Rich people.

I've read it several times.
I've pointed out to you many recent protests around the White House even one regarding HR347.

It's important to note — contrary to some reports — that H.R. 347 doesn't create any new crimes, or directly apply to the Occupy protests. The bill slightly rewrites a short trespass law, originally passed in 1971 and amended a couple of times since, that covers areas subject to heightened Secret Service security measures.

The original statute, unchanged by H.R. 347,made certain conduct with respect to these restricted areas a crime, including simple trespass, actions in or near the restricted area that would "disrupt the orderly conduct of Government," and blocking the entrance or exit to the restricted area.

 

It seriously depends on the person. I live in a gated community with a huge lake, mostly rich people who are only up here at most 3 months during the summer. Some come up nearly every weekend then go back to the city. Most in here love Obama, some don't. Some are really nasty and will run you off the road with their BMW's. And some are cool and will help you with whatever you need.

As for things like "the help", it's a mixed reaction. As I said, most will be nice because they are and will treat them like family. Offer water, maybe soda, use of the phone, bathrooms, talk with them if they want, shoot the breeze, etc. Then you get people who make them drink out of the garden hose on a hot day without a cup, no bathroom breaks (and don't be caught pissing behind a tree).

I live in a town that is mostly low income, lower middle class. Places like my development get bad raps because naturally people assume we're all uptight like Niles Crane. But, those who get to know us (and I mean the full timers not people who just show up once a month and speed, litter, trespass, and blast music so loud you can hear it across the place), they know we're normal just like them.

 

I don't know if its always that accurate to make blanket statements about " rich people".
OK, in England, most *are* already from a particular social group ie privately educated, rich parents, most likely grandparents, Conservative voters, and secretly homosexual. (OK, I'll stop there.. )

But seriously, most "rich" people describe will themselves as "comfortable". And even then, many people with a supposedly big income find that they are working flat out to sustain the lifestyle their peer group expects of them. (eg In London, its amazing just how expensive property is..)

I actually think politics, moral values and lifestyle are the best descriptors of people.
Some rich people are very down to earth and respecting of different groups. Then there are also very lower middle class people who are utterly disdainful of others.

Britain however is possibly different to other countries tho, because of the way it has a very rigid class stratification. Which means perhaps it can be accurate to talk about "rich people"

 

Which 'class' would you say most 'rich' people are in, and how rich do they have to be?

 

rich people die just like everything else.

 

well obviously most very rich people are upper class or the top end of upper middle class.

A millionaire in the 70s is equiv to 20m or so today, its often said.
But real power, Id say comes at 200million, or much more..

I mean someone worth 1 and a bit m in lots of London areas will not be able to pay the mortg on a house.

I dont think there are many lower middle or working class rich, on my definition of rich.

 

Did you just copy and paste this? It doesn't CREATE any new crimes, but is you Disrupt government activity, you're guilty of a felony tresspassing charge!!!

That's serious shit! You're downplaying the facts because it was reported slightly differently. It says it wasn't "directly about occupy protesters; but think about it seriously! This was completely because of #OWS, because they're the ones who "disrupt the orderly conduct of Government,"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=IlEg3nLguOs#t=5s

This is now a felony.

Welcome to Nazi Germany everyone!

 

I don't know.

I thought most people earning a million or more were: celebrities, musicians, sports-persons, entrepreneurs and people like Alan sugar...

It depends what sort of power you mean, imho.

 

Yeah, Odin likes to just cut and paste shit from government sources. After all, they're the most accurate and unbiased.

 

Relabeling Boones Farm and selling it to rich suckers sounds like a really good idea.

I say, I detect a faint hint of blue watermelon.

 

Yes. Why?

Not as far as I am aware. If you trespass, I think it's a class A misdemeanor. If you know otherwise please do correct that. To verbally 'Disrupt government activity' might just get you thrown out

Which part of it is not accurate?

“willfully and knowingly” entered an area restricted by the Secret Service. Now that has been changed to just “knowingly.”

It specifies that it is unlawful to enter secured areas of the White House and its grounds, or the vice president’s official residence and grounds. Previously, according to the report, the law prohibited unlawful entry to any building or ground, secured by the Secret Service, where the president or vice president is “temporarily” visiting. That forced the Secret Service to rely on a District of Columbia law that “addresses only minor misdemeanor infractions” even if somebody were to breach the White House residence itself.
The new law revises the standard that prosecutors must meet to gain a conviction, from proving that a violation was committed “willfully and knowingly” to merely proving that it was committed “knowingly.”

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/05/obama-criminalize-free-speech/

Which part of it is not accurate?

You might need to check how long 'disrupt the orderly conduct of Government' has been around for.

Oh, good grief.

 

Maybe I should just post opinion/the first thing that comes off the top of my head instead.

P.S It wasn't from a 'government source'

http://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/how-big-deal-hr-347-criminalizing-protest-bill

 

A law that makes it a crime to 'disrupt the orderly conduct of government'.

That's a good one. This assumes that there is some semblance of 'orderly conduct of government' to begin with, which is questionable.

Most of the members of the U.S. Congress should be charged with a crime, considering their obstructionist behavior in recent years. Protesters today can, at best, obstruct the conduct of government only a small fraction as good as the members of Congress do.

 

It was going well till this...