Gather 'round folks, it's time for your annual dose of "What the hell are these people thinking?"
Washington state's senator, Doug Ericksen, has proposed a bill that would define and criminalize economic terrorism. "But Serio," I hear you say, "terrorism is bad! It involves people getting hurt!". Well. Not quite. Terrorism is generally defined as using fear and intimidation to achieve political goals. In this case, Mr. Ericksen wishes to define protesting as a method of intimidating people, rather than what it currently is - a democratic right.
If you read the language of the bill, it seems sound enough. Endangering lives, vandalizing, all that jazz is bad. But all that stuff is already covered by existing laws. In all likelihood, what the bill would accomplish is discourage people from participating in acts of civil disobedience - protesting and gathering for demonstrations thereby included - out of fear for legal repercussions.
Apparently economic gain is more important than freedom to these bastards.
9th September 2007
"Serio"Apparently economic gain is more important than freedom to these bastards.
Have they ever indicated otherwise? :p
"I'd shush her zephyr." ~ Zephyr.
When their actions cause the earth to quake and the skies to open, can we leave them behind as we settle a new planet? I don't feel like those shitnuts have any place on New Earth, given that they've helped bring the present Earth to the state it's in now :p
Mister Angry Rules Guy
31st January 2010
How did this all start? I cannot help but think this whole "economic terrorism" definition only became a thing because America just elected a Ferengi. Seriously. How did they think a Ferengi would make a good President?