About time!

http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/amended-protest-law-passes-tas-upper-house/story-fni0xqi3-1227115248651

Oppose and defy!

These filthy 'laws' are just  plain wrong.

I have no time for either their proponents or their supporters.

Time for the far-right to go - permanently.

Our foreparents had similar laws to contend with and they simply just defied them. Time to do the same. Thing is once we ignore the law once the easier it gets until the law starts to look decidedly like and ass.

http://m.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/amended-protest-law-passes-tas...

I'd be interested to know what constitutes a 'radical protestor' as opposed to an ordinary one.  Without a clear definition it seems to me this piece of legislation is wide open to abuse, and any serious violent etc protestor or other person behaving in the same way was already open to sanction of the Law.

I'd have to say this piece of legislation, like so very many other 'social engineering' pieces of legislation, has fallen at the first hurdle - the hurdle of necessity.

I long ago cited that such things as 'domestic violence' legislation could not be Law due to its inherent discriminality (sic - intentional criminal or culpable discrimination), and on the simple basis that any genuine act of violence was already covered by Law as it stood, and thus this legislation was an abrogation of rights and could not therefore become Law (as indeed it is not - see Grappler University School of Politics and Law dissertation on Law, law, legislation and regulation) - AND such a piece of legislation could and would be used as an avenue for direct violence by the State itself against any chosen demographic, and would lead, not to any diminution in violence overall, but the development instead of a society entirely based on violence as shown by the clear example of the State itself.

History so far has absolved me on every one of those issues...... issues it cost me dearly to place before the Law Reform commission in 1992 as one of two dissenting views.

 

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 7^th, 2014 at 8:45am:


Protests and revolutions are different things Pansi.
You can still protest, but you'll just have to stand back and wave placards and chant, instead of chaining yourself to the gates or making a human chain.

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 7^th, 2014 at 11:24am:


The move-along laws really aren't that broad, or useful in protest situations....they're designed more for moving drunks away from the door of a pub/club.

Arresting or fining (about $500) a protester from a large, well funded group isn't really going to stop the other idiots from stuffing up the poor workers trying to earn a living.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 7^th, 2014 at 8:45am:


Where does it say you can't protest? Of course you can. You just can't chain yourselves to machinery or block roads, etc. Workers have the right to do their jobs safely, just as you have the right to protest. This is a fair balance, short of banning protests altogether.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 7^th, 2014 at 12:07pm:


You require a permit to organise a protest....Once that permit is rejected the public will suffer severe penalties for any breaches.....The Franklin Dam project, Gunn's paper Mill and other controversial projects are classic examples where these laws would have prevented opposition and given big business the right to prevent the public protesting.....If people chain themselves to machinery they can already be arrested, what this law does is prevent peaceful protest where the only laws broken is the publics right to excise their democratic rights!!!