If you didn’t support George Bush’s polices, you were un-American and didn’t support the troops. If you don’t support Barack Obama’s policies, you’re against health care reform and don’t want people to have health care. There are so many creative tactics for ignoring what people are actually saying. Free Speech Zones are among them.
August 19th, 2009
If you hate Free Speech Zones it means you hate free speech!!!! : P
Free Speech Zones are great. You can say anything you want in them!
I see free speech zones more as a social gathering for people who have no balls.
Is that cop carrying an electric shaver on his belt?
It’s a taser.
The first time I ever heard about a “free speech zone” I complained about it loud and long, and the retorts I got were along the lines of “If there is a free speech zone, then you HAVE FREE SPEECH! What’s the problem?”
thats not a tazer, its a spork!
Well, but if there’re free speech zone means that all other zones are non-free speech.
Now see, if that tree had an AR15, it would get more respect.
@Josh
“Don’t Spork me, Bro!”
the most telling part about them was that the *media* was forbidden from covering them. so that gave the lie to it merely being a crowd-control or security measure. it was pure suppression. and begun under Clinton not Bush, fwiw, though Bush used them more, uh.. liberally..
Excellent strip, Dale.
Nice, but the anthropomorphic tree evokes way too much sympathy… You’re not going green, are you Dale? And that “where’s the restroom” sign just encourages more porta-potties at taxpayer expense!
(TROLL’d)
I also thought the tree was a little weird… but quite delightful, too.
The right to freedom of speech is dependent upon property rights. I do not have the inalienable right to say whatever I want if I am standing in your house. You do have the inalienable right to tell me vacate your property for whatever reason you choose, including if you do not wish to hear what I have to say.
This is why individual property rights are so important. If you have no place to stand upon the face of the Earth that is yours, then you cannot exercise your inalienable right to free speech without the permission of the owner of whatever property on which you find yourself. Not being able to exercise a right is the same as not having it. Rights given by permission can be rescinded at any time.
Free speech zones are on public property, as are non-free speech zones. Public property is supposedly “owned” by everyone in our government/citizen/country model, but this communistic ownership concept fails.
You say we all own the sidewalk and street in front of city hall? Really? Then how do I get permission from the other property owners (everyone who is not me) in order to protest on the public land outside of city hall?
Do I need everyone’s permission? In that case, no protest will take place.
Do I just need the majority? Then the minority aren’t really owners, since they cannot do what they wish with their own property.
Or do I need no one else’s permission? Can I do whatever I like on the sidewalk and street because I “own” a miniscule fraction of them?
Our solution to public property is to give the responsibility for maintaining these commons to government bureaucrats (GBs). We don’t get to vote on how each piece of commons will be utilized each and every hour of each and every day—we instead elect GBs to handle that responsibility.
Now the intended use for a sidewalk and a street are for people to travel from Point A to Point B. If a giant sinkhole were to open up in front of city hall and swallow a big chunk of sidewalk and street, the public would certainly demand that the GBs repair it so it could be returned to its functional state.
When GBs see a public demonstration clogging the sidewalk and street, they view it the same as a sinkhole: “My job is to keep these transportation corridors open and functional, and so I must act to restore their intended functionality.”
This is all perfectly reasonable. Everyone is paying him to do exactly that. If he gives preferential treatment to some groups over others or allows for sidewalks and streets to be used for something other than their intended function, then he is not fulfilling his duty. The lowest common denominator must be satisfied, because everyone is paying for the public land, and so everyone must be given the same service.
Of course the practical end result of this is that the government in effect owns the public commons. If you wish to exercise free speech on its property, you must have its permission. You have no inalienable right to speak your mind on public property.
You can have a government, or inalienable rights. You cannot always have both.
I declare this strip to be full of WIN!