Just a layperson's comments. I'd be surprised if the Secret Service had not been sufficiently empowered to protect the President and could not legally disarm anyone in the vicinity of the President. I would not regard such power as infringing freedom sufficiently to warrent an effort to change the situation.
Where I think I see problems is Secret Service assuming power to remove protestors without legal authority. For example, if there is a threat to the President's safety from a possible bomb being thrown at his car as it passes, then secret service action to move people away from his motorcade route might be justified. All the people should be moved in that case. If the Secret Service (or local authorities) move only people carrying anti-president signs while leaving those with pro-president signs, it appears to me they would be abusing civil rights and infringing liberty. Absent a legal finding that a person is a criminal, the authorities should have no warrent to treat that person in a distinguished way even if his lawful conduct might offend sensibilities of those in power. Obviously, the key is that a protestor's conduct should be lawful (and the Secret Service should not have authority to make that conduct unlawful just because someone is protesting). I would love to see someone with sufficient resources take on what I understand to be abuses in this area. Phil > On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 23:50:40 -0500, Robert Woolley wrote: > > >This doesn't specify any conduct which one is required to conform to or > >refrain from in order to be in the designated areas. It seems, rather, to > >allow complete exclusion of unauthorized persons. Further, I doubt that, > >e.g., a campaign speech site is designated as a "residence" or "office." It > >appears to me that this is for, e.g., hotels that the president is staying > >at, or major portions thereof. > > I think you're right, and one of the links says that the Senate Report (many > years old) supports your comments; HOWEVER, recent media coverage of the > "pre-jail" at the DNC in Boston suggests that understanding "is no longer > operable." > > Other recent media coverage of arrests has said, summarized and restated, > that the Secret Service gave oral notice to protestors that permission to be > within the restricted area had been withdrawn, the restricted area being > defined by the Secret Service as pretty much wherever the protestors were. > > Along with you, I'd appreciate an update from anyone who has managed to stay > current with this part of the law. > > The other thought I have is that the statute and the regulations are careful > to say that state and local law are not preempted. So if the protestors > argue with the Secret Service, they are arrested for disturbing the peace. > > The extension to your original question about licensed firearms would be that > if the agent says "no," then the answer is "no. I recall a news article > several years ago about a licensed/authorized carrier (he might have been > some kind of judicial officer) who was briefly detained when he was somewhere > back in the crowd at a presidential appearance. Poor judgment on his part, > perhaps, but in the absence of formally designated restricted areas and/or > metal detectors hardly a crime. Or so I would think. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. > > -- The Art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is. Get at him as soon as you can. Strike at him as hard as you can and as often as you can, and keep moving on. -- Ulysses S. Grant _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
