Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Eric Blair 2084
I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here. My natural inclination is to oppose any restrictions beyond "keep your hands to yourself." And even if we say legislation may be enacted does not mean it MUST be enacted. But there has to be SOME leeway in letting the public set the rules for public places. Littering on public ground, for instance, can be legitimately restricted...or do you disagree?

How about a ban on people listening to their ipod at high volume and singing off key to the Bee Gees?

Depends on the volume. If the volume is reasonable, then restrictions may run afoul of the 1st amendment.

How about a ban on annoying fat women on buses yapping about some nonsense like Bob breaking up with Jen?

While annoying, this is still the exercise of free speech, a fundamental right. I don't think local governments should be able to restrict fundamental rights like speech or religion.

How about people who don’t shower and smell like ass?

Theoretically I think this could be permissible, but it's probably impossible to draft the restrictions in a reasonable way. The problem is defining standards and verifying that they are being enforced fairly.

If you want to legislate againt stuff that is annoying in public go for it. I’m all for it. Who cares if the constitution doesn’t allow it. It’s for the greater good.

I don't WANT to legislate against annoying stuff, I just think one CAN legislate against annoying stuff...well, at least some annoying stuff.

I'm also not sure how the Constitution fits into this. I've limited my statements to local government, and specifically exempted fundamental rights from the equation.

We have “disturbing the peace” violations already. I can’t play Metallica right now at 400 decibels in my backyard.

Right, because some restrictions can be reasonably imposed. For example, your backyard rock concert is forbidden because it will bother your neighbors. A public smoking ban- meaning one that actually covers public areas- is designed to prevent pedestrians from being bothered. What is the difference between the two? Or, to sound like some of the hardened Anti's I've debated on similar threads, "where do we draw the line?"

I struggled with this issue because it is not as clear-cut as legislation affecting private property. My sympathies are with the smokers on this one, but I'm not sure I can frame an effective argument for them other than the type I gave in post #31.

40 posted on 01/19/2008 9:42:34 PM PST by timm22 (Think critically)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: timm22

Very thoughtful and well thought out answers. I appreciate the fact that you take me so seriously. My own wife and kids don’t take me that seriously. Thank you.

I’m going to sleep. Just think about it for a while and get back to me tomorrow.

The ipod I was talking about didn’t make any noise that could be heard. It was me singing AC/DC off key while I couldn’t hear the sound of my own voice that pissed people off on the street. Should we ban that?


41 posted on 01/19/2008 9:52:04 PM PST by Eric Blair 2084 (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms shouldn't be a federal agency...it should be a convenience store.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson