Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Colorado Thought Crime Statutes ban Anarchism
I found this little gem in the colorado criminal code. The wording is vague enough to give me pause, but then again I think that it infringes on free speech to an extent that it wouldn't hold up on appeal.
18-11-203. Membership in anarchistic and seditious associations.
18-11-203. Membership in anarchistic and seditious associations.
(1) Any association, organization, society, or corporation, one of whose purposes or professed purposes is to bring about any governmental, social, industrial, or economic change in this state or in the United States by the use of sabotage, terrorism, physical force, violence, or bodily injury, or which teaches, advocates, advises, or defends the use of sabotage, terrorism, physical force, violence, or bodily injury to person or property, or threats of such injury, to accomplish such change, and which shall, by any such means, prosecute or pursue such purpose or professed purpose is declared to be anarchistic and seditious in character and to be an unlawful association.
(2) Any person who, in this state, shall act or profess to act as an officer of any such unlawful association, or shall speak, write, or publish as a representative or professed representative of any such unlawful association, or, knowing the purpose, teachings, and doctrine of such association, shall become or continue to be a member thereof or contribute dues, money, or other things of value to it or to anyone for it commits a class 5 felony.
Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 480, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 40-11-203. L. 81: (1) amended, p. 981, § 8, effective May 13. L. 89: (2) amended, p. 842, § 100, effective July 1.
ANNOTATION
Am. Jur.2d. See 70 Am. Jur.2d, Sedition, Subversive Activities, and Treason, § 104.
C.J.S. See 77 C.J.S., Riot, §§ 1-3
*Note class 5 felonies carry 1-3 years presumptive sentencing range.
(2) Any person who, in this state, shall act or profess to act as an officer of any such unlawful association, or shall speak, write, or publish as a representative or professed representative of any such unlawful association, or, knowing the purpose, teachings, and doctrine of such association, shall become or continue to be a member thereof or contribute dues, money, or other things of value to it or to anyone for it commits a class 5 felony.
Source: L. 71: R&RE, p. 480, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 40-11-203. L. 81: (1) amended, p. 981, § 8, effective May 13. L. 89: (2) amended, p. 842, § 100, effective July 1.
ANNOTATION
Am. Jur.2d. See 70 Am. Jur.2d, Sedition, Subversive Activities, and Treason, § 104.
C.J.S. See 77 C.J.S., Riot, §§ 1-3
*Note class 5 felonies carry 1-3 years presumptive sentencing range.
For more information:
http://colorado.indymedia.org/node/449
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Care to provide the DATE of the law? I notice that while month/day references, no YEAR is mentioned.
Once upon a time anti-anarchist laws used to be rather common. All sorts of other laws thrown out by later courts rather common too. What is less common is that the legislatures bother repealing thrown out laws. The reason is very simple. At the time of the court rulings many are still in favor and hoping for a reversal of the courts. And in spite of court rulings, a great amount of time might elapse before the law no longer in effect. Just consider the amount of time between the Supreme Court's ruling on Brown v Board of Ed and the effective end of segregation. The latter would be a good example to examine becuase I would be willing to bet you that you could find at least some places where segregation laws still on the books.
Understand? A court ruling does not REMOVE an unconstitutional law from the books. Only the legislature can do that if it ever bothers.
Once upon a time anti-anarchist laws used to be rather common. All sorts of other laws thrown out by later courts rather common too. What is less common is that the legislatures bother repealing thrown out laws. The reason is very simple. At the time of the court rulings many are still in favor and hoping for a reversal of the courts. And in spite of court rulings, a great amount of time might elapse before the law no longer in effect. Just consider the amount of time between the Supreme Court's ruling on Brown v Board of Ed and the effective end of segregation. The latter would be a good example to examine becuase I would be willing to bet you that you could find at least some places where segregation laws still on the books.
Understand? A court ruling does not REMOVE an unconstitutional law from the books. Only the legislature can do that if it ever bothers.
Anyone who truly believes you have a right to absolute free speech, including the right to advocate violence, is truly living in the past - like, the 1960's, man.
The rest of us know the world has changed; the 21st century will see increasing government monitoring of dissident thought. In an age of terrorism and powerful and dangerous weapons, it is a price that must be paid for security. In any event, the government has the technology to do the monitoring, so you can assume they will. If you hear or read someone advocating violence nowadays besides radical Muslims -- and maybe including some of those -- they are probably agent provocateurs.
The rest of us know the world has changed; the 21st century will see increasing government monitoring of dissident thought. In an age of terrorism and powerful and dangerous weapons, it is a price that must be paid for security. In any event, the government has the technology to do the monitoring, so you can assume they will. If you hear or read someone advocating violence nowadays besides radical Muslims -- and maybe including some of those -- they are probably agent provocateurs.
To Google = "define:sabotage"
Result:
the willful and malicious disruption of the normal processes and functions of an organization.
(http://www.asisonline.org/library/glossary/s.xml)
Sabotage is a deliberate action aimed at weakening an enemy, oppressor or employer through subversion, obstruction, disruption, and/or destruction.
(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabotage)
By either of these definitions, the MainStreamMedia is breaking the law by supressing (disruption/obstruction) Ron Paul (presidental candidate/elections = normal processes) from the public eye. Of course, this is only one example of how this law can be used AGAINST corporations and the government.
Result:
the willful and malicious disruption of the normal processes and functions of an organization.
(http://www.asisonline.org/library/glossary/s.xml)
Sabotage is a deliberate action aimed at weakening an enemy, oppressor or employer through subversion, obstruction, disruption, and/or destruction.
(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabotage)
By either of these definitions, the MainStreamMedia is breaking the law by supressing (disruption/obstruction) Ron Paul (presidental candidate/elections = normal processes) from the public eye. Of course, this is only one example of how this law can be used AGAINST corporations and the government.
For historical context, look into Criminal syndicalism laws... Funny, there's nothing specifically on it in wikiworld...
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$120.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network