalitarian politicians but they are being kept in their place?


Yeah, like the only idea that has any chance of improving the situation... elimination of the state.

In favor of a federal republic that is strictly adherent to the Constitution or no state meaning no government? In the first case any new administration will pass laws that deprive rights claiming they are Constitutional. At least with a collection of states they can nullify whatever the federal government is doing if it is unconstitutional.

Without government, those that love government will force their will on you perhaps even with the help of other countries. Unfortunately government at least on a minimal level to protect natural rights and national defense to prevent other governments or groups from gaining control seems to be a necessary evil.

oyarde
07-21-2011, 11:24 AM
It did not pass, right? So currently the issue with Arkansas is you have some totalitarian politicians but they are being kept in their place?



In favor of a federal republic that is strictly adherent to the Constitution or no state meaning no government? In the first case any new administration will pass laws that deprive rights claiming they are Constitutional. At least with a collection of states they can nullify whatever the federal government is doing if it is unconstitutional.

Without government, those that love government will force their will on you perhaps even with the help of other countries. Unfortunately government at least on a minimal level to protect natural rights and national defense to prevent other governments or groups from gaining control seems to be a necessary evil.

Maybe bill 5- 73 -120 , I imagine it did pass , do not know .

DamianTV
07-21-2011, 11:50 AM
Revolutions start small...