Mostly I like what MacLorry has to say, and I like the way he investigated the video for detention.

But I have to give the standard Rothbard/TRH response to this:
Originally Posted by MacLorry
The proper exercising of rights is good, but before some idiot yelled "fire" in a crowed public place as a stunt to test his right of free speech there was no restriction for doing so. All it takes is an idiot to get a bunch of lawyers and judges thinking about so-called "reasonable" restrictions to our right. You seem ignorant to the historical erosion or our rights precipitated by criminals and idiots abusing those rights.

"Fire!" in a crowded public place is not a problem because the guy who does it has too much freedom of speech, and the free-speech right has to be throttled back until it's not a problem.

"Fire!" in a crowded public place has nothing to do with freedom of speech. It's a problem because it's fraudulent. If there really were a fire, then the person who noticed it and warned everybody about it would be a hero. The reason he's a criminal instead is that he's defrauding people into believing there's a fire when there isn't.

It would be just fine for him to holler "Fire!" in a crowded theater if he were part of the cast and that was a line in the play, and everybody understood that. He'd be saying the same thing, but there'd be no fraud involved.

Likewise, people who stand at the side of the road and shoot into passing cars are not a problem because they have too much freedom to carry guns; they're a problem because they're shooting innocent people.

Folks need to understand these distinctions. They're important.


"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain--that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." --Lysander Spooner, 1867