RKBA Legal question


PDA






brookstexas
June 13, 2004, 10:06 AM
If someone attempts to deny you your civil rights through organized means-websites that spout hate, lies and untruths isn't that an offense?
DO gun owners have any case under RICO or any laws against the VPC and Brady Bunch folks?
CT

If you enjoyed reading about "RKBA Legal question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Art Eatman
June 13, 2004, 11:06 AM
Not under the First Amendment...

Art

brookstexas
June 13, 2004, 11:12 AM
but don't we have libel laws and other laws concerning speech?
You may yell "Fire" when there isn't one but you also may inccur penalities for doing so.

WT
June 13, 2004, 12:00 PM
Your question is not specfic.

How has your personal name and reputation been defamed by the speech of others on the internet? What financial losses have you incurred due to their speech? See libel definition at link
http://www.legal-definitions.com/I,%20J,%20K/libel.htm

RICO is a federal law which applies to criminal organizations carrying out specific criminal acts. What criminal organizations and specific acts are you referring to? See RICO link at http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/laws/majorlaw/rico/rico.htm

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 covers issues dealing with race, religion, sex, etc. How have your civil rights been infringed by these people? See civil rights definition at link
http://www.legal-definitions.com/civil-rights-act-of-1964.htm

CarlS
June 13, 2004, 12:29 PM
RICO is a federal law which applies to criminal organizations carrying out specific criminal acts. What criminal organizations and specific acts are you referring to? See RICO link at http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa...w/rico/rico.htm
WT, unless I am mistaken, RICCO has been applied to right to life protestors. I'm not rying to argue; I'm trying to learn.

Graystar
June 13, 2004, 01:37 PM
If someone attempts to deny you your civil rights through organized means-websites that spout hate, lies and untruths isn't that an offense? No. There's no way to deny a person his civil rights through the postings of a website. Some act must be performed that would specifically deny the rights of particular people.

A website may defame someone and as such be libel for any harm caused. However, that has nothing to do with rights. That's simply being held responsible for actual harm.

brookstexas
June 13, 2004, 01:44 PM
I'm treated different becuase of anti-gun propaganda. Example- I was just denied being allowed to use the free classified listings on our homeowner assoc. website for a handgun. Why? Years of anti-gun indoctrination make folks think they are bad and I must be a crazy to own them.
I am denied being able to own certain guns if I live in XYZ place for cosmetic resons. I'm sure we can all think of examples....

WT
June 13, 2004, 01:53 PM
Carl - if people come together from around the country and physically stop or threaten others seeking or providing medical care, well they should be charged under RICO. They crossed state lines (making it federal) and agreed (conspired) to assault (harm) another.

An extreme example - some pro-life advocates have actually murdered abortion doctors and fled to other jurisidications with the help of others. That's RICO.

Graystar
June 13, 2004, 02:06 PM
An extreme example - some pro-life advocates have actually murdered abortion doctors and fled to other jurisidications with the help of others. That's RICO. It takes more than that.

http://www.ricoact.com/ricoact/nutshell.asp#conclusion

http://www.ricoact.com/ricoact/nutshell.asp

WT
June 13, 2004, 02:39 PM
Graystar - interesting reading. Thanks.

CarlS
June 13, 2004, 05:04 PM
Graystar, thanks for the links. I learned.


Carl - if people come together from around the country and physically stop or threaten others seeking or providing medical care, well they should be charged under RICO. They crossed state lines (making it federal) and agreed (conspired) to assault (harm) another.

An extreme example - some pro-life advocates have actually murdered abortion doctors and fled to other jurisidications with the help of others. That's RICO.

WT, I agree about the conspiring to harm others, kill, and destroy property. That is criminal. However, RICCO has been used to prevent pro life demonstrations which involved people other than the lunitic activists. Other groups "conspire" to protest from various jurisdictions - the Million Mom March - and RICCO is not used against them. I'm missing something here. Or is pro life being treated in a discrimantory manner as is RKBA?

WT
June 13, 2004, 06:10 PM
How has the Million Mom March harmed anyone?

brookstexas
June 13, 2004, 06:19 PM
Well if people listen to their stats that are inaccurate, introduce or vote for laws restricting our 2A rights I think it's clear.
I think just as bad is the mommies that listen and believe and later on are raped and killed from bad choices.
If I work for someone who listens to them without balance and sees my NRA sticker I may be out of a job or promotion because of fear.
On and on....

CarlS
June 13, 2004, 06:55 PM
WT, a protest and a bombing or murder are two different things. Are you suggesting that every pro life protester is a bomber or murderer? It seems to me they should have the same right to gather and protest as the Million Mom March people, anti-war protesters, etc. I find it a bit strange that RICCO has been used against the entire movement. And yes, the Million Mom March is trying to hurt me by removing my means and right to self defense. My point is that the intent of RICCO has been stretched and is being applied to non politically correct groups in a discriminatory fashion.

I see it as a tool to be used by those in power to limit protest in the same vein that the Campaign Finance Reform act limits our First Amendment rights. I believe the way RICCO has been used is one more nail in the Bill of Rights.

WT
June 13, 2004, 07:47 PM
Carl - you brought up the right to life issue. You did not provide a reference to a specific case. Since you did not do so, I can only respond in generalities. I know that a number of doctors and clinic workers were murdered, burned and maimed by pro-lifers who conspired to do so.

I do not believe the MMM meets the definition of a criminal organization. I do not know of any case where people have been physically injured, put in fear for their lives, or financially harmed by them. When the MMM paraded in Washington DC, I believe they got the proper permits to demonstrate and express their 1st Amendment Rights. I don't agree with them but I believe they were within their rights to peacefully assemble.

I do not think all pro-lifers are dangerous people. Most are peaceful in nature and committed to their point of view. Others are less so.

Getting back to the origin of this thread, one can spout hate and lies on the internet but when it comes to harming someone then they can be held responsible for their actions.

If one feels that they have been harmed, they should see an attorney to resolve the issue.

Graystar
June 13, 2004, 09:08 PM
Well if people listen to their stats that are inaccurate, introduce or vote for laws restricting our 2A rights I think it's clear. So they should go to jail because they don't think as you do. That's just great :rolleyes:

If you enjoyed reading about "RKBA Legal question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!