Skip to main content

View Diary: Reporters: Most Supreme Court justices view Massachusetts' abortion clinic buffer zones skeptically (302 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Hmmmm (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    VClib
    Given that assault of someone who is attempting to exercise their right to get an abortion and the threat thereof would fall under the federal definition of terrorism

    So, given that there is a clear history of terrorism in these situations.

    If this is the case, than it's up to the DOJ to prosecute these protestors for terrorism. Has that occurred?

     

    it has been a matter of assault as well, as many people in the comment section here have attested to.
    If it's a case of assault, it's the responsibility of local law enforcement to arrest these people for assault.

    I suppose we could stop a lot of crime if we were willing to start dispensing with more civil liberties. Which civil liberties are you willing to give up in the name of stopping assault?

    Dammit Jim, I'm a lawyer, not a grammarian. So sue me.

    by Pi Li on Thu Jan 16, 2014 at 09:21:55 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  From what other people here are saying (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Old Sailor

      and remember these are people who have been working at these clinics, there is a serious problem with various locales not prosecuting for assault. And the fact of the matter is that I've already had civil liberties taken from me in the name of safety. I can't tell you how many times I've been corralled into "free speech zones" at protests. If those are constitutional then why not this relatively small buffer zone?

      If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

      by AoT on Thu Jan 16, 2014 at 10:47:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site