Anonymous ID: 974364 April 30, 2019, 11:34 a.m. No.6372408   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2422

>>6372339

Another free speech concept came to mind while showering. Run it by you, anons?

 

Picture an art museum featuring paintings and sculptures of the (acknowledged) Great Masters. Does the management allow somebody off the street to come in with paint and brush, hammer and chisel, and deface the artworks, or substitute their own creations? Of course not. It's a site with a purpose, namely an art museum. It's open to the public. But it's not open for just anybody to come in and display their own works in the hall of the art masterworks.

 

Or consider a ballgame. Open to the public. Would a principle of free speech require management to allow 1000 people to rush the field with their own soccer ball and start playing chase the flag? Of course not. The umpires/referees would call time out and the owner would call the security guards. It's a venue with a PURPOSE and the public is there because of that stated purpose.

 

Or suppose the workers at a manufacturing plant want to protest. OK fine, they may protest outside with signs and disrupt people entering and leaving the premises. But they it would be unlawful for them to break/destroy/set fire to the owner's property as part of the protest.

 

The right of free speech is very important but it's not an absolute right in all places at all times.

 

Or let's say you want to have a protest march in DC. You can do that but I believe you have to get a permit from the National Park Service or local jurisdiction? That's so they can arrange to have some cops there to protect the protesters and the public in case of a trouble.

 

Might be interesting to research some cases where the right to free speech has been adjudicated. Need to factor in the specific circumstances. It's not a general right applicable in all places and all times.