Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

RockRaven

(19,164 posts)

2. Short answer: the various specific acts (like threatening elected officials) are already illegal

Reply to duforsure (Original post)

Fri Aug 19, 2022, 04:19 AM

Aug 2022

under various statutes, as are conspiracies to do said acts. Do we really need new laws, or would better enforcement of existing ones suffice?

Since all the various criminal acts are already, well, criminalized, what would such a proposed domestic terrorism law newly criminalize that wouldn't impinge upon our 1st Amendment protections of speech and association?

In considering a possible new law of this sort, imagine the worst possible abuse of it by people like Sessions/Barr/TFG and ask if it is really worth giving them such a tool to misuse against you. Because they will.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why isn't there legislation, and laws against domestic terrorism? [View all] duforsure Aug 2022 OP

Germans are asking that question Pachamama Aug 2022 #1

Short answer: the various specific acts (like threatening elected officials) are already illegal RockRaven Aug 2022 #2

Abuse of existing laws will continue either way, duforsure Aug 2022 #3

If Rs return to power, they can vacate the laws you propose Kaleva Aug 2022 #4

Simple Metaphorical Aug 2022 #5

Hear Hear, Sir The Magistrate Aug 2022 #7

Because rethigs would kill in senate with filibuster JT45242 Aug 2022 #6