Pre-Fascism in Colorado

Started by poiuyt, Mar 24, 2007, 10:26 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

poiuyt

... According to the good men of Colorados State Legisative Assembly, protection from violence is to now presuppose an opportunity for the victims unjust enrichment by legalised theft and annexation of other peoples property.

Question is, are you really a victim or just the same old economically-lascivious pig of history, who likes to live well on the sweat, blood and efforts of others, that have chosen honest work over the parasitism you have opted for, as a means of self sustenance ?

You see victim, slavery was abolished hundreds of years ago and you need to get over it. Otherwise this overburdening of your men-folk will lead on to all sorts of altercations with others everywhere in their pursuit of more resources with which to quench your material lust and financial greed.

www.leg.state.co.us/Clics/Clics2007A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/91BC854F552ACB8A87257251007B8843?Open&file=136_ren.pdf



SENATE 3rd Reading Unamended
March 8, 2007
SENATE Amended 2nd Reading
March 6, 2007
First Regular Session Sixty-sixth General Assembly
STATE OF COLORADO REENGROSSED
This Version Includes All Amendments Adopted in the House of Introduction LLS NO. 07-0254.01 Stephen Miller SENATE BILL 07-136 Senate Committees House Committees Judiciary


A BILL FOR AN ACT CONCERNING THE JURISDICTION OF COURTS TO ENTER ORDERS 101 FOR 102 THE PROTECTION OF PERSONS.

Bill Summary (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced and does not necessarily reflect any amendments that may be subsequently adopted.)

Clarifies the jurisdiction of courts to issue additional orders in civil protection order cases for the protection of persons concerning rent and mortgage payments, telephone and utility services, child care costs, temporary possession of personal property, and insurance. Requires a court issuing an order to specify how the order is to be administered, including how payments and property transfers are to be made.


Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado:SECTION 1. Legislative declaration. (1) The general assembly finds and declares that:

(a) Domestic violence is not limited to physical threats of violence and harm but includes financial control, document control, property control, and other types of control that make a victim more likely to return to an abuser due to fear of retaliation or inability to meet basic needs;

(b) Victims of domestic violence in many cases are unable to access resources to seek lasting safety options;

(c) These victims need the assistance of additional court orders to meet their emergency needs for food, shelter, medical care, and child care at the time they go to court for a civil protection order;

(d) These additional court orders are needed not only in cases that end in dissolution of marriage but also in cases in which reconciliation is appropriate, as well as in other cases; and

(e) Thirty-three states recognize existing legal obligations for support, payment, or ownership of personal or real property in order to protect victims in civil protection order cases.

SECTION 2. 13-14-102 (15), Colorado Revised Statutes, is amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW PARAGRAPH, to read:

Civil protection orders - legislative declaration.

A municipal court of record that is authorized by its municipal governing body to issue protection or restraining orders and any county court, in connection with issuing a civil protection order, shall have original concurrent jurisdiction with the district court to issue such additional orders as the municipal or county court deems necessary for the protection of persons. Such additional orders may include, but are not limited to:

(1)A TEMPORARY INJUNCTION THAT MAY BE ISSUED BY THE COURT THAT, UPON PERSONAL SERVICE OR UPON WAIVER AND ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE BY THE DEFENDANT, IS TO BE IN EFFECT AGAINST THE DEFENDANT FOR A PERIOD DETERMINED TO BE APPROPRIATE BY THE COURT, AND RESTRAINS THE DEFENDANT FROM CEASING TO MAKE PAYMENTS FOR MORTGAGE OR RENT, INSURANCE, UTILITIES, SERVICES, OR CHILD CARE WHEN THE DEFENDANT HAS A PRIOR EXISTING DUTY OR LEGAL OBLIGATION TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS, OR FROM TRANSFERRING, ENCUMBERING, CONCEALING, OR IN ANY WAY DISPOSING OF PERSONAL EFFECTS OR REAL PROPERTY, EXCEPT IN THE USUAL COURSE OF BUSINESS OR FOR THE NECESSITIES OF LIFE. THE RESTRAINED PARTY SHALL BE REQUIRED TO ACCOUNT TO THE COURT FOR ALL EXTRAORDINARY EXPENDITURES MADE AFTER THE INJUNCTION IS IN EFFECT. ANY INJUNCTION ISSUED SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE HUNDRED TWENTY DAYS AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF THE PERMANENT CIVIL PROTECTION ORDER.

...

poiuyt

It is on account of this type of woman who lusts after other peoples property that fascist-colorado and the rest of america promotes misandric legislation. That is, in order to provde a suitable cover, under which she and her kind can continue to operate to steal, cheat, lie, abuse, poison, violate and murder for profit, whilst going foward as the official victim. And in such cases as these, it takes the murder of a second or even a third husband to prompt a reluctant investigation into the homicide of the first!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/03/24/antifreeze.deaths.ap/index.html

Woman found guilty of antifreeze murder

Story Highlights

Lynn Turner could face death sentence in killing of her boyfriend
Turner convicted Saturday of poisoning boyfriend with antifreeze
She's already serving life sentence in death of her husband in 1995
Turner did not testify; maintains she's innocent

DALTON, Georgia (AP) -- A former 911 operator was convicted Saturday of murdering her boyfriend by poisoning him with antifreeze.

Lynn Turner could face a death sentence in the 2001 killing of Randy Thompson, a Forsyth County firefighter and the father of her two children. The same jury that convicted her must decide whether to impose that sentence.

She is already serving a life sentence for the 1995 death of her husband, Glenn Turner, a Cobb County police officer. The murder charge in Thompson's death was filed after that 2004 conviction.

The trial went to the jury Saturday morning following closing arguments on Friday.

Turner, who had maintained her innocence in both cases, did not testify in either trial.

In closing arguments Friday, District Attorney Penny Penn said the motive in both cases was Turner's greed for the victims' life insurance money.

Lawyers for Turner, 38, rested their case earlier Friday after a defense toxicologist testified that while one of the victims showed signs of antifreeze poisoning the other did not, casting doubt on the prosecution theory that the deaths were similar.

Defense lawyers have argued there's no direct evidence proving murder.

Police didn't launch a criminal investigation of the deaths until a few months after Thompson [the second husband] died.


poiuyt

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article5811412.ece

From The TimesFebruary 27, 2009.
Malevolent voices that despise our freedoms....ie Feminism in genderised nations and their leading male co-conspirators against free men.

To mark the Convention on Modern Liberty, the children's author has written this article.


Philip Pullman.

Quote
Are such things done on Albion's shore?

The image of this nation that haunts me most powerfully is that of the sleeping giant Albion in William Blake's prophetic books. Sleep, profound and inveterate slumber: that is the condition of Britain today.

We do not know what is happening to us. In the world outside, great events take place, great figures move and act, great matters unfold, and this nation of Albion murmurs and stirs while malevolent voices whisper in the darkness - the voices of the new laws that are silently strangling the old freedoms the nation still dreams it enjoys.

We are so fast asleep that we don't know who we are any more. Are we English? Scottish? Welsh? British? More than one of them? One but not another? Are we a Christian nation - after all we have an Established Church - or are we something post-Christian? Are we a secular state? Are we a multifaith state? Are we anything we can all agree on and feel proud of?

The new laws whisper:

You don't know who you are

You're mistaken about yourself

We know better than you do what you consist of, what labels apply to you, which facts about you are important and which are worthless

We do not believe you can be trusted to know these things, so we shall know them for you

And if we take against you, we shall remove from your possession the only proof we shall allow to be recognised

The sleeping nation dreams it has the freedom to speak its mind. It fantasises about making tyrants cringe with the bluff bold vigour of its ancient right to express its opinions in the street. This is what the new laws say about that:

Expressing an opinion is a dangerous activity

Whatever your opinions are, we don't want to hear them

So if you threaten us or our friends with your opinions we shall treat you like the rabble you are

And we do not want to hear you arguing about it

So hold your tongue and forget about protesting

What we want from you is acquiescence

The nation dreams it is a democratic state where the laws were made by freely elected representatives who were answerable to the people. It used to be such a nation once, it dreams, so it must be that nation still. It is a sweet dream.

You are not to be trusted with laws

So we shall put ourselves out of your reach

We shall put ourselves beyond your amendment or abolition

You do not need to argue about any changes we make, or to debate them, or to send your representatives to vote against them

You do not need to hold us to account

You think you will get what you want from an inquiry?

Who do you think you are?

What sort of fools do you think we are?

The nation's dreams are troubled, sometimes; dim rumours reach our sleeping ears, rumours that all is not well in the administration of justice; but an ancient spell murmurs through our somnolence, and we remember that the courts are bound to seek the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and we turn over and sleep soundly again.

And the new laws whisper:

We do not want to hear you talking about truth

Truth is a friend of yours, not a friend of ours

We have a better friend called hearsay, who is a witness we can always rely on

We do not want to hear you talking about innocence

Innocent means guilty of things not yet done

We do not want to hear you talking about the right to silence

You need to be told what silence means: it means guilt

We do not want to hear you talking about justice

Justice is whatever we want to do to you

And nothing else

Are we conscious of being watched, as we sleep? Are we aware of an ever-open eye at the corner of every street, of a watching presence in the very keyboards we type our messages on? The new laws don't mind if we are. They don't think we care about it.

We want to watch you day and night

We think you are abject enough to feel safe when we watch you

We can see you have lost all sense of what is proper to a free people

We can see you have abandoned modesty

Some of our friends have seen to that

They have arranged for you to find modesty contemptible

In a thousand ways they have led you to think that whoever does not want to be watched must have something shameful to hide

We want you to feel that solitude is frightening and unnatural

We want you to feel that being watched is the natural state of things

One of the pleasant fantasies that consoles us in our sleep is that we are a sovereign nation, and safe within our borders. This is what the new laws say about that:

We know who our friends are

And when our friends want to have words with one of you

We shall make it easy for them to take you away to a country where you will learn that you have more fingernails than you need

It will be no use bleating that you know of no offence you have committed under British law

It is for us to know what your offence is

Angering our friends is an offence

It is inconceivable to me that a waking nation in the full consciousness of its freedom would have allowed its government to pass such laws as the Protection from Harassment Act (1997), the Crime and Disorder Act (1998), the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2000), the Terrorism Act (2000), the Criminal Justice and Police Act (2001), the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act (2001), the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Extension Act (2002), the Criminal Justice Act (2003), the Extradition Act (2003), the Anti-Social Behaviour Act (2003), the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act (2004), the Civil Contingencies Act (2004), the Prevention of Terrorism Act (2005), the Inquiries Act (2005), the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (2005), not to mention a host of pending legislation such as the Identity Cards Bill, the Coroners and Justice Bill, and the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.

Inconceivable.

And those laws say:

Sleep, you stinking cowards

Sweating as you dream of rights and freedoms

Freedom is too hard for you

We shall decide what freedom is

Sleep, you vermin

Sleep, you scum


Philip Pullman will deliver a keynote speech at the Convention on Modern Liberty at the Institute of Education in London tomorrow.

www.modernliberty.net



Virtue

Hell thats been standard here in CA for sometime now.
Imagine waking up tomorrow to find
that unbelievably rape is now legal.

You would be freaking out, telling everyone you ran into this is crazy- something needs to be done... now!!! And then every man you told this to just very smugly and condescendingly says...

"Hey... not all men are 'like that.'"

Go Up