First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Ninth Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Thus, there doesn't have to be a "Freedom of River Opening" right. The laws pertaining to river closings are intended to protect those who would navigate the waters. I can understand road closings because the delegates are going to arrive by either helicopter at the Point or by motorcade and it is only prudent that they be able to progress unimpeded. Insofar as I am aware, none are arriving by water.
There are many less Draconian measures which would allow boats passage but not mooring, etc. But, of course, that would require more effort on the part of law enforcement and why do it when the easiest thing is simply to close the river.
I don't make these statements, lightly. As I already noted, I have many personal and professional connections to law enforcement. But, as Franklin is alleged to have written:
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Our nation was built upon the concept of personal liberties. Taking these liberties away for the sake of expediency, alone, merely give credence to those who argue that tyranny is preferable for safety.
Thats about as flimsy a connection to the constitution as I've seen in a while. If it was that important to you to navigate, you had the right to request passage from The Port of Pittsburgh. You are really trying to say that the river being closed off for about 40 hours denied you right to assemble? And the congress didn't make a law denying any rights. State and local govt have many more controls and thats the way the framers wanted it....you must be a libertarian which is fine but there also has to be common sense. This country is in a war on terrorism...this was a big target....and required some measures for safety....and even though you didnt give your stamp of approval, federal judges did. A boat having passage at the convention center is clearly a security issue...even though they didnt clear it by you first. And finally...Draconian???? Seriously???? WIth the feds taking over your life to such a degree I'm impressed that you put yourself at risk by posting an opinion....the funny thing is you and I probably agree on a lot of issues but this is the typical crying over nothing....and witht he relative calm g20 that was had....i think the authorities made all the right calls...
First, I want to make sure I used correct grammar in the title. I don't want to offend anyone by omitting the 'dash'. Moron....
My husband will be patrolling our three rivers on the 24th and 25th. Do I worry about his well-being? YEAH. Do I hope he is safe and comes home both nights (if he can get through the city)? YEAH. So, if anything does happen, I'll be sure to direct the appropriate people to your threads, JoeLeaphorn, since you are hell-bent on having minimum security on the water.
I'm sure my husband and the other officers will have more important things to worry about that having to check, board and inspect dumb-a** 'pleasure' boaters, that just HAVE to be out on the water these two days. All the commercial traffic will need to be verified, I think that's enough to worry about. Two days is all they're asking - to keep private/pleasure boats out of the area. Isn't that almost like a detour that keeps you from your usual/quick routes? How dare PennDot do that to you !! I think you should protest all the detours in and around the city, that inconvenience you. Do you realize how far upriver they'll have to patrol?
You are not God, you cannot predict the future. You can't look at past G-20's and say 'oh well, nothing happened there, so nothing will happen to us'. And bull to your comment that if our police and security were 'good enough', then we wouldn't need all this extra beefed up security. We are not losing our liberty and freedom by having thousands of police/security/secret service in our city for this event.
For someone that was in law-enforcment, and having relatives in the same field, you don't show very much support.
From my posts you can see i agree with you but replys like yours dont really help anything....thank your husband for his service and he and his contemporaries should be applauded for excellent work....
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by JoeLeaphorn
