120 votes

HR 347 just passed - is this real?

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.
Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Just a vicious cycle

The nastier the government gets, the more the people look to retaliate. The more vengeful the people get, the more the government wants to set itself in an ivory tower...so they even further misunderstand the people they control.

Spiritual blindness from every angle.

That's why I'm grateful for the peace movement. Maybe we can reach critical mass or a tipping point, and the shift in thinking will be such that no one will take a job that requires or allows them to abuse others.

3 voted no in senate,

3 voted no in senate, including Amash (who is always looking great lately) Rand did not vote nor did 42 others..OH and they proved the bill's constitutionality with this :

H.R. 347.
Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant
to the following:
Article I, Section 8: To make all Laws which shall be
necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the
foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by the
Constitution in the Government of the United States or in any
Department or Officer thereof.

Apparently those "law makers" haven't seen this yet:

If you haven't seen this seminar yet, you're in for a shocker!

You will never again be afraid of those public trustees/servants again after you watch this seminar.

The most powerful seminar I've ever watched, period! Don't skip a minute of it; get the iced tea and popcorn; put the kids to bed, because you're about to have an OH $HIT moment that rattles you to the core.

Part 1 ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2pMJyIikCk&feature=relmfu
Part 2 ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvKu2UNHQpA&feature=related
Part 3 ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xLzKRdsNLU&feature=related

Then go here and watch the first five he did that led up to that one:


So Much for the...

"TEA PARTY"...What a "CROCK" of YouKnowWhat!
..and so much for the "supposed" TP Congressional Reps.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

SteveMT's picture

Strange isn't it?: 1 co-sponsor & 10% chance of passage. Liars!

This bill has a 10% chance of being enacted. The following factors were considered:

This bill was reported by committee as H.R. 2780 (111th) in the previous session of Congress. (-17%)

Just 29% of all House bills reported favorably by committee in 2009–2010 were enacted.


Read Bill Text

show cosponsors (1)
Rep. Ted Deutch [D-FL19] (joined Jan 25, 2011)


all three reps from my home state ( police state ) WV voted for this tyrannical piece of garbage!!

SteveMT's picture

Implementation of HR 347, but in Spain! Borders will be closed.

[Coming soon to a city, county, state, or country that you live in.]
April 23, 2012, 2:37 p.m. ET
Spain To Impose Border Checks To Prevent ECB Summit Disruption
MADRID (Dow Jones)--Spain said Monday it will impose border checks as it seeks to limit public disorder during a European Central Bank meeting in Barcelona next week.

Spain's Interior Ministry believes the border checks could help prevent antiausterity activists from disrupting the ECB's governing council meeting on May 3.

The temporary border checks involves suspending the EU's Schengen treaty, which allows passport-free travel within most of the European Union.

The treaty suspension will last for 7 days, starting on April 28 and ending May 4. Spain will impose border checks at its Barcelona and Girona airports alongside five points of entry between France and Spain.

Such suspension is allowed under the Schengen treaty in case of a "serious threat to public order or internal security."

On March 29, violence flared in a series of small clashes between police and protesters during a general strike in Spain that affected the country's transportation systems and resulted in factory shutdowns.

-By Alex MacDonald

Was this story even on the

Was this story even on the 6:00 news tonight? I mean, besides Russia Today?

It doesnt seem real,

but this is essentially the same kind of things that took place in 1930's Germany. I imagine that it will be selectively enforced. I guess there wont be any Ron Paul supporters anywhere near the Republican convention, if its passed. It also seems that you can still be charged even if you were not aware you were inside the restricted area. Has Obama signed this legislation?

Obamacare Protests were allowed


either this law is not being enforced or its not the case, i am not sure which one. this was when Obamacare was before the hearings on it at the supreme court, which was after the supposed signing of the hr 347.

Ron Paul abstained

Check it out:

Don't get this mixed up with the 2011 bill and vote. That's what most people are doing.

SteveMT's picture

Kucinich abstained also.

Why not just vote no?

And this is why there won't be an election in 2016....

It's now or never folks.

"sometimes I hug the coffee table when no one is looking."



Ron Paul abstained from HR 347?

http://www.opencongress.org/vote/2012/h/73 Opencongress.org is publishing a vote tally that indicates Ron Paul abstained from the vote on HR 347 this is contrary to Govtrack http://t.co/3ITFYrjy which clearly shows he voted no. it looks like opencongress.org might be using a vote on an amendment leading up to the vote, to confuse people. i have already been is a couple debates with people over this and they are refering me to opencongress.org, can anyone shed some light on this? i have included the links,

opencongress.org is right

Yes, he abstained. Don't get this Feb. 2012 vote (reported in opencongress.org) mixed up with the one in 2011...like many are doing. The link you are quoting is from 2011.


Drinking the Ron Paul Kool-Aid again...

Sadly, this isn't a new law or an expansion of the law... just a simplification. All they really did was clear away some of the legalese language.

Those who voted against it didn't do so because they were taking a stand, they did it because it might make them look good should it all erupt into controversy... and then almost certainly quickly set their proxies to stirring controversy about it.

On the whole, it's arguably non-constitutional in the first place yet has held up in various forms since the 1970s with legal arguments for constitutionality by necessity based on the idea that radical voices would be disrupting government work rooted in the will of the majority.


You should read the new law,

You should read the new law, before you pass judgment due to you reading a short paraphrasing of part of the new law. Jumping to conclusion based on only partial evidence makes one look quite silly.

Susie 4 Liberty's picture

Welcome, new member kcraven....

It is indeed my understanding that it was SIGNIFICANTLY strengthened...

Susie 4 Liberty

help! help!

i'm being repressed!

Ron Paul Voted against HR347

His son Rand voted for it in the Senate which is a travesty. I've never trusted ambition when it comes to values.

Good to see Ron Paul voted against it. This is the official tally.


Rand Paul is NOT a Ron Paul!

I said it before and I'll say it again and again... "Rand Paul is NOT one of us". Both he and his wife are half baked constitutionalists, and in time will become one of them!

The Winds of Change!

Check more closely!!!

The link you are quoting is from a 2011 vote. Ron Paul abstained on this Feb.2012 vote.

We don't really know if Rand

We don't really know if Rand did or not, they didn't record a voting record on this one. We should be careful, though, not to assume "unanimous consent" means every Senator was present and voting in favor at the time. That's not what it means. It just means no one objected in time. Unanimous consent is actually a way to speed up the passage of bills; they are set to pass automatically unless someone on the floor objects. This was how the Libya no fly zone was passed, there wasn't really a "vote" in the sense we think of it.


i knew he wasn't as good as

i knew he wasn't as good as Ron..
but it's still a little surprising.

Rand Paul didn't vote on the #HR347?

Well, maybe he's gaining acceptance into the party and it's starting to feel kinda good to fit in, since Dr. Paul never quite has. However, why wouldn't he vote against it and make sure to be there for the vote. conviction is conviction, all else is selling out. I left a comment on one of his YouTube Videos after the CPAC about some statements he made I thought way out of line, I mentioned I understood he's in "their" home and like they say "when in Rome" but I mentioned that him buddying up too much and being part of outsmarting the stupid people is going to end up leading me to go back to being one of them. Next I know the comment disappeared and it didn't even leave behind the comment removed post or my name, even after somebody else answered me, so I know I left it there. Now I want you all to really really keep your minds very open and be very aware of whats going down here in the next few months. Our guy isn't attacking Romney at all, of all that Dr. Paul has never caved in, it could be possible he has a soft spot for his son and everybody has an Achilles tendon. I know I'm going to be voted down and I understand. I hope it's not so, but even as far as the VP to Rand will never cause me to vote for Romney over Obama, Obama did say he will never take U.S. citizens under the NDAA, but I never heard Romney say a word, and as radical as many of these republicans have been lately, I tend not to trust any very far at all, remember Dr. Paul is a libertarian. Please, in case it comes down to some kind of deal with Romney, and I hope it doesn't, be very very careful, our country and our freedom is at stake, literally. Peace and God Bless. Ron Paul 2012!!!

William Paxson

HR 347

Be sure and check the facts...Dr. Ron Paul did abstain on the HR 347 vote in Feb. 2012. Some people are mixing up this vote (or non-vote) with one from Feb. 2011. Check it out:

best case scenario..

this ibs some trojan horse shit

he could be in a high position one day if the establishment isn't against him [like they are ron] and thennnn..ta daaa but, i doubt it. and selling out is not cool. but, this is the devils world..sometimes you gotta play the game

More real

than any lingering concept of freedom. Be prepared. Be very prepared.

πολλα γαρ πταιομεν απαντες ει τις εν λογω ου πταιει ουτος τελειος ανηρ δυνατος χαλιναγωγησαι και ολον το σωμα


Part of their master plan