Constitutional Right To Peacefully Assemble Latest 'Victim' of Govt COVID-19 Crackdown

[Coyote]

1. Do my constitutional rights give me the right to put other people in danger?

I think the courts have consistently said...no.

Whether or not your rights put others "in danger" is irrelevant. There must be an injury/harm, not the risk of harm.

.

In that case Typhoid Mary had every right to continue working in the food industry.

You and Pogo are failing to see the distinction. Typhoid Mary KNOWINGLY spread the disease and attempted to operate under aliases to continue spreading the disease.

.

According to your logic - unless she actually infected someone, she did no harm.

 

[MisterBeale]

Govt flexes muscle to show citizens / Constitution / Founding Fathers who's 'Boss'....



One Arrested as Raleigh, NC Police Suspend First Amendment; Declare Coronavirus Lockdown Protest “Non-Essential Activity”

'Raleigh, North Carolina police suspended the First Amendment Tuesday, dispersing a protest against the COVID-19 Chinese coronavirus lockdown and arresting one protester for failing to disperse. The police issued a statement declaring “Protesting is a non-essential activity” that was in violation of an executive order by Governor Roy Cooper (D) prohibiting mass gatherings.'

What is considered 'non-essential activity' by the government is a right protected by the Constitution from a government who seeks to quell all peaceful assemblies...

Add this one to the list of Constitutional Rights - like exercise of religious freedom - being trampled in the name of 'preventing the spread of CPVID-19'.

One Arrested as Raleigh, NC Police Suspend First Amendment; Declare Coronavirus Lockdown Protest "Non-Essential Activity"

Raleigh, North Carolina police suspended the First Amendment Tuesday, dispersing a protest against the COVID-19 Chinese coronavirus lockdown and arresting one protester for failing to disperse. The police issued a statement declaring “Protesting is a non-essential activity” that was in violation...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Benjamin Franklin - Liberty/Security - Comments on Mass. Refusal to Alter Charters/Laws to Avoid War

As to the other two acts, the Massachusetts must suffer all the hazards and mischiefs of war rather than admit the alteration of their charters and laws by Parliament. ‘They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.’

.

Another way to look at it.

It's not just about YOUR safety. It's about those you might infect in the process of exercising your "liberty".

"might?"


"Clause 2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Has the President suspended Habeas Corpus or not?

If not, why not?

Otherwise, I don't think you petty tyrants have a case. Do you REALLY want Trump to suspend it? That is the only legal grounds you have to enforce what you want.

The Heritage Guide to the Constitution

The Heritage Guide to the Constitution is intended to provide a brief and accurate explanation of each clause of the Constitution.

www.heritage.org

Why Did Lincoln and George W. Bush Suspend Habeas Corpus?

In 2006, President Bush suspended the constitutional right of writs of habeas corpus. President Abraham Lincoln did the same thing in 1861. Why?

www.thoughtco.com

What is habeas corpus and can it be suspended?

On Monday, the White House would not rule out suspending habeas corpus ahead of the approach of a migrant caravan to the US border.

www.nbc26.com

Quite frankly, I am astonished the left would be the ones wanting to give the President this sort of power.



Good luck with that. . . .

Petty tyrants? Really?

So you think it's perfectly fine to suspend all public health concerns during an epidemic?

AND - what power, exactly, is being given the president here? These decisions are up to the various state governors.

Every citizen, in every state, still has the right of Habeas Corpus.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."



It must be suspended by the President to do the things you want to do, namely, keeping healthy people from exercising their civil rights and civil liberties.



You are the one that is being hyperbolic. You are making the assumption that anyone that is a non-essential employee is diseased, it is hypocritical.

Oh. .. but they are allowed to go get booze and food though. . .

What is going on is absurd. I don't know why you can't admit it. Why do you assume that folks need to stay in their homes, except when they don't. . . etc.

This has nothing to do with "staying safe," and very little to do with, "flattening the curve," and a lot more to do with seeing how much control the bureaucracy can exert.

"Strict adherence to all edicts is a must to be kept safe.
----------
Here are the official CDC Coronavirus guidelines:

1. Basically, you can't leave the house for any reason, but if you have to, then you can.

2. Masks are useless, but maybe you have to wear one, it can save you, it is useless, but maybe it is mandatory as well.
3. Stores are closed, except those that are open.
4. You should not go to hospitals unless you have to go there. Same applies to doctors, you should only go there in case of emergency, provided you are not too sick.
5. This virus is deadly but still not too scary, except that sometimes it actually leads to a global disaster.
6. Gloves won't help, but they can still help.
7. Everyone needs to stay HOME, but it's important to GO OUT.
8. There is no shortage of groceries in the supermarket, but there are many things missing when you go there in the evening, but not in the morning. Sometimes.
9. The virus has no effect on children except those it affects.
10. Animals are not affected, but there is still a cat that tested positive in Belgium in February when no one had been tested, plus a few tigers here and there…
11. You will have many symptoms when you are sick, but you can also get sick without symptoms, have symptoms without being sick, or be contagious without having symptoms. Oh, my..
12. In order not to get sick, you have to eat well and exercise, but eat whatever you have on hand and it's better not to go out, well, but no…
13. It's better to get some fresh air, but you get looked at very wrong when you get some fresh air, and most importantly, you don't go to parks or walk. But don’t sit down, except that you can do that now if you are old, but not for too long or if you are pregnant (but not too old).
14. You can't go to retirement homes, but you have to take care of the elderly and bring food and medication.
15. If you are sick, you can't go out, but you can go to the pharmacy.
16. You can get restaurant food delivered to the house, which may have been prepared by people who didn't wear masks or gloves. But you have to have your groceries decontaminated outside for 3 hours. Pizza too?
17. Every disturbing article or disturbing interview starts with "I don't want to trigger panic, but…"
18. You can't see your older mother or grandmother, but you can take a taxi and meet an older taxi driver.
19. You can walk around with a friend but not with your family if they don't live under the same roof.
20. You are safe if you maintain the appropriate social distance, but you can’t go out with friends or strangers at the safe social distance.
21. The virus remains active on different surfaces for two hours, no, four, no, six, no, we didn't say hours, maybe days? But it takes a damp environment. Oh no, not necessarily.
22. The virus stays in the air - well no, or yes, maybe, especially in a closed room, in one hour a sick person can infect ten, so if it falls, all our children were already infected at school before it was closed. But remember, if you stay at the recommended social distance, however in certain circumstances you should maintain a greater distance, which, studies show, the virus can travel further, maybe.
23. We count the number of deaths but we don't know how many people are infected as we have only tested so far those who were "almost dead" to find out if that's what they will die of…
24. We have no treatment, except that there may be one that apparently is not dangerous unless you take too much (which is the case with all medications).
25. We should stay locked up until the virus disappears, but it will only disappear if we achieve collective immunity, so when it circulates… but we must no longer be locked up for that?"

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

"Intent" is irrelevant. There's nothing in the Bill of Rights about "intent", even in the original Greek. Except for that one bizarre phrase in the Second Amendment.

So, you are telling me that to peaceably assemble is not based on intent or purpose? Just the outcome?

(This is a trap question.)

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

According to your logic - unless she actually infected someone, she did no harm.

Correct.

Until I actually crash my car into someone, I have done no harm by driving it.

.

 

[Pogo]

Your "lynch mob" argument falls right on its idiotic face because the intent of the people assembling is what matters, not the result.

Actually -- no, not at all. Suppose the lynch mob goes out to do its lynching but it starts raining so they all go home, no lynching happens. They still had the intent, didn't they. This isn't Catholic school now.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Your "lynch mob" argument falls right on its idiotic face because the intent of the people assembling is what matters, not the result.

Actually -- no, not at all. Suppose the lynch mob goes out to do its lynching but it starts raining so they all go home, no lynching happens. They still had the intent, didn't they. This isn't Catholic school now.

Yes. They still had the INTENT. Each of those mob members can still be charged and convicted of co-conspiracy to commit a crime. They still assembled without a peaceful intent. THAT type of assembly is not protect.

You walked yourself right into proving my point.

.

 

[Pogo]

Your "lynch mob" argument falls right on its idiotic face because the intent of the people assembling is what matters, not the result.

Actually -- no, not at all. Suppose the lynch mob goes out to do its lynching but it starts raining so they all go home, no lynching happens. They still had the intent, didn't they. This isn't Catholic school now.

Yes. They still had the INTENT. Each of those mob members can still be charged and convicted of co-conspiracy to commit a crime. They still assembled without a peaceful intent. THAT type of assembly is not protect.

You walked yourself right into proving my point.

Again, you're confusing "the law" with "sin".

 

[MisterBeale]

Govt flexes muscle to show citizens / Constitution / Founding Fathers who's 'Boss'....



One Arrested as Raleigh, NC Police Suspend First Amendment; Declare Coronavirus Lockdown Protest “Non-Essential Activity”

'Raleigh, North Carolina police suspended the First Amendment Tuesday, dispersing a protest against the COVID-19 Chinese coronavirus lockdown and arresting one protester for failing to disperse. The police issued a statement declaring “Protesting is a non-essential activity” that was in violation of an executive order by Governor Roy Cooper (D) prohibiting mass gatherings.'

What is considered 'non-essential activity' by the government is a right protected by the Constitution from a government who seeks to quell all peaceful assemblies...

Add this one to the list of Constitutional Rights - like exercise of religious freedom - being trampled in the name of 'preventing the spread of CPVID-19'.

One Arrested as Raleigh, NC Police Suspend First Amendment; Declare Coronavirus Lockdown Protest "Non-Essential Activity"

Raleigh, North Carolina police suspended the First Amendment Tuesday, dispersing a protest against the COVID-19 Chinese coronavirus lockdown and arresting one protester for failing to disperse. The police issued a statement declaring “Protesting is a non-essential activity” that was in violation...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Benjamin Franklin - Liberty/Security - Comments on Mass. Refusal to Alter Charters/Laws to Avoid War

As to the other two acts, the Massachusetts must suffer all the hazards and mischiefs of war rather than admit the alteration of their charters and laws by Parliament. ‘They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.’

.

Another way to look at it.

It's not just about YOUR safety. It's about those you might infect in the process of exercising your "liberty".

"might?"


"Clause 2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Has the President suspended Habeas Corpus or not?

If not, why not?

Otherwise, I don't think you petty tyrants have a case. Do you REALLY want Trump to suspend it? That is the only legal grounds you have to enforce what you want.

The Heritage Guide to the Constitution

The Heritage Guide to the Constitution is intended to provide a brief and accurate explanation of each clause of the Constitution.

www.heritage.org

Why Did Lincoln and George W. Bush Suspend Habeas Corpus?

In 2006, President Bush suspended the constitutional right of writs of habeas corpus. President Abraham Lincoln did the same thing in 1861. Why?

www.thoughtco.com

What is habeas corpus and can it be suspended?

On Monday, the White House would not rule out suspending habeas corpus ahead of the approach of a migrant caravan to the US border.

www.nbc26.com

Quite frankly, I am astonished the left would be the ones wanting to give the President this sort of power.



Good luck with that. . . .

What does the POTUS have to do with state and local ordinances? Did I sleep through an Amendment?

I already answered this in another post.

It's not an Amendment, and it is one of the bedrock protections little folks have against authoritarian tyrants.
"Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which demands that "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

It is what this issue is all about, you folks insisting folks are guilty without presenting a body of evidence. You need to suspend rule of law if you want to do that.

You have the right to Habeas Corpus unless it is suspended by the POTUS. No matter where you live. If your town passes an ordinance that says women are not allowed the writ of Habeas Corpus, or illegal aliens are not allowed the writ of Habeas Corpus, or those suspected of being infected with Covid-19 have no writ of Habeas Corpus, unless the POTUS suspends that writ based on some pretext, such ordinances would be unconstitutional.

You common wealth folks should read up on American culture before you come here to try to subvert our culture and government.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Again, you're confusing "the law" with "sin".

What THE FUCK!!!!!

Are you arguing that co-conspiracy is ONLY a sin, not a crime?

 

[Pogo]

1. Do my constitutional rights give me the right to put other people in danger?

I think the courts have consistently said...no.

Whether or not your rights put others "in danger" is irrelevant. There must be an injury/harm, not the risk of harm.

.

In that case Typhoid Mary had every right to continue working in the food industry.

You and Pogo are failing to see the distinction. Typhoid Mary KNOWINGLY spread the disease and attempted to operate under aliases to continue spreading the disease.

Mary Mallon didn't believe what she was told about being a silent carrier. But the victims who got infected from her were just as dead.

There's your "intent" canard again. Wack wack.

 

[buttercup]

Quite frankly, I am astonished the left would be the ones wanting to give the President this sort of power.

That IS funny, isn't it? And incredibly hypocritical.

This has nothing to do with "staying safe," and very little to do with, "flattening the curve," and a lot more to do with seeing how much control the bureaucracy can exert.

It has to do with their agendas. And there are numerous agendas. Agenda 2030, ID2020, more surveillance, the move toward a cashless society where everything is tracked by the government, and of course eventually the NWO. The funny (but sad at the same time) thing is that the bootlickers here seem to really believe they have our best interests at heart.

 

[MisterBeale]

So you wanna go back to post 11 AGAIN? It was that good?

OK, I can run this as many times as it takes until it sinks in. Here, horse, this is called "water".

The BASIS of a hypothetical lynch mob (and I didn't say it was racial, did I) is irrelevant here just as the basis of the hypothetical congregation, but apparently you're saying that a lynch mob has the right to peaceably assemble then? Because in either case the outcome is death. The main difference is in the latter it's potentially many more deaths and they're indiscriminate, whereas the lynch mob has its specific target.So the question we're STILL down to is, whether an assembly that results in death as a direct consequence of that assembly, can be called "peaceable".

Yes. It is peaceable when those people meet FOR THE PURPOSE of worship, not to cause death.

Do you get the difference, or do I need to further explain.

Your "lynch mob" argument falls right on its idiotic face because the intent of the people assembling is what matters, not the result.

"Intent" is irrelevant. There's nothing in the Bill of Rights about "intent", even in the original Greek. Except for that one bizarre phrase in the Second Amendment. When those people meet, REGARDLESS whether their purpose is worship, a Flaming Dickheads concert, a seminar at Fraud University, or anything else, they do so **KNOWING** that such assemblage ITSELF endangers the public health.

Have you never seen one of these?

View attachment 323860​

Bullshit. If they believe they are all healthy, they do not believe they are endangering anyone.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Mary Mallon didn't believe what she was told about being a silent carrier. But the victims who got infected from her were just as dead.

There's your "intent" canard again. Wack wack.

You are a fucking simpleton.

Did she intend to hide her identity?

.

 

[Pogo]

Govt flexes muscle to show citizens / Constitution / Founding Fathers who's 'Boss'....



One Arrested as Raleigh, NC Police Suspend First Amendment; Declare Coronavirus Lockdown Protest “Non-Essential Activity”

'Raleigh, North Carolina police suspended the First Amendment Tuesday, dispersing a protest against the COVID-19 Chinese coronavirus lockdown and arresting one protester for failing to disperse. The police issued a statement declaring “Protesting is a non-essential activity” that was in violation of an executive order by Governor Roy Cooper (D) prohibiting mass gatherings.'

What is considered 'non-essential activity' by the government is a right protected by the Constitution from a government who seeks to quell all peaceful assemblies...

Add this one to the list of Constitutional Rights - like exercise of religious freedom - being trampled in the name of 'preventing the spread of CPVID-19'.

One Arrested as Raleigh, NC Police Suspend First Amendment; Declare Coronavirus Lockdown Protest "Non-Essential Activity"

Raleigh, North Carolina police suspended the First Amendment Tuesday, dispersing a protest against the COVID-19 Chinese coronavirus lockdown and arresting one protester for failing to disperse. The police issued a statement declaring “Protesting is a non-essential activity” that was in violation...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Benjamin Franklin - Liberty/Security - Comments on Mass. Refusal to Alter Charters/Laws to Avoid War

As to the other two acts, the Massachusetts must suffer all the hazards and mischiefs of war rather than admit the alteration of their charters and laws by Parliament. ‘They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.’

.

Another way to look at it.

It's not just about YOUR safety. It's about those you might infect in the process of exercising your "liberty".

"might?"


"Clause 2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Has the President suspended Habeas Corpus or not?

If not, why not?

Otherwise, I don't think you petty tyrants have a case. Do you REALLY want Trump to suspend it? That is the only legal grounds you have to enforce what you want.

The Heritage Guide to the Constitution

The Heritage Guide to the Constitution is intended to provide a brief and accurate explanation of each clause of the Constitution.

www.heritage.org

Why Did Lincoln and George W. Bush Suspend Habeas Corpus?

In 2006, President Bush suspended the constitutional right of writs of habeas corpus. President Abraham Lincoln did the same thing in 1861. Why?

www.thoughtco.com

What is habeas corpus and can it be suspended?

On Monday, the White House would not rule out suspending habeas corpus ahead of the approach of a migrant caravan to the US border.

www.nbc26.com

Quite frankly, I am astonished the left would be the ones wanting to give the President this sort of power.



Good luck with that. . . .

What does the POTUS have to do with state and local ordinances? Did I sleep through an Amendment?

I already answered this in another post.

It's not an Amendment, and it is one of the bedrock protections little folks have against authoritarian tyrants.
"Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which demands that "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

It is what this issue is all about, you folks insisting folks are guilty without presenting a body of evidence. You need to suspend rule of law if you want to do that.

You have the right to Habeas Corpus unless it is suspended by the POTUS. No matter where you live. If your town passes an ordinance that says women are not allowed the writ of Habeas Corpus, or illegal aliens are not allowed the writ of Habeas Corpus, or those suspected of being infected with Covid-19 have no writ of Habeas Corpus, unless the POTUS suspends that writ based on some pretext, such ordinances would be unconstitutional.

You common wealth folks should read up on American culture before you come here to try to subvert our culture and government.

No one's being arrested by (again) state and municipal social restrictions.

 

[Pogo]

Mary Mallon didn't believe what she was told about being a silent carrier. But the victims who got infected from her were just as dead.

There's your "intent" canard again. Wack wack.

You are a fucking simpleton.

Did she intend to hide her identity?

She tried to, yes. Worked under an assumed name.

---- And? You know wny?

 

[WEATHER53]

Is anyone getting tired of this rightwing whine fest about "shut downs" and "constitutional rights"?

The shut down sucks, but the whining (and I'm not talking about job loss, a valid complaint) but the whining about not being able to get together in large groups is pretty shallow.

Quarantine is nothing new. Restricting large gatherings is during an epidemic is nothing new. But this level of whining is.

Anyone over 70 probably remembers quarantine during the polio outbreaks...

“But absolutely, when coronavirus hit, the first thing I thought of were those summers in the 1940s, how you couldn’t go to pools, you couldn’t go to the movies, you just stayed home,” says Gray, who as a child lived in Kansas City. “When I was in high school, a wonderful young man got polio. It was just so terrifying for us.”

maybe. maybe people are pretty shallow. but if people have legitimate questions about what we're being told vs. seeing, calling them shallow for asking is simply another form of shaming. you don't believe it, i will call you names.

and while a quarantine may be nothing new, i certainly have never seen an entire city do it; much less most of the world. to think people will sit and behave for an indefinite undefined period of time and not question why is simply unreasonable.

I think a certain amount of angst is understandable, and I think a LOT of angst about jobs, economy etc is very understandable. But I also think about how people underwent the privations, rationing and inconveniences brought on by WW2, with a sense of community and patriotism. But what I'm seeing is essentially people bitching about inconvenience (and, no, I don't like this either). And I guess the irony is, the people whining are the same people who bitch about others' "lack of patriotism" for not supporting certain policies or making choices based on "convenience.

It's going to end. This temporary suspension of large gatherings is exactly that - temporary. So...I guess my thought is suck it up and make it work knowing it is temporary. I'm more worried about jobs for so many people than I am about not being able to go to a physical church or congregate in crowds. My rights are not being infringed upon if it means temporary measures that preserve lives.

This is not a patriotic life saving endeavor we are being told to undertake
It is a compliance one with abdication of constitutional freedoms over non constitutional related health issue.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No one's being arrested by (again) state and municipal social restrictions.

Being confined to one's home is the same thing, and Habeas Corpus would apply.

.

 

[Pogo]

So you wanna go back to post 11 AGAIN? It was that good?

OK, I can run this as many times as it takes until it sinks in. Here, horse, this is called "water".

The BASIS of a hypothetical lynch mob (and I didn't say it was racial, did I) is irrelevant here just as the basis of the hypothetical congregation, but apparently you're saying that a lynch mob has the right to peaceably assemble then? Because in either case the outcome is death. The main difference is in the latter it's potentially many more deaths and they're indiscriminate, whereas the lynch mob has its specific target.So the question we're STILL down to is, whether an assembly that results in death as a direct consequence of that assembly, can be called "peaceable".

Yes. It is peaceable when those people meet FOR THE PURPOSE of worship, not to cause death.

Do you get the difference, or do I need to further explain.

Your "lynch mob" argument falls right on its idiotic face because the intent of the people assembling is what matters, not the result.

"Intent" is irrelevant. There's nothing in the Bill of Rights about "intent", even in the original Greek. Except for that one bizarre phrase in the Second Amendment. When those people meet, REGARDLESS whether their purpose is worship, a Flaming Dickheads concert, a seminar at Fraud University, or anything else, they do so **KNOWING** that such assemblage ITSELF endangers the public health.

Have you never seen one of these?

View attachment 323860​

Bullshit. If they believe they are all healthy, they do not believe they are endangering anyone.

So you're saying that restaurant employee can ignore the sign? A sign which is btw typically a state law....

Besides which, how could they possibly KNOW none of them are infected? That's what the choir in Washington "thought" too. Didn't end well, did it.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

She tried to, yes. Worked under an assumed name.

---- And? You know wny?

Her intent is established. What more do you want?

.

 

[Pogo]

No one's being arrested by (again) state and municipal social restrictions.

Being confined to one's home is the same thing, and Habeas Corpus would apply.

No one is confined to one's home. Strawmen-R-us. Melodramatic too.