Freedom of Speech is Awesome

October 31, 2007 by Andy.

Let’s start by reading an article from the CBS Associated Press.

CBS Article

If you want to see the incident then here is a link to the video.

taser video

You can tell by the title that justice has been carried out in this case.

The first question that comes to mind after reading this story and then actually seeing the incident is…”How free is our Freedom of Speech?” Once that initial question opens the door and runs through it, the rest of the questions run into your mind like beers 3 through 10 run into your mouth on Friday night.

We all understand that we have a right to “Freedom of Speech” as part of being an American. But…how far does this right extend? Does it extend unrestrained allowing us to say anything we want at any time at any place? The obvious answer to that is no, and by establishing that, we have a maximum boundary on our right to free speech. How far do we need to regress before we actually figure out what we can say and what we cannot say?

Can we walk into our place of work and start saying whatever we want? Probably not, unless you are self employed. Can we walk into a business and say whatever we want? Probably not, unless the business encourages that. Can we go to our school, a place that is supposedly open to ideas and new arguments? Probably not, unless you want to spend an afternoon with the principal or campus police. Can you simply go out to the street and start espousing your views? Maybe, but you better have a permit and not be saying anything that will upset anyone…so probably not. Can you use an amplifier to project your message? Well…once again you have to have a permit, a designated space, and it must not be done so with the involvement of a sound truck…so probably not. Where can we go, and what can we say?

Can you go to a political rally and question your leadership? Well…if you watch the video and read the story then apparently not. The invent of the taser also tells us otherwise. Man…maybe you can send a letter that expresses your views to a politician? You can do this, but you have to pay to send the letter; so in essence, there is a restraint on that method as well. The concept of free speech seems to be very narrow after you ask all of these questions….doesn’t it? There are a many questions but none of them really have any concrete answers that give us an ultimate limit on our right to “free speech.” So what does define our right?

Is our right to “free speech” limited simply to saying things that people agree with? Are we estopped from saying things that people don’t like? If you ask the student who questioned John Kerry, you probably would get a resounding yes. Did he have the right to stand before a Congressman and former Presidential candidate and ask him a non scripted question? According to the campus police he didn’t. Doesn’t the article say it all…no charges will be filed. Whew…we can all breath a sigh of relief because a potential threat to national security was avoided. It only took one objectionable question and 50,000 volts of electricity to prevent charges and keep the peace from being disturbed. And what would those charges have been? Disturbing the peace…maybe? Was he really disturbing the peace, or was he simply asking a tough question? Was his “disturbing the peace” really disturbing, or was it an attempt to shed some light on a system that has helped a few but hurt many more? Was his “disturbing the peace” an attempt to clarify some confusion regarding the democratic process? Was it an attempt to exercise his right to free speech? Was it a way of holding an elected representative accountable? Was he speaking for half of the nation or simply interrupting a scripted performance? It is a good thing that nobody has to answer these questions because they are tough, and we should all be grateful for those officers protecting the peace.

Despite the many other issues that this scenario raises (abuse of power, excessive force, forced conformity, restraint on opposing views, etc.), we can stand proudly on the fact that our rights, national security, and most importantly peace were preserved on that day. But wait…might a little disturbance in the peace be good? No way. It is not possible for a person or a group of people to say something unpopular and have any type of good result…right? We can all be assured that our Founding Fathers knew that things such as womens’ suffrage and a movement toward racial equality would simply result from an evolving nation…can’t we? I mean no one had to stand up and ask some tough questions or say something that was unpopular did they? Not that I am comparing the student from the article with Martin Luther King, but he is representative of a value that we hold dear as Americans…the right to free speech. His questions represent our ability to seek answers from those we choose to represent us. He represents a minority that will not stand silent and complacent, but who seek to grow, evolve, and improve. And for this he was tased. The proper remedy for this situation is not only to decline to file charges due to the fact that no crime was committed, but it would be to allow that student to sit down with Mr. Kerry and ask every question that came into his mind. Instead of restricting our right to free speech with a taser, why not allow the tough questions to be asked? Why not seek out deficiencies in our system so that we can then seek solutions? Why not stand on the idea of free speech in hopes that something good will come from it? Or maybe we should just give everyone a taser to protect the peace.

Just a thought

Andy Out

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »