speech + action

[Tim May]

On Thursday, August 30, 2001, at 10:20 PM, mmotyka at lsil.com wrote:

> Tim,
>
> It's not easy to find great links but I still say that speech + action
> is something that a prosecutor can use to the disadvantage of the
> accused even if the speech is legal and the action appears to be
> ineffectual or undirected. Look at how AP was used. 18 U.S.C. 23 1 seems
> to link speech directly with the action of paramilitary training, even
> if there is no specific target. The speech portion of the offense
> enables a heavy response to the otherwise unpunishable action. Whether
> or not anyone has been convicted under this statute there it sits, ready
> to pounce.

Which is why I asked for you some actual cases. I pointed out that--so 
far as I have heard--there have been _no_ prosecutions for "paramilitary 
training." (There may have been some paramilitary types busted for 
firing AK-47s, for trespassing, whatever. This is why I listed these as 
exceptions.)

Bell's AP was not one of the charges in his case.

>
> Admittedly these are weak cites but I do think the (
> legal_but_unpopular_speech + unpunishable_action = crime ) idea is
> embodied in laws. I think eventually it'll somehow get extended to
> address the cyberterrordangerouslyeducatedchaosprogrammerdeaththreat
> that faces each and every freedom-loving, net-browsing Amurrican today!
>
> Maybe the pro bono brigade of the unorganized, non-organizational,
> casually associational, non-paramilitary, non-coding, non-militia,
> profusely verbal cypherpunks flying circus will chime in with some fun
> stuff.

No point in going round and round. I don't think even the U.S.G. has 
this power that you think it does, and I cite the non-prosecution of 
many right-wing groups as evidence. When busts have occurred, other 
alleged crimes were involved, like trespassing, violations of gun laws, 
etc.


> http://www.sfgate.com/okc/winokur/0423.html
>
> http://www.vpc.org/studies/awapara.htm
>
> In 1986, the ADL formulated model state legislation that would ban
> paramilitary training "aimed at provoking civil disorder."[104] In
> drafting the model bill, the ADL specifically stated that the statute
> must not violate First Amendment   freedoms of speech and association.

Well, the ADL is made up mostly of Jews, and Jews have extraordinarily 
anti-liberty views. If the Jews ran our country...wait a minute, they do.


Never mind.


(P.S. Just kidding. The ADL and B'nai Brith and Jews for the 
Confiscation of Firearms have not succeeded in getting thoughtcrimes 
banned the way they had hoped. And Jews for the Preservation of Firearms 
Rights are actively campaigning on the other side.)


--Tim May