Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Image

Subversive Groups Must Now Register In South Carolina 849

Posted by samzenpus
from the are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-a-member-of-the-communist-party dept.
Hugh Pickens writes "The Raw Story reports that terrorists who want to overthrow the United States government must now register with South Carolina's Secretary of State and declare their intentions — or face a $25,000 fine and up to 10 years in prison. The 'Subversive Activities Registration Act' passed last year in South Carolina and now officially on the books states that 'every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States ... shall register with the Secretary of State.'"

*

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Subversive Groups Must Now Register In South Carolina

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @08:58PM (#31093580)
    slashdot requires all first posters to register.
    • by headkase (533448) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:34PM (#31094740)
      How about something like this (feel free to democratically suggest improvements or point out issues): When a law finally makes it's way through all the courts and the Supreme Court finds it unconstitutional how about putting *every single last bastard* who voted for it on trial for treason? The Supreme Court could decide if it was an obvious case which would make it more difficult to get out of, an hysteria case which would allow reparations to more easily flow, or a subtle case which a voter could get out of with a slap on the wrist simply by admitting their stupidity. Seriously, a little bit of responsibility? I know politicians hate that word when applied to *them*, but come on: throwing insult after insult at the wall knowing that a few of them will stick is the antithesis of what I thought the USA was. It you are going to, as a politician, betray the blood spilled by countless of your ancestors for the freedom you enjoy, well, I'd like to see yours spilled in return.
      • by larry bagina (561269) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:42PM (#31094814) Journal
        From what I've read and remember, in ancient Greece, a legislator who sponsored a law which was struck down by the court (??) was fined.
      • by Teancum (67324) <robert_horning@n ... t ['etz' in gap]> on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @11:10PM (#31095066) Homepage Journal

        I would prefer a constitutional amendment that goes something like this:

        Any law which isn't enforced and has no public record of ever having been enforced for a certain period of time, say 20 years or perhaps less, that the law in question simply is null and void.

        A constitutional provision is one thing, such as procedures for impeachment or something that is rarely invoked for a good reason, but for laws that impact ordinary citizens, a failure to even enforce these laws (such as the anti-sodomy laws and co-habitation/fornication laws) ought to be simply declared obsolete due to lack of enforcement.

        A token enforcement merely to keep the law on the books would not be considered acceptable. A pattern of widespread enforcement of such a law would have to be demonstrated for it to be considered valid under such a provision.

        In this particular case with the terrorist registration law, I have my doubts that such a law would ever be proven to be enforced and its only purpose is to expand and exaggerate sentences in an effort to stifle free speech. Simply asking a state officer to testify in court about how many people actually engaged in registration would be sufficient in this case to show non-enforcement of such a law.

        Too bad that such a provision or legal concept is not typically a part of common law.

        • by DaleSwanson (910098) on Thursday February 11, 2010 @12:15AM (#31095566)
          I'd rather just place a time limit on all laws after which they would need to be renewed or become null and void. The period would range between 2-25 laws based on what majority (which ever house was less) it passed with (say 50-60 = 5, 60-70 = 10, 70-80 = 20, 80+ = 25). All new laws would be 5 year regardless of the majority (to prevent panic laws like Patriot Act from starting with 25 years). All existing laws would start with whatever period they should have based on the scale (exempt from 5 year mandatory first period). A law could only be renewed in the year it was due for renewal (to avoid parties from passing pet laws when they had control).
        • by poena.dare (306891) on Thursday February 11, 2010 @12:19AM (#31095604)

          "Any law which isn't enforced and has no public record of ever having been enforced for a certain period of time, say 20 years or perhaps less, that the law in question simply is null and void."

          Deputy Bubba: You wanted to see me, Sheriff?

          Sheriff Leroy: Yep, Bubba, I just got a call from the state legerslature. It seems our anti-sodomy law is up for renewal.

          Deputy Bubba: 'Bout damn time!

          Sheriff Leroy: You betcha bygolly! We need to get crackin' on this. We only have a month.

          Deputy Bubba: I'll tell the men to be on the lookout for sodomistic behavior.

          Sheriff Leroy: Hop to it son. And tell the undercover sting teams to start greasin' up their backsides.

        • by steelfood (895457) on Thursday February 11, 2010 @12:29AM (#31095682)

          Or, it could be a great defense.

          "Your honor, I didn't register as a member of a subversive group, therefore the purpose of my group could not have been to overthrow the government of the United States."

  • Too bad (Score:5, Funny)

    by bensafrickingenius (828123) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @08:59PM (#31093594)
    No one thought to do this pre 9/11.
    • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:03PM (#31093666)

      Too bad England didn't think of this pre-1775. Jjust think we could all be speaking in smashing British accents like James Bond right now...

      • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Informative)

        by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:17PM (#31093874) Homepage

        England did think of it, and they tried to stop the colonists from meeting up, which is precisely why "the right of the people peaceably to assemble" was put into the first amendment.

        • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Insightful)

          by mysidia (191772) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:35PM (#31094108)

          And it's exactly that ammendment which this law is blatantly contrary too...

          The legislature who passed this might have good intentions, but I hope the courts strike this one down post haste.

          • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Funny)

            by SnapShot (171582) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:46PM (#31094266)

            Can you imagine the intelligence of the voter to which this law was intended to pander? I can just imagine the debate during the next election cycle.

            Mah opponent beeleeves that the Subversive Ahctevities Registration Ahct is unconstitutional. Ah beeleeve Ah speak for the GREAT people of South Carolina when Ah ask: 'Why do yoo support the terrorists?'

          • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Insightful)

            by ChipMonk (711367) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:29PM (#31094698) Journal
            Not to mention the Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination.
        • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Third Position (1725934) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:51PM (#31094326)

          Somewhere, there's an irony in this being passed by the state that was first to secede from the Union and instigate the Civil War.

          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by Anonymous Coward

            This is South Carolina. It's being passed to set these groups up for state grants, not to get them arrested.

          • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Informative)

            by moosesocks (264553) on Thursday February 11, 2010 @12:22AM (#31095628) Homepage

            Somewhere, there's an irony in this being passed by the state that was first to secede from the Union and instigate the Civil War.

            Says the guy advertising a neo-nazi political group in his sig.

            (Seriously, go on and look up the traditional definition of the "third position," and read through the A3P's political positions. I'm not calling them Nazis simply for the sake of being hyperbolic. They're one of the few groups that actually makes the law being discussed in TFA seem like a good idea.)

          • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Daniel Dvorkin (106857) * on Thursday February 11, 2010 @12:38AM (#31095742) Homepage Journal

            Somewhere, there's an irony in this being passed by the state that was first to secede from the Union and instigate the Civil War.

            No, there is zero irony. It simply highlights the absurdity of the claim that the Confederate states were fighting for freedom. They seceded in an attempt to keep aristocratic rule alive when the rest of the country was turning against it; and even among the slave states, S.C. was always distinguished by the degree to which it worshiped the aristocratic ideal. The American Revolution was not complete until 1865.

            • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Insightful)

              by Garrett Fox (970174) on Thursday February 11, 2010 @04:01AM (#31096956) Homepage
              "The American Revolution was not complete until 1865."

              You mean, when we established by violence that the government does not "derive its just powers from the consent of the governed", and people do not have the right to separate their state/colony from a larger empire?
        • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Insightful)

          by AmberBlackCat (829689) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:33PM (#31094734)

          England did think of it, and they tried to stop the colonists from meeting up, which is precisely why "the right of the people peaceably to assemble" was put into the first amendment.

          And the fact, that it worked, is precisely why they want to take that from us now.

    • Re:Too bad (Score:5, Informative)

      by icebike (68054) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:11PM (#31093786)

      Oddly enough North Carolina had a right to revolution written into their constitution. http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Legislation/constitution/article1.html [state.nc.us] (section 3D).

      Their neighbors to the south, not so much.

  • by honestmonkey (819408) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:00PM (#31093614) Journal
    I mean, I don't want to have to drive all the way to South Carolina if I can avoid it. Especially with gas prices the way they are now, and subversive equipment costs going through the roof.
  • subversive? (Score:5, Funny)

    by SoupGuru (723634) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:01PM (#31093630)
    Well, if they did that then they wouldn't be subversive now, would they?
    • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:40PM (#31094176) Homepage
      Hmmm... I wonder if that's a defense. Like, "I was about to register as a subversive group, at which time I realized I was no longer subversive and so I didn't have to register. I again became subversive, but when I decided to register, I again ceased to be subversive. Since I couldn't be subversive and register at the same time, I was never able to register."
  • by MindlessAutomata (1282944) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:01PM (#31093636)

    Don't like someone badmouthing the government? Require them to register. Then when they (obviously) don't do it, stick 'em in jail and take their money.

    Enjoy your democracy, guys.

  • by Arancaytar (966377) <arancaytar.ilyaran@gmail.com> on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:01PM (#31093638) Homepage

    I thought my evil master plan for overthrowing the government was PERFECT! Nobody could have known what I was up to!

    And now I have to tell them myself?

    Oh well...

    • by EricWright (16803) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:06PM (#31093710) Journal

      FTFA:

      By "subversive organization," the law means "every corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or organization, composed of two or more persons

      You'll be just fine if you keep it to yourself.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by h4rr4r (612664)

        So basically this is in violation of our right to peaceably assemble. That's only the first amendment, easy to see how they could miss that.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Arancaytar (966377)

          Peaceably assemble... with intent to overthrow the government.

          Although there's kind of a Catch 22 opportunity there.

          • Re:Awwwww crap! (Score:4, Insightful)

            by h4rr4r (612664) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:16PM (#31093862)

            How so?
            Ghandi got the brits out peaceably.

          • We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

            Hmmmmm

            But I still think this is a joke.

  • Well... (Score:3, Funny)

    by thinkpol (51932) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:02PM (#31093652)

    The story also states that it only costs $5 to register. At least it's not expensive to get on such an exclusive list!

  • by dmomo (256005) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:03PM (#31093662) Homepage

    Only criminals will secretly be Terrorists. :( ...

    PANIC!

  • by tinkerghost (944862) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:05PM (#31093698) Homepage
    Freedom of association and the right to espouse political views anonymously have been upheld frequently by the highest courts, so this is just a matter of paper politics.
  • by syousef (465911) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:07PM (#31093718) Journal

    If you intend to do anything illegal you must register. If you litter and have not registered your intention to litter we're going to come down hard on you! Planning to kill your spouse? Register now, and get 20% off your sentence! Planning to rob a bank? Registration before Feb 15th gives you 10% off your sentence. Planning a terrorist act? Just call 1-900-TERR-RIST, and we'll go easy on you if you don't make it right away to your chosen form of heaven.

    Seriously, what kind of bass awkwards government scheme is this? If your penalties for commiting a crime are too lax, tighten them. Otherwise expecting people to register their intention of breaking the law (and inciting the overthrow of the government isn't just simple free speech folks. If you think it is maybe you're so messed up this law will work on you) is pure nonsense.

    The muppets coming up with this should be....oh wait I'd have to register to say that....

    • by Urza9814 (883915) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:33PM (#31094084)

      (and inciting the overthrow of the government isn't just simple free speech folks. If you think it is maybe you're so messed up this law will work on you)

      _inciting_ the overthrow isn't free speech, no. But _advocating_ it certainly is. And that's one of the things this law requires registering. And "subversive" is a quite vague word - by some definitions simply saying "Obama is a terrible president" could be considered subversive.

      Reminds me of the many sedition acts we've had here in the U.S. - all of which were eventually ruled unconstitutional.

  • Uh oh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BigSlowTarget (325940) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:07PM (#31093720) Journal

    Hmm $5 charge..... What do you want to bet the Republican and Democratic parties, Tea Party, Police Departments, Exxon, Greenpeace, Chase Bank, Hillary Clinton, Rush Limbaugh, Goldman Sachs, everyone's ex's and pretty much everyone else anyone dislikes all find 'helpful' people registering on their behalf? If this list feeds to the no fly list there's going to be hell to pay.

  • by BitterOak (537666) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:11PM (#31093772)
    Does this mean if my group registers with the state and we state our intentions to commit terrorist acts that we will be immune from prosecution when we carry out our intentions?
  • by istartedi (132515) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:11PM (#31093774) Journal

    This is just like those "marijuana tax stamp" acts. Laws like that typicly just end up being used to tack on extra years when you get convicted, and/or to assist the prosecutors since the more laws you break the easier it is to convict. IMHO, it's a waste of time since any serious act (ie, assault, murder) comitted by such a group is going to get them life or worse (does SC have the death penalty?)

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by swb (14022)

      Yes, "tax stamps" was exactly what I was thinking. Ironically, Mississippi used the same system for alcohol when it was still a "dry" state.

      When they began "issuing" and requiring them in Minnesota, they actually sold a couple of dozen of them. They made a big point of being able to buy them anonymously but glossed over the fact they were sold in a government building which was easily monitored by law enforcement. I don't remember any prosecutions making the news but I'm sure from time to time they beat

  • by ZosX (517789) <zosxavius AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:15PM (#31093852) Homepage

    I can see other states passing laws such as this. I would think that if you were planning on overthrowing the government, doing so "legally" by registering your intent probably wouldn't seem like the brightest idea. This is akin to requiring bank robbers to register before they go rob a bank. Who in their right mind would do anything? Also notice that it says on the clause:

    "(1) "Subversive organization" means every corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or organization, composed of two or more persons, which directly or indirectly advocates, advises, teaches or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States, of this State or of any political subdivision thereof by force or violence or other unlawful means;

    "advocate"........."advise".......... These words are the result of sharing your opinion. You "advocate" or you "advise" somebody on a matter. This basically makes thought and speech crimes if you do not register to speak your opinion. If we share opinions then we need to register. I honestly cannot fathom what crime this useless law is meant to deter from, nor see how it will protect anyone from anything. Any sort of restrictions on free speech and the right to assembly (also attacked here) are movements towards taking power and freedoms away from people. My oh my how utterly un-american we have so become........the sad part is that the people that vote these laws into action consider themselves patriots (notice how patriotism is explicitly exempt from this law, which opens up all sorts of avenues......militias are patriotic too........) I hope they gave George and Tom lots of space to roll in their coffins......................

    America.....pure irony at its best!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by galego (110613)
      OK ... let's break this down ..

      "(1) "Subversive organization" means every corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or organization, composed of two or more persons, which directly or indirectly advocates, advises, teaches or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of ...

      • controlling - lobbyists, right?
      • conducting - lobbyists and defense contractors
      • seizing - either party in an election year, year before an election year ... or these days, the day after the e
  • by cybereal (621599) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:21PM (#31093926) Homepage

    These sort of laws always seem so ridiculous until you learn how criminal law comes into application in real practice. Laws like this one enable police organizations to expand their scope of suspicions to an area of law that is less scrutinized that violent crimes. This type of law is also used to enhance punishments during investigations for the cases where say, the police are pretty sure these guys were planning to do some terrorizing but couldn't prove it but with this law they can show the far more vague notion of being a group with desires for overthrowing gov't. (Wouldn't many republicans count? hehe, anyway...) so they can put them in jail or otherwise limit their freedom of movement and privacy while continuing to investigate and try to prove more malicious actions or intent.

    So the law might seem ridiculous but it's exactly this kind of law that is constantly misused and abused in our legal/police system every day, both for good and bad.

    On a related note, many traffic codes and laws are created for the purpose of enhancing fines and punishments allowable to people who cause accidents. Consider any traffic law that seems impossible to catch a person breaking, then realize that when that person crashes or causes a crash, any number of such laws can be applied, merely with witness testimony, to enhance fines and so on. For example, many states have had laws for years that require you use your hands for nothing besides driving. This is classically used to assert fault on, say, a woman doing her make-up while driving or a driver distracted by children. They just need an eye witness to corroborate for determination of fault.

    • Or in other words give them rights to snoop where they have no right to be snooping. When the person breaks the law, punish them suitably for it. end of story. Being a group who desires to overthrow the government is legal. Deal with it. You do remember how this country was founded right?

      They seem ridiculous because they are. They admit how faulty our system is to need such things. There is no way to abuse something for good. If you abuse the law you are doing something ethically wrong. Because by so doi

  • New laws (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jmv (93421) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:21PM (#31093930) Homepage

    Is it just me or is there an increase in the number of new laws (not just in the US) that basically state that it's illegal to do illegal stuff? I'm trying to find the rational explanation for that, but so far I've failed.

  • Lobbyist Groups? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by GrubLord (1662041) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:22PM (#31093948)

    From TFA - this is any group that "directly or indirectly advocates, advises, teaches or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States".

    Lobbyist groups are all about controlling the government (via substantial bribes). Does this mean they need to register?

  • by voss (52565) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:32PM (#31094076)

    How awesome is that! Lets all go register!

    It used to be you have to have a following buy guns or spend years spewing wacky ideas
    Now you can just fill out a form and pay $5.

  • by bit9 (1702770) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:33PM (#31094078)
    Sounds like an end-run around the First Amendment. The legislators probably realized that an outright ban on such groups would amount to prior restraint of free speech, so they figured they could achieve essentially the same effect by attempting to regulate your right to free speech, knowing that no sane person (or group) would willingly put themselves under the government's microscope. This is straight out of the playbook of J. Edgar Hoover. I am not a lawyer.
  • by hey! (33014) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:36PM (#31094130) Homepage Journal

    Anarchists, unite!

  • by srobert (4099) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @09:43PM (#31094212)

    I drove through South Carolina not long ago. You see lots of rebel flags flying, especially in the rural areas. Is that subversive? Is the state going to go after them?

  • It's time (Score:5, Insightful)

    by alvinrod (889928) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:08PM (#31094514)
    It seems to me that right about the time a government passes such a ridiculous law it's time for it to be overthrown.
  • by Compulawyer (318018) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:25PM (#31094666)
    ... welcome our new registration overlords. I feel safer already.

    Why didn't the federal government think of this? We could have already had a beowulf cluster of airport security checkpoint imaging machines matching pre-flight body scans with names from the registration list.

  • by Just Some Guy (3352) <kirk+slashdot@strauser.com> on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:37PM (#31094766) Homepage Journal

    I live in Nebraska, but I'd like to register anyway. I have advocated "controlling and conducting" the government by means of encouraging others to vote for the candidates I like and by donating time and money to their campaigns. By South Carolina's standard, I'm a subversive. Would I get a registration form I could hang on my wall next to my college diploma, a share of SCOX stock, and a Church of the SubGenius ordination certificate?

    Actually, I'm kind of serious about that. In a dream world, I'd like to see a few hundred million people register as South Carolina subversives.

  • by ogdenk (712300) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:42PM (#31094810)

    The feds beat them to it a long time ago..... but they will probably just throw you in prison for 20 years. Amazing that I can be jailed for this longer than I can be jailed for attempted murder. Just for ADVOCATING revolution. This is disgusting. I feel a storm brewing.

    TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > 2385

      2385. Advocating overthrow of Government

    Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States or the government of any State, Territory, District or Possession thereof, or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence, or by the assassination of any officer of any such government; or
    Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or
    Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof—
    Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.

  • by st0rmshad0w (412661) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:46PM (#31094854)

    'every member of a subversive organization, or an organization subject to foreign control, every foreign agent and every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States ... shall register with the Secretary of State.'

    Do they ever even consider running these things past a high school English teacher or equivalent before they put them to a vote?

  • by Hurricane78 (562437) <deleted.slashdot@org> on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:46PM (#31094856)

    I mean what is the definition of “subversive”? “Does not conform to party lines, like in China”?
    By my definition, all TV stations and political parties are subversive and perverse. Now what?

  • Political parties (Score:4, Insightful)

    by WPIDalamar (122110) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @10:59PM (#31094974) Homepage

    " every person who advocates, teaches, advises or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government"

    Political parties certainly advocate and advise the controlling and conducting of the government. I hope all those politicians are registering.

  • by MillionthMonkey (240664) on Wednesday February 10, 2010 @11:47PM (#31095334)
    I guess this means secessionist groups must now register in South Carolina.

    What is this world coming to?
  • George Soros (Score:4, Interesting)

    by kenh (9056) on Thursday February 11, 2010 @12:00AM (#31095456) Homepage Journal

    Any chance George Soros would count as a foreign organization plotting the overthrow of the US Gov't?

    Just a thought...

    Any reason to think this would withstand a constitutional challenge?

  • by ffflala (793437) on Thursday February 11, 2010 @12:15AM (#31095570)

    Dear South Carolina,

    As requested, we hereby notify you that we are a "Subversive organization" --a corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or organization, composed of two or more persons. We hope to directly or indirectly advocate, advise, teach or practice the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government the State of South Carolina and any political subdivision thereof by unlawful means.

    Specifically, we wish to advocate doing so by (1) collecting money from business organizations, then (2) using this money to support the campaign efforts of a sufficient number of elected officials to obtain majority influence over the elected branches of the Government of South Carolina. We will solicit and accept donations from corporations subject to foreign control, such as Sonoco Products, SCANA Corporation, Bowater, Inc., and other corporate entities with major investments in both South Carolina and the rest of the world. They do not have to be Fortune 500 companies! We're willing to include profitable corporations of any size, regardless of the national allegiances of their stockholders, board members, or executives.

    We will, by funding the continuation of the careers of elected officials in the State of South Carolina, hope to directly or indirectly influence them to pursue policies favorable to the business interests of our donors, particularly when these interests conflict with the rights provided in the constitutions of the State of Carolina and the United States. As we anticipate that these conflicts will be of a constitutional nature, this should suffice to be unlawful enough to warrant registration under your recent legislation. Hopefully you will find this suitably subversive.

    Included with our registration fee you will find a 15% gratuity. Please consider this a token of our appreciation of your ongoing efforts to make the realization of our goals easier.

    Looking forward to seeing you at the President's Day golf outing. Looks like the weather will keep us in the clubhouse!

    Toodles,

    -The Old Boy Network

  • Mod story down (Score:5, Informative)

    by chazzf (188092) <cfulton@deepthou ... minus physicist> on Thursday February 11, 2010 @08:04AM (#31098104) Homepage Journal
    According to Eugene Volokh [volokh.com], the law was actually passed in 1951, is something of a dead letter, and they're currently trying to repeal it. Sorry to spoil all the hand-wringing.

In a consumer society there are inevitably two kinds of slaves: the prisoners of addiction and the prisoners of envy.

Working...