Replies

. . . should not be allowed to resort to freedom of speech as an excuse.

This is one of the most misunderstood (deliberately by the leftists, I think) aspects of rights. A right is something that the government may not restrain prior to its exercise. It does not mean that there are no consequences for exercising it.

I absolutely agree that there should be freedom of speech and of the press = no prior restraint by the government. However, the correct "check and balance" on this is that speech (or media/press) that harms someone has consequences. Yet the leftists use the 'free speech' argument to protect themselves from the consequences of their lies.

To use the gun analogy again: I have the right to keep and bear arms. If I shoot someone (cause harm) I have to accept the consequences of that. The fact there might be harm/consequences doesn't mean that the government has the authority to stop me from carrying in the first place.

And, for both the lying press and an irresponsible gun user, the balance comes from making the consequences serious enough that a person is very, very careful about the exercise of their right. For the press, that means fact-check very carefully. For a gun user, it means be very careful to use appropriate force, and to prevent unintended harm.