The council will hold a public hearing at 6:30 tonight on several proposed changes to city ordinances. Observer reporter Steve Harrison details the changes well in a story this morning.
Most of the proposed rules look sensible to us: It's certainly reasonable to ban protesters from having paint guns, bars, chains, pipes, handcuffs, bricks, fireworks and the like.
We like that the city is considering a designated "protest zone" but also would allow picketing on city sidewalks, as long as those protests don't obstruct cars or pedestrians. It's important, though, that the designated zone be somewhere near the action, not banished to Lancaster.
The City Council needs to look closely, though, at at least two changes that could quickly be abused. Under the new rules, Section 19-313, subsection (g) (6) would prohibit "a backpack, duffle bag, satchel, cooler or other item carried with the intent to conceal weapons or other prohibited items."
And subsection (g) (12) would prohibit "A mask or scarf worn with the intent to hide one's identity while commiting a crime."
This could open the door for even innocent bystanders to be forced to hand over their personal bags. There's no way for a police officer to distinguish a backpack with a student's books in it from one used to conceal a weapon. And what distinguishes a fashionable scarf from one that might be pulled up at any moment to cover one's face during a crime?
And these rules would be in place for other big events, not just the DNC.
The City Council and City Attorney Bob Hagemann are doing a lot right here, but need to look at each provision closely to consider how it could be abused.
What do you think? Take our poll at the top right of this page.
-- Taylor Batten
You have read this article with the title How far should government go for safety?. You can bookmark this page URL http://ogbcommunity.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-far-should-government-go-for-safety.html. Thanks!
No comment for "How far should government go for safety?"
Post a Comment