# Free Speech



## Cipcich (Oct 3, 2011)

What fun. If I keep doing this, I can sell a knife.
Anyway, the question of the hour is: 
Have you ever REFRAINED FROM SPEAKING OUT about something you did not think was right because you were afraid of retaliation, whether:cool2: on the job, or from the police?


----------



## kalaeb (Oct 3, 2011)

Every [email protected] day!


----------



## mano (Oct 3, 2011)

It's called being smart. Sometimes the best thing to say is nothing.


----------



## Cipcich (Oct 4, 2011)

Actually, much of the time the safest thing is to say nothing. There were a lot of smart Germans in the thirties . . .
This "off topic" post was precipitated by the foreboding I felt when I questioned the actions of law enforcement in a letter to the editor. 
Our freedom of speech should not be constrained by the possibility that we might be subject to retaliation of any kind.


----------



## Salty dog (Oct 4, 2011)

I'm in a rural town that consists of farm fields, horses and upscale neighborhoods. The town folk like their village quiet and white. The cops keep it that way.

You would think being the highest profile business in the community, one that draws visitors from as far as a 100 mile radius wouldn't get hassled but we do. Thankfully my lawyer is on good terms with the top cop so we are currently co-existing. I have instructed my security company not to call the cops if a burglar alarm comes in. I don't want them in my building. (Yes, I'd rather have burglars. In the long run they are cheaper)

On advice of my lawyer I've kept my mouth shut about the numerous incidents of racial profiling and one of illegal search and seasure. (I am white so guess which one I was a victim of?)


----------



## Cipcich (Oct 4, 2011)

Search "Aaron Bassler". Shot on sight from a distance of 40 yards in a Mendocino County forest. I would imagine even some cops think this was a little cowardly, not that they'd ever say so.
When I was a kid in the '50's, my family rode the "Skunk Train" through this area. I loved Ft. Bragg, because I thought it was a fort. Since then, they've cut down all the trees; they left a few by the tracks, but you can see the wasteland through them.
Aaron Bassler was a sad case, but he could have been afforded the opportunity to surrender with little or no risk to the SWAT team with the ceramic plates in their vests half a football-field away.


----------



## SpikeC (Oct 4, 2011)

Cipcich said:


> Our freedom of speech should not be constrained by the possibility that we might be subject to retaliation of any kind.


 
Unfortunately it is in many ways. Think of all the people who have been fired for facebook posts.


----------



## tk59 (Oct 4, 2011)

Cipcich said:


> ...Have you ever REFRAINED FROM SPEAKING OUT about something you did not think was right because you were afraid of retaliation, whether:cool2: on the job, or from the police?


Yes, and you can throw in crazies/druggies, too. Some times it just isn't worth it to stand up for what's right when the other side feels they have nothing to lose or just doesn't consider the possibility of losing.


----------



## ecchef (Oct 4, 2011)

Everyone does it when 'necessary' because we've been conditioned to, exactly as the subterranean workers of "Metropolis" or the sleeping populace of "They Live". Yeah, I know; but cinematic images get the point across pretty well.

There have been some that transcended the political/social/religious dogma of their era, but many of them have been relegated to the historical record as being obscure curiosities or insane and dangerous megalomaniacs. 

I find some solace in reading _Men Among The Ruins_ & _Revolt Against The Modern World_; but you'll have to pick your own poison, so to speak.

tk59...what you have just said is what every terrorist (whether clandestine or duly elected by our own citizenry) prays to their own particular diety to hear. It is their "Holy Grail". Please re-think this.


----------



## mr drinky (Oct 4, 2011)

With in-laws, there is no freedom of speech. You will pay for every bit of truth you say -- somehow.

k.


----------



## chazmtb (Oct 4, 2011)

Freedom of speech, as it is applied by the First Amendment, only protects the speaker from GOVERNMENT, i.e., the MAN, the FUZZ, and in some instances the PUBLIC SCHOOLS from taking any action against you, unless there is clear and present danger. GOVERNMENT can limit speech very narrowly, in certain time, place manner, if there is interest in public safety. GOVERNMENT can limit speech through the airwaves (FCC) if it is found indecent or pornographic. Speech can be found in many forms and as the courts sees fit (burning the flag). (Off topic, but we need to start burning the Iranian flag)

Otherwise, in the other parts on non GOVERNMENTAL action, speech can be met with lawful repercussions.


----------



## Eamon Burke (Oct 4, 2011)

I've been arrested for speaking my peace to a cop.

Now I keep everything to myself. Only my wife gets what I'm thinking, and nobody gets uncensored me.


----------



## ecchef (Oct 5, 2011)

chazmtb said:


> GOVERNMENT can limit speech very narrowly, in certain time, place manner, if there is interest in public safety. (Off topic, but we need to start burning the Iranian flag)


 

Constitution of the United States (Bill of Rights): Amendment I: Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech ... 

US Patriot Act: Freedom of speech: The government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation. "Anyone"? Does this also include local law enforcement agencies? A clergyman, in confidence? 

Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers may sometimes be prosecuted for tolerating "hate speech" by their employees, if that speech contributes to a broader pattern of harassment resulting in a "hostile or offensive working environment" for other employees. Pretty vague, huh?

Why only the Iranian flag? What criteria does a nation have to meet to get on the list to have its flag burned? Shouldn't we _really_ be starting with the UN flag?


----------



## Cipcich (Oct 6, 2011)

I told myself I'd unplug my keyboard and stop drinking. But I didn't.
I'm kind of over the hill, and semi-illiterate in matters internet, so I was unaware that comments I posted on newspaper websites would be visible worldwide. I was shocked to see my own photo in "comments" when I took a look at a Tokyo paper's story on Aaron Bassler . . .
Nevertheless. I could not refrain this morning from commenting on the latest developments, as the reporter was good enough to follow up on the story, despite the tone of my entreaties. 
The Mendocino County DA is looking into the matter, a "matter of protocol", he said. Wonder how that will work out . .
Eleven rounds fired, seven hit Bassler, without warning, from 60 yards out (used to be 40). "His finger was near the trigger". Justifiable homicide says a professor in Sacramento, from whence the shooters came.
Another schizophrenic bites the dust.


----------



## Salty dog (Oct 6, 2011)

Oh, that was the guy they had the big man-hunt for? When I read the story I have to admit it sounded odd. It read like they spotted the guy walking through the woods and just shot him. Done.

Sounds like he won't get much sympathy either.


----------



## Cipcich (Oct 6, 2011)

No, little sympathy, and I'd hate to be telling this story in a bar in Ft. Bragg tonight.
Nevertheless, he was effectively executed by a team from Sacramento shooting from tree stands at a range of of approximately 50 yards, without warning or challenge.


----------



## mr drinky (Oct 6, 2011)

ecchef said:


> Shouldn't we _really_ be starting with the UN flag?



Hey, I used to work for them...easy on the hate burning 

Anyhow at the risk of sounding political (which I am not). I used to follow politics a lot, and was even a voter registration specialist by trade, but now I have chosen never to vote again. It got me too worked up and kept me away from wasting time on knives.

So here is my observation. I never could understand my friends that were always talking about the 2nd amendment and their right to bear arms and then also being against burning the flag. Regardless of what the constitution actually says (on the right to bear arms and free speech), the idea that many of my army buds had was the our guns were there to fight our government if they ever tried to take away our rights. Ok, fine. But then if that situation does come up in which citizens are taking up arms against their own government, wouldn't that tyrannical government also be using the American flag? It always seemed to me that if a person justifies their gun for this possible tyranny, they should also reserve the flag burning right in case of that same possible tyranny. 

Anyhow, please don't take (or turn this) into political chatter. It was just an observation and something I never quite understood. And I am not going to sign this with my first initial just in case the NSA is listening. Btw, I know the head of the NSA, Gen. Alexander. Watch out you guys.


----------



## chazmtb (Oct 6, 2011)

> US Patriot Act: Freedom of speech: The government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation. "Anyone"? Does this also include local law enforcement agencies? A clergyman, in confidence?


 
Probably can under national security/clear and present danger doctrine. Court will have to decide.



> Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers may sometimes be prosecuted for tolerating "hate speech" by their employees, if that speech contributes to a broader pattern of harassment resulting in a "hostile or offensive working environment" for other employees. Pretty vague, huh?



Probably can, because it is a tortious activity to allow harassment of employee. I think it goes outside of speech law into what an Employer has a duty to do which is to protect employees. EEOC can regulate workplace environment.



> Why only the Iranian flag? What criteria does a nation have to meet to get on the list to have its flag burned? Shouldn't we _really_ be starting with the UN flag?



Because they burn ours.


----------



## ecchef (Oct 6, 2011)

The way I look at it, a flag is just another piece of cloth...like the Shroud of Turin or a pair of panties. 
And I don't give a rat's ass about the NSA, FBI, CIA, DEA, BATF or any of the other USA, Inc. goon squads.


----------

