Someone, somewhere, please help... [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Someone, somewhere, please help...



bobsticks
03-15-2012, 08:22 AM
...me understand this.

Before'n y'all get up on yer high horses let me make this clear: this is not a query about the viability, legality, or any other aspect of prostitution. What I know about prostitution is that there are some that claim it a victimless crime but obviously there is a sex trade within this country that is rife with violence and oppression. This is not about that.

This is about judicial process.

Wtf is going on in Manhattan? After a five year investigation---yes, that's five years of tax payer money being spent on the investigative process---prosecutors have come up with a single D Felony charge against the "Millionare Madam" Anna Gristina.

How on earth can a judge levy a two million dollar bail on a single D Felony? Where is the ACLU on this?

Anyone?

Hyfi
03-15-2012, 09:30 AM
Can't answer that but another stupid thing happened in Philly yesterday.

The mayor passed a law stopping people from feeding the homeless outside. Duh, Homeless means you live outside. In these same parks, a family can have a pic nic and eat a sandwich, but they cannot give a sandwich to a homeless person to eat.

It was stated it was for health ans sanitary reasons but in reality, there is a new Museum set to open next month along the Parkway and they want the homeless that sit there during the day gone.

bobsticks
03-15-2012, 09:50 AM
The mayor passed a law stopping people from feeding the homeless outside. Duh, Homeless means you live outside. In these same parks, a family can have a pic nic and eat a sandwich, but they cannot give a sandwich to a homeless person to eat.

It was stated it was for health ans sanitary reasons but in reality, there is a new Museum set to open next month along the Parkway and they want the homeless that sit there during the day gone.

Nothing surprises me when it comes to politicians. With the federal government passing 10,000 pages of new laws every month it's clear that things have gotten out of hand.

But, that said in agreement, I'm really speaking more toward the application of existing law. The absolute worst I've ever heard of for a D Class Felony is one of those Lojack ankle doohickies and a couple thousand in bond.

Hell, right across the way in New Jersey that character that was accused of killing five teenage boys was released on less than a million dollar bond. That's five A murder charges versus a D promoting charge. There's got to be a political angle to this but ultimately it boils down to th epeople in power in this country abusing that power and our media standing by idly.

bobsticks
03-15-2012, 09:52 AM
BTW, it was amazing how few homeless people there were in downtown Indy over the Super Bowl weekend :hand:

Hyfi
03-15-2012, 09:57 AM
Nothing surprises me when it comes to politicians. With the federal government passing 10,000 pages of new laws every month it's clear that things have gotten out of hand.

But, that said in agreement, I'm really speaking more toward the application of existing law. The absolute worst I've ever heard of for a D Class Felony is one of those Lojack ankle doohickies and a couple thousand in bond.

Hell, right across the way in New Jersey that character that was accused of killing five teenage boys was released on less than a million dollar bond. That's five A murder charges versus a D promoting charge. There's got to be a political angle to this but ultimately it boils down to th epeople in power in this country abusing that power and our media standing by idly.

You will do more time for cocaine than for murder

JohnMichael
03-15-2012, 10:21 AM
...me understand this.

Before'n y'all get up on yer high horses let me make this clear: this is not a query about the viability, legality, or any other aspect of prostitution. What I know about prostitution is that there are some that claim it a victimless crime but obviously there is a sex trade within this country that is rife with violence and oppression. This is not about that.

This is about judicial process.

Wtf is going on in Manhattan? After a five year investigation---yes, that's five years of tax payer money being spent on the investigative process---prosecutors have come up with a single D Felony charge against the "Millionare Madam" Anna Gristina.

How on earth can a judge levy a two million dollar bail on a single D Felony? Where is the ACLU on this?

Anyone?


Sorry cannot help you with that one. You are right the ACLU needs to be involved. What happened to the punishment fitting the crime. I for the record do not think it should be a crime.

bobsticks
03-15-2012, 10:33 AM
What happened to the punishment fitting the crime?

Right thought except that nobody has been convicted of a crime despite a five year investigation.

The defendant claims that she was running a "matchmaking service" which I suppose is walking a thin line as it were, but still legal. The way I know that is that there are fricken television shows about said profession.

Hyfi
03-15-2012, 10:40 AM
Right thought except that nobody has been convicted of a crime despite a five year investigation.

The defendant claims that she was running a "matchmaking service" which I suppose is walking a thin line as it were, but still legal. The way I know that is that there are fricken television shows about said profession.

More than likely her black book contains too many names of people in higher places that would crash and burn if they actually say what the investigation turned up.

ForeverAutumn
03-15-2012, 10:40 AM
Can't answer that but another stupid thing happened in Philly yesterday.

The mayor passed a law stopping people from feeding the homeless outside. Duh, Homeless means you live outside. In these same parks, a family can have a pic nic and eat a sandwich, but they cannot give a sandwich to a homeless person to eat.

It was stated it was for health ans sanitary reasons but in reality, there is a new Museum set to open next month along the Parkway and they want the homeless that sit there during the day gone.

Makes me want to buy a truckload of sandwiches, stand in front of Philly's city hall handing them out, and ask everyone to go into city hall to eat them.

Hyfi
03-15-2012, 10:43 AM
Makes me want to buy a truckload of sandwiches, stand in front of Philly's city hall handing them out, and ask everyone to go into city hall to eat them.

I hear ya, really stupid move and he is treating the homeless like ferrel cats.

JohnMichael
03-15-2012, 10:47 AM
Can't answer that but another stupid thing happened in Philly yesterday.

The mayor passed a law stopping people from feeding the homeless outside. Duh, Homeless means you live outside. In these same parks, a family can have a pic nic and eat a sandwich, but they cannot give a sandwich to a homeless person to eat.

It was stated it was for health ans sanitary reasons but in reality, there is a new Museum set to open next month along the Parkway and they want the homeless that sit there during the day gone.



I liked Philidelphia when I have visited the city. Will they have to change their slogan from "City of Brotherly Love"?

bobsticks
03-15-2012, 10:52 AM
More than likely her black book contains too many names of people in higher places that would crash and burn if they actually say what the investigation turned up.

That would be a workable theory except that the authorities are already in possession of both her business partner and the documents associated with the business. Jailing her doesn't prevent her (through her lawyer) making any public statements.

Hyfi
03-15-2012, 10:56 AM
That would be a workable theory except that the authorities are already in possession of both her business partner and the documents associated with the business. Jailing her doesn't prevent her (through her lawyer) making any public statements.

Death threats would.

Hyfi
03-15-2012, 10:58 AM
I liked Philidelphia when I have visited the city. Will they have to change their slogan from "City of Brotherly Love"?

Overall, it's a crappy city except for the outskirts and a few tourist locations.

City of Unwanted Homeless

The fumiest thing about the Mayor saying it was about sanitary and health concerns is that these poor people are already as unsanitary and health-less as they can be and FOOD would actually help them.

bobsticks
03-15-2012, 11:01 AM
Makes me want to buy a truckload of sandwiches, stand in front of Philly's city hall handing them out, and ask everyone to go into city hall to eat them.

That's a laudable instinct Autumn...there's a few problems though. No doubt there's a statement against eating in or on the property of City Hall. You could be prosecuted.

Several hundred sandwiches would be impossible to hold. They would require some type of cart or stand or table for which you have no license. You could be prosecuted.

If you put them on the ground that would violate several health codes. You could be prosecuted.

Depending on the ingredients of the sandwiches they have to be kept at a constant and controlled temperature. If you were unable to provide documentation of such, you could be cited.

Should any of the recipients of said sandwiches not be able to provide identification they could be perceived as homeless, placing you in violation of the very code you were protesting.

Despite there being a right to assemblage in this country, one needs a permit for a gathering or a parade. Got one? Sorry.

Now granted, these are only misdemeanors but there seems to be several of them with a pattern of escalation--you malcontent. Better tell hubby to sell the drums, 'cause bail could be north of a million bucks or so. Don't worry, the Philly court system isn't that busy. We'll see you in a month or three...

ForeverAutumn
03-15-2012, 11:23 AM
That was actually my Plan B. Plan A was to buy a bunch of passes into the new museum and hand out a sandwich and museum pass to the homeless so that they could eat their sandwiches in the museum. But I figured that there's no way the museum is going to allow outside (HA!) food onto the premises.

bobsticks
03-15-2012, 11:33 AM
Not a bad plan but you're wise to avoid the obvious pitfalls.

One of the differences between our two countries is that our prison system is almost exclusively privatized, providing an economic incentive to criminalize our citizenry.

The U.S. has a higher rate of incarceration of its citizens than Communist Russia and when that rate dips we just adjust the bar for measurement.

JohnMichael
03-15-2012, 11:33 AM
That was actually my Plan B. Plan A was to buy a bunch of passes into the new museum and hand out a sandwich and museum pass to the homeless so that they could eat their sandwiches in the museum. But I figured that there's no way the museum is going to allow outside (HA!) food onto the premises.



You could treat them to the incredible Sunday brunch at the Philidelphia Museum Of Art.

Feanor
03-15-2012, 11:36 AM
Prostitution like most drugs ought to be legalized and taxed, e.g. as Holland does. Illegal things that are in high demand attract crime ... but that's old news.

If contraception or abortion were made illegal, they too would attract crime (as they did in the past).

Feanor
03-15-2012, 11:42 AM
Well Twinkies don't need refrigeration and I'm sure you could put 200-300 in a large backpack. So get out there and give FA a hand -- two people don't constitute an illegal gathering.

ForeverAutumn
03-15-2012, 12:04 PM
You could treat them to the incredible Sunday brunch at the Philidelphia Museum Of Art.

I'm thinking that I could probably make a few dozen sandwiches for the cost of one brunch. :)


Well Twinkies don't need refrigeration and I'm sure you could put 200-300 in a large backpack. So get out there and give FA a hand -- two people don't constitute an illegal gathering.

TWINKIES! YES! How is that law worded? Does it specifically say "no food"? Because Twinkies are devoid of anything resembling real food. I think we've found our loophole. Twinkies could save Philadelphia's homeless!

GMichael
03-15-2012, 12:50 PM
I'm thinking that I could probably make a few dozen sandwiches for the cost of one brunch. :)



TWINKIES! YES! How is that law worded? Does it specifically say "no food"? Because Twinkies are devoid of anything resembling real food. I think we've found our loophole. Twinkies could save Philadelphia's homeless!

But as you said, they are not really food. They wouldn't help them much.
I like the sandwich idea. Make a few hundred and pull them in on a trailer/cart pulled by a rental car. Then leave the cart with a sign and get yer butt outta there.

bobsticks
03-15-2012, 12:54 PM
Prostitution like most drugs ought to be legalized and taxed, e.g. as Holland does. Illegal things that are in high demand attract crime ... but that's old news.

If contraception or abortion were made illegal, they too would attract crime (as they did in the past).

Be that as it may---and I don't necessarily disagree with you---the argument over process is instantly lost when people make statements like that. Of course, in this country, if the headline contains the word "prostitution" every fat, judgemental stay-at-home bible-mom and her henpecked husband scream, "Throw the book at her!!".

The issue was, and remains, that you can't put unconvicted people in jail for indeterminate amounts of time---and unreasonable bail is de facto just that.

Do we think she's a flight risk? She's got four school aged children. She's part of a community.

Is she a danger to the generall public? What's she gonna do, bludgeon someone with a hooker?

This is akin to the police spending five years wiretapping, reading the emails of and surveilling a nine year old operating a lemonade stand to determine whether or not a valid license is had---and the courts imposing a hundred thousand dollar bail for one citation of failure to obtain.

bobsticks
03-15-2012, 01:25 PM
But as you said, they are not really food. They wouldn't help them much.
I like the sandwich idea. Make a few hundred and pull them in on a trailer/cart pulled by a rental car. Then leave the cart with a sign and get yer butt outta there.

Nope. That's a really, really bad idea. Because of it's mobility the cart would fall under the same rules regulating the food trucks one sees in larger cities around the country. The truck/car and the cart would both have to be licensed specifically for that pupose. Further, they have to be inspected with the results posted. Pennsylvania is one of the states that requires documentation posted with a letter grade, so there's another violation.

Autumn would have to go through a "Food Service Safety" or "Serve Safe" course and the accompanying tests therein.

Failure to follow these rules could result in additional charges for each and every individual that took a sandwich---which would, of course, be in furtherance multiple counts of large-scale civil disobediance.

Damn, that's gonna be hella bail and crippling fines. Can the homeless eat cardboard? That's just a littering fine...

JohnMichael
03-15-2012, 02:43 PM
Nope. That's a really, really bad idea. Because of it's mobility the cart would fall under the same rules regulating the food trucks one sees in larger cities around the country. The truck/car and the cart would both have to be licensed specifically for that pupose. Further, they have to be inspected with the results posted. Pennsylvania is one of the states that requires documentation posted with a letter grade, so there's another violation.

Autumn would have to go through a "Food Service Safety" or "Serve Safe" course and the accompanying tests therein.

Failure to follow these rules could result in additional charges for each and every individual that took a sandwich---which would, of course, be in furtherance multiple counts of large-scale civil disobediance.

Damn, that's gonna be hella bail and crippling fines. Can the homeless eat cardboard? That's just a littering fine...


Too bad my Serve Safe certification has expired. I could have been her sidekick.

ForeverAutumn
03-15-2012, 04:56 PM
You guys would bail me out, right?

RIGHT?

Zephyr!
03-16-2012, 03:56 AM
It's corruption, plain and simple -- there is so much subjectivity, even in the law. Agree with the poster above that legalization is best.

Feanor
03-16-2012, 05:16 AM
Be that as it may---and I don't necessarily disagree with you---the argument over process is instantly lost when people make statements like that. Of course, in this country, if the headline contains the word "prostitution" every fat, judgemental stay-at-home bible-mom and her henpecked husband scream, "Throw the book at her!!".

The issue was, and remains, that you can't put unconvicted people in jail for indeterminate amounts of time---and unreasonable bail is de facto just that.

Do we think she's a flight risk? She's got four school aged children. She's part of a community.

Is she a danger to the generall public? What's she gonna do, bludgeon someone with a hooker?

This is akin to the police spending five years wiretapping, reading the emails of and surveilling a nine year old operating a lemonade stand to determine whether or not a valid license is had---and the courts imposing a hundred thousand dollar bail for one citation of failure to obtain.
There might be an argument that he amount of the bail should reflect the wealth of the charged person. I don't see that number of charges has much to do with it. High bail makes sense of the purpose of bail is to deter flight from justice. The other factor is the likelihood of flight for reasons of other than bail.

So the kid with the lemonade stand would have small bail -- unless her dad was, say, Mitt Romney. Now Mitt probably wouldn't skip bail himself, but he could send his kid to a prep school in Switzerland.

JohnMichael
03-16-2012, 05:28 AM
You guys would bail me out, right?

RIGHT?



Of course we would bail you out. You are too delicate for prison.

StevenSurprenant
03-20-2012, 06:28 AM
The judicial process is only part of the problem. It all begins with our representatives in office creating an ever increasing mountain of new laws to micro-manage every aspect of our lives. Many of these new laws are variations of laws that already exist and created to give them more power of arrest or increased punishment for the offender. In addition, the interpretation of these laws are left to the courts. To compound this problem is the fact that laws do not mention the reason these laws were created.

For instance, prostitution is illegal, but why? Is it a moral issue, a health issue, or perhaps because it occurs without taxation. If it's a moral issue, then who's morals is it based on. If it's a health issue, then regulate it. If it's about taxation, then regulate it. As for what constitutes prostitution, it's easy to see that accepting money for sex is prostitution, but when people get married for money isn't that prostitution? Many years ago, before equal job opportunities, a woman’s only hope at the good life was marriage, but couldn't that be construed as prostitution? You can see the problem. As a side note, there are laws that make sex outside marriage illegal and laws that attempt to control what sex acts people engage in. The odd thing about all of this is there are no victims. The prostitute and the john engage in these acts willfully. So the question is, what crime has been committed? Why does it need to be controlled? What justification is there for spending tax payers money on police, jails, and courts to enforce these laws against people engaged in willful acts between two consenting adults? Has making laws against prostitution solved this problem or has it created more problems?

As for secondary effects of these laws... So what would happen if prostitution were made legal? First off it would be regulated and taxed. The men and women engaged in this would be taken off the streets, improving the conditions within communities. Health concerns would be addressed, protecting both the woman and the men. The question to be asked is does criminalization of an act that has existed and will exist probably in perpetuity make any sense?

The war on drugs is another issue that is mindless and has created more problems than it solved, but that is another issue.

As for laws, there are so many and new ones being created every day that it is impossible for any person to know them. Without defining the reason for the creation of a new law and a description of the problem it is trying to solve, the courts makes a best guess at the intent of the bill and that in effect becomes the definition or scope of the law. Is there a solution for this? I think so. Perhaps every law needs an expiration date, say five years, after which it is removed from the books unless it is reviewed and re-enacted into law. Perhaps regulate the number of laws to what fits into a book of 500 pages (font 10). There can be different books for different situations. One book for the private citizen, one for people engaging in business, and so on. I realize that this sounds simple, but consider all the laws concerning murder. Wouldn't it be simpler to just say that if you murder another person you will be arrested and incarcerated? I think that “intent” is the determining factor in the punishment given. Anyway, by limiting the space in which laws can be written and setting time limits of their existence should keep our law makers busy enough to stop them from being so stupid. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to have a 500 page book with all the laws rather spend our lives not knowing what the laws are? We shouldn't have to pay a lawyer every time we have a question about the law. Our government should make access to the laws free and understandable to everyone.

If I continue this will turn into a book, but keep in mind that this is simply a blog and cannot be construed as an entire representation of my thoughts.

Feanor
03-20-2012, 06:33 AM
The judicial process is only part of the problem. It all begins with our representatives in office creating an ever increasing mountain of new laws to micro-manage every aspect of our lives. Many of these new laws are variations of laws that already exist and created to give them more power of arrest or increased punishment for the offender. In addition, the interpretation of these laws are left to the courts. To compound this problem is the fact that laws do not mention the reason these laws were created.

For instance, prostitution is illegal, but why?...
The war on drugs is another issue that is mindless and has created more problems than it solved...
Ah, come on. More laws is good for lawyers, right? What is the most common occupation among members of Congress? I rest my case.

bobsticks
03-20-2012, 07:07 AM
Steve, I'm not sure about the feasibility of having only 500 pages of laws but, other than that, I'm gonna guess that you're a very frustrated voter. You make way too much sense to be an enfranchised member of the American electoral process.

ForeverAutumn
03-20-2012, 07:18 AM
The odd thing about all of this is there are no victims. The prostitute and the john engage in these acts willfully.

I don't agree with this. It may be true in some cases, but I don't believe that all prostitutes do their job willfully. And while I agree that legalizing prostitution would solve many problems, there will always be an illegal underground for those unwillful situations.

But Sticks specifically asked us to stay away from these issues so I won't go there. I just wanted to state my disagreement with your premise.

GMichael
03-20-2012, 07:50 AM
Nope. That's a really, really bad idea. Because of it's mobility the cart would fall under the same rules regulating the food trucks one sees in larger cities around the country. The truck/car and the cart would both have to be licensed specifically for that pupose. Further, they have to be inspected with the results posted. Pennsylvania is one of the states that requires documentation posted with a letter grade, so there's another violation.

Autumn would have to go through a "Food Service Safety" or "Serve Safe" course and the accompanying tests therein.

Failure to follow these rules could result in additional charges for each and every individual that took a sandwich---which would, of course, be in furtherance multiple counts of large-scale civil disobediance.

Damn, that's gonna be hella bail and crippling fines. Can the homeless eat cardboard? That's just a littering fine...

Who said that I was worried about any laws being broken. I just want to get the food to the people who need it in a way that sticks in the law makers faces.

bobsticks
03-20-2012, 07:51 AM
Who said that I was worried about any laws being broken. I just want to get the food to the people who need it in a way that sticks in the law makers faces.

Well, then you're right on track. I like the cut of your jib, GM. :p

Lol, that's a pretty easy position to take though when it's Autumn that's gonna end up in shackles...

GMichael
03-20-2012, 07:55 AM
Well, then you're right on track. I like the cut of your jib, GM. :p

Lol, that's a pretty easy position to take though when it's Autumn that's gonna end up in shackles...

Another dream come true.:arf:

StevenSurprenant
03-20-2012, 09:00 AM
I don't agree with this. It may be true in some cases, but I don't believe that all prostitutes do their job willfully. And while I agree that legalizing prostitution would solve many problems, there will always be an illegal underground for those unwillful situations.

But Sticks specifically asked us to stay away from these issues so I won't go there. I just wanted to state my disagreement with your premise.

I agree with you that my ideas will not solve all the problems and that criminal elements will probably continue to exist, the question is whether or not it will have a more positive impact on society compared to how we deal with this situation in the present. To simply deny human nature and criminalize it is not act of a sound mind.

As for Sticks, I'm not sure if I can agree since this is in the "Off Topics" forum. It seems that all the replies are reasonable and thoughtful, so I see nothing wrong with this topic. I realize that this is a huge departure from audio, but it's very interesting to see another side of the posters here. There are some very intelligent people here and I really enjoy their viewpoints on a multitude of subjects. The only time I would consider this particular forum as over-the-top is if it dominated audio review, which is hasn't.

Anyway, thanks for your input as it is pertinent to the subject and a real concern. Perhaps if it were legal then people unwilling engaged in this might have an out from this way of life, as It would be open to the scrutiny of officials monitoring the business. It can't be worse than it is now.

Besides, I don't understand... Isn't it Sticks who started this thread? I think his post is of grave concern to all people. It is only one example of the insanity that goes on in the legal system. His concern was the money spent on investigating Anna Gristina, and the amount of bail set for a class D felony. I can't directly respond to that except to say that it is a reflection of the mentality of our judges and lawyers. The court system is rife with similar situations which boggle the mind.

My girl friends two sons are lawyers and one of them got out of the business based on his moral persuasions and the other will criticize the system in a heart beat saying that the criminal judicial system is a travesty in the making and the civil courts are a total crap shoot. Don't think for a minute that many of these lawyers and judges are blind to inconsistencies and faults of the legal system. They know that it's flawed but they do their job, regardless of whether it makes sense or not, because they believe that it is what they're supposed to do.

I just don't know what to say about this except to say it is out of my control.

bobsticks
03-20-2012, 09:10 AM
As for Sticks, I'm not sure if I can agree since this is in the "Off Topics" forum. It seems that all the replies are reasonable and thoughtful, so I see nothing wrong with this topic...

Hey Steve, no big deal. When I originally started the thread I wanted it to be a discussion of eroding civil liberties and the complete lack of respect for the rule of law that our judicial and criminal justice system display. That discussion seems to have run its course so flail away my Quixotic friend...:p

StevenSurprenant
03-20-2012, 09:43 AM
Hey Steve, no big deal. When I originally started the thread I wanted it to be a discussion of eroding civil liberties and the complete lack of respect for the rule of law that our judicial and criminal justice system display. That discussion seems to have run its course so flail away my Quixotic friend...:p


Thanks, perhaps my reply was off subject, but I agree with you, in totality, about eroding civil liberties and the crimes of the courts against the people of this nation.

New word for the day: Quixotic - (had to look that one up)

ForeverAutumn
03-20-2012, 02:32 PM
Shall we talk a bit about justice not being served? Graham James was sentenced to only two years for the sexual abuse of Theo Fleury and Todd Holt. What a joke!

LeRoy
04-14-2012, 10:46 AM
...me understand this.

Before'n y'all get up on yer high horses let me make this clear: this is not a query about the viability, legality, or any other aspect of prostitution. What I know about prostitution is that there are some that claim it a victimless crime but obviously there is a sex trade within this country that is rife with violence and oppression. This is not about that.

This is about judicial process.

Wtf is going on in Manhattan? After a five year investigation---yes, that's five years of tax payer money being spent on the investigative process---prosecutors have come up with a single D Felony charge against the "Millionare Madam" Anna Gristina.

How on earth can a judge levy a two million dollar bail on a single D Felony? Where is the ACLU on this?

Anyone?

Approximately 20-25 years ago we had a "madame", Theresa Brown who had been running a brothel out of her home and she did it for very, very long time before getting arrested (in San Antonio, TX).

During that time frame the local PD was really getting after the prostitution rings and were releasing names of the John's in the media. Well, when T.B. got arrested it was speculated that high ranking local politicians, PD, and high profile business men were on the list. In fact, a court order was issued prohibiting the release of the names! She got off easy on the charges and then left town.

I am speculating that maybe the NY madame is threatening to release names of high profile people and the judge sent a warning to her with that hefty bail amount.

bobsticks
04-24-2012, 10:11 AM
[QUOTE=StevenSurprenant;379457]The judicial process is only part of the problem. It all begins with our representatives in office creating an ever increasing mountain of new laws to micro-manage every aspect of our lives. Many of these new laws are variations of laws that already exist and created to give them more power of arrest or increased punishment for the offender. In addition, the interpretation of these laws are left to the courts. To compound this problem is the fact that laws do not mention the reason these laws were created. [QUOTE]

Yes, though sometimes it's left not to the courts but to law enforcement officials. See HR347 :



The anti-protest bill signed by Barack Obama is a quiet attack on free speech. - Slate Magazine (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2012/03/the_anti_protest_bill_signed_by_barack_obama_is_a_ quiet_attack_on_free_speech_.html)



"And that brings us to the real problem with the change to the old protest law. Instead of turning on a designated place, the protest ban turns on what persons and spaces are deemed to warrant Secret Service protection. It’s a perfect circle: The people who believe they are important enough to warrant protest can now shield themselves from protestors. No wonder the Occupy supporters are worried. In the spirit of “free speech zones,” this law creates another space in which protesters are free to be nowhere near the people they are protesting.

Consider that more than 6,700 people have been arrested at Occupy events since last September. Thus, while these changes to the law are not the death of free speech, they aren’t as trivial as the administration would have you believe. Rather, they are part of an incremental and persistent effort by the government to keep demonstrators away from events involving those at the top of the political food chain. "