Local law enforcement officials have ruled out terrorism with the rash of Hollywood arsons. But now, someone with the “Occupy” movement could be associated with the wave of arsons against prime real estate they might associate with wealth.
And the latest attempted federal crimes for the “Occupy” movement was a number of arrests on Saturday from “Occupy Iowa” protesters, who blocked the doors to a Democratic state party headquarters in the state. One 14 year old high school aged girl has been arrested for the third time, because only local trespassing charges were filed against her and not much stiffer federal charges for interference in the voting process were charge. Some spokesman for the “Occupy Iowa” movement claimed that the loose organization of protesters aren’t trying to disrupt the caucuses, yet others pledge to do just that, disrupt the voting at Tuesday’s statewide caucuses.
All of this represents just why problems with the “Occupy” movement have grown so out of control. Protesters commit serious federal crimes such as interfering in banking, interfering in interstate commerce when they blocked the transfer of goods by trucking from the Western coast state’s docks, and now are stepping up to illegal interference in federally protected voting rights.
In California, the rash of arsons of prime real estate properties could well be the work of someone associated with the “Occupy” movement as well, because they seem to be targeting properties associated with upper income individuals. The former home of Jim Morrison, the late singer of The Doors, was targeted by some arsonist criminal. The luxury three story historic home is valued at more than $1.1 million.
At some point, law enforcement officials will likely want to send a message to the “Occupy” movement to only engage in constitutionally protected protests and legal free speech rights, and to stop the illegal acts such as arson or federal crimes associated with the movement. Interference in the Iowa caucuses may just push that legal button. Courts have never looked kindly on extremists such as the Ku Klux Klan or others who prevented voters from voting. Likely, the courts just won’t view interference in the voting process as a legitimate political protest, when other perfectly legal protests are possible.