A CRIMINAL APPROACH TO OUR CONSTITUTION

Saturday, December 20, 2014

THE FIRST AMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

This Editorial will be an extension of the last alert we issued regarding the riots in Missouri. In that ALERT we talked about the importance of dealing with this state of affairs in Missouri. To do that it is essential to look carefully at the Constitutional right to peaceably assemble. Today this is more commonly called a demonstration or protest. The social order at work in the United States where most of the demonstrations and protests arise from have become more inclined to throw out as much of the First Amendment legal requisite as possible. This should not continue to be allowed or misconstrued if we are to protect both the First Amendment, Civil Rights and their freedoms. 

The last part of the three main parts separated by semi colons, of the First Amendment states basically, Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The key word in this important legislation is peaceable since keeping the country safe and secure is one the governments most important functions. 

The authors of the Bill of Rights knew the danger of these provisions if misread or misinterpreted, they also knew the importance of protecting the right to assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. The phrase  was then combined in such a way to state, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. 

In my Law Dictionary it explains riot as an unlawful assembly that has developed to a stage of violence. A public disturbance involving an act or acts of violence towards persons or property by an assembly or assemblage of three or more people that constitute a clear and present danger, or shall result in damage or injury to persons or property, or the threat or threats of the commission of an act or acts of violence to persons or property that would constitute a clear and present danger to persons or property.

The difference is huge in the First Amendment and the act that is legally classified as a riot. The Civil Rights issue is another complex matter that has evolved like the First Amendment-riot disparity. And the Criminal Justice System will need to look at these situations and differences that separate a riot from a legal assembly to bring these matters back into a level that is correct for law and fact, and Constitutionally responsible. Ferguson should be one of these challenges.

Civil rights has suffered a similar perversion. According to Wikipedia civil rights and political rights are a class of rights that protect individuals freedom from infringement by governments, social organizations, and private individuals, and which ensure one's ability to participate in the civil and political life of the society and state without discrimination or repression. Which is a great freedom and protection that should not be allowed to be perverted by any mob or other group in America today nor should we allow this to happen to the First Amendment.

The largest Groups of people that began to violently distort these laws were the early Socialist movements, and that long list of perpetrators of unamerican activities of the fifties and sixties that probably did the most damage to the notion of peaceable assembly. The early civil rights activists like Martin Luther King and Jessie Jackson took the issue to new heights encouraging the most oppressed and the most calculating black and white socialist oriented people to stretch the limits of lawful assembly in a level of showmanship and aggression that left an enormous path of death in the wake. This seemingly nonviolent conflict became so frustrating to both sides that a ruthless aggression emerged in the US. Some of the different factions on both sides like the 1965 race riots in Watts that caused 34 deaths, $40 million in property damage, 1032 injuries and 3438 arrests in Los Angeles was certainly a high point in the merging of demonstration and riot. 

Then their were the activists like the Black Panthers that worked with people such as Hillary Clinton and Charles Gary their attorney in the 1970s, or Stokely Carmichael. These activists advocated a more violent posture after the Watts Riots. Hillary Clinton in the early days of the transformation of civil rights from peaceful assembly to an armed aggression, political fraud and riot similar to what we are seeing in Ferguson today, worked with Mr. Gary. He was a remarkable attorney, his clients included some of the great Socialist movers and shakers of the time including Jim Jones. 

Of course it was not all black or Socialist aggression their was the group that killed John Kennedy and then his brother Robert Kennedy, they were the activists that took the US into Asia while they wrenched the tea, silk and spice colonies from the hands of the declining East India Company and through the powerful Fabian Society, made Asia a component of the New World Order. There was also the assassination of Martin Luther King. These murders were a great loss and the world suffered for that violent time that attacked again and again some of our most basic laws and rights. The First Amendment and our very important Civil Rights position to name just a few. 

To allow armed aggression to overshadow good judgement and law and order. To threaten our country and our elections with an on going deadly level of political fraud and murder is a terrible crime.

When the White House let the riots rage in Oakland California in 2009 to culminate three months later in the murder of four Oakland Police Officers to create a position during the first few months of the Barack Obama Presidency for his Black Revolutionary Army in the world, marshaled into existence to elect Barack Obama President and attempt to improve the position of the Negro people through the use of violence, riot and death, it created a great deal of concern and set the standard for the next six years for the White House. If the White House is letting the Riots at Ferguson, Missouri continue in the same way until after the elections, are they in actuality conspiring to again intimidate and threaten the American people in a terrible display of election violence, murder and fraud; or worse, treason?

Our Criminal Justice System needs to reset the legal posture on the constitutional right to peaceably assemble back to a safe standard. Rather than a stepping stone to violent revolution, and perhaps World War.