Arizona Legislature To Announce Anti-Westboro Law To Protect Shooting Victims

[True_Blue]

Source: Huffington Post

Arizona's state legislature has announced a legislative effort to combat the infamous Westboro Baptist Church's plans to picket the funerals of the shooting victims in Tucson over the weekend.

"We're going to try to protect the families from undue harassment," State Rep. Daniel Patterson (D), one of the leaders of a bipartisan group of legislators, told Talking Points Memo Monday.

While the Topeka-based congregation has been best known for their incendiary anti-gay, pro-dead soldier messages, they have now decided to take their insensitive protest to the services of victims -- including a 9-year-old girl and a 30-year-old Giffords aide who was set to be married -- killed by Jared Lee Loughner on Saturday.

The chair of the Pima County GOP, for one, has since said that he thinks such a law is a dangerous infringement on free speech laws.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/11/arizona-westboro-baptist-church_n_807232.html

[bluestateguy]

1. It will pass and Westboro will sue

And then I hope to see the state ignore the judge's inevitable order that Westboro be allowed to abuse the First Amendment.

[Mark Maker]

2. It already passed and Brewer signed it tonight

Not like we don't have budget problems already, nothing like lining Phelps pockets again.

Bunch of kneejerk MORONS.

[AtheistCrusader]

8. No, they will win lots of money.

The WBC clan is mostly comprised of lawyers. There's money in them thar hills of outrage. THey are lawsuit trolls.

[no_hypocrisy]

18. +1 WBC subsidizes itselfs with expected and provoked lawsuits.

They either win on First Amendment rights or get a settlement.

[sharesunited]

3. That's all well and good. But what about shutting down retail sale of guns and ammo?

[johnroshan]

4. I stand with WBC on this one.

No matter how despicable I think their message is, I would still defend their right to say it loud and well.

John.

[No Elephants]

7. You must have a unique definition of "well."

Do you also oppose the quiet zone around abortion clinics?

Limitations on content (message)are forbidden, with few exceptions, like falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater (and this comes damn close).

Limitations on time and place are older than the First Amendment. For example, no one has a right to blare loudspeakers in a residential neighborhood at midnight, absent a real emergency, even for political speech.

Let them say their message as often as they wish, without invading the most private and grief-filled moments of others.

[johnroshan]

9. by "well" I meant "to their satisfaction of spewing crap around."

Isn't there already a rule stating the distance from which they are allowed to air their protests? I mean, they can't get close to the actual site of the funeral right?

What else do you need? No one has the right to stop them from saying what they want, at a respectable distance which allows the funeral services to go on without disturbance. I understand that the key point is to maintain freedom of speech while ensuring the privacy of the funeral services.

I'm not aware of what the Arizona law actually forbids. If anyone has a link or knowledge, please share with us.

John.

[sweetloukillbot]

10. As I understand it...

The AZ Law requires the protesters to maintain a 300 ft perimeter from one hour prior to one hour after the funeral. I don't think there was a prior law to this affect- the Legislature rushed it thru today to assure the protesters wouldn't be able to disturb the funerals.
I assume this will pass Constitutional muster, although I am afraid of my state getting deeper into debt to pay that asshole Phelps' legal fees. If he has an iota of legal ground he'll sue...

[sam sarrha]

15. hey just start suing Phelps'..suit after suit hundreds of them ..bankrupt the SOB

[timo]

19. ?????????

couldnt they just up those #'s??? say 5000 foot for 2 hours prior and post??

[tavalon]

13. Kind of like the KKK?

I understand theoretically. I really do. But these creatures are monsters, monsters who are somehow not burned by the sun. It's confusing and hard. As a card carrying Democratic Socialist, I must stand up for their first amendment rights. It's their right to continue consuming precious oxygen that's hard for me to support. I know I need to but it's times like this when I want to let my animal side out - but no, I am a human and I will offer them the mercy they lack.

[Liberty Belle]

5. I don't think intimidating little girls at their friends' funeral should be protected.

It's a form of bullying in my book - terrorist-like intimidation. I am normally a strong free speech advocate, but this is over the line in my book. If you want to say you think this was God's will, just don't do it at the funeral for the victims.

[alp227]

6. There's no right to harass others at funerals, which are private gatherings usually

And WBC has repeatedly and willfully acted otherwise. Thus it's about time that government stand up against these repeat offenders.

[SemperEadem]

17. their argument to that is

the minute the parents went public with the funeral plans, it ceased to be a private gathering.

I listened to their lead harriden on cspan a couple of months back make that absurd declaration.

[Arrowhead2k1]

11. Yeah, sorry, I can't agree with this...

I'd much rather see the people standup against these thugs with their angel plan than have the government pass yet another kneejerk law which may very well be unconstitutional. It's more trouble than it's worth.

[tavalon]

12. While I laud where their hearts are, they just played into the scum-sucking vermin's

gig. They will sue and they will win. This is what those fucking bottom feeders live for.

[sam sarrha]

14. they use small children as Human Shields.. ..

[JoeyT]

16. I'm not sure why a new law was even needed to stop them.

If you've ever been to a political protest, you know the bag of tricks police can use if they really want to arrest you.
Seems like it would be a simple matter to make a random request (Something on the order of "Step back" or "Be quiet".) and when it isn't obeyed or isn't obeyed correctly slap them in handcuffs. Something like that has happened at every protest I've ever been to.