🚀 go-pugleaf

  Robb Shecter schectr@ucunix.san.uc.edu writes:
> There's been discussion about freedom of speech.   (Now, not that I
>   represent anyone but myself...)   I think this pertains ONLY to the 
>   government.  In fact, I know it does.  We can't sue someone down the
>   street for depriving us of our freedom of speech, but we can sue the
>   government.
  Oh come on!  
> I've been a long time member of the ACLU.  Any freedoms (speech, right to
>   bear arms, etc...) deals with the interface between any group and the
>   government.  The is an important distinction.
  It falls to the govenment to protect our rights.  This means the law should
protect each individual's right to free speech from other individuals.  And
this goes for other rights as well.  I can see this specious logic applied to
Locke's three inalienable rights: life, liberty, and property (changed to
the pursuit of happiness by our founding fathers, so they wouldn't have to
pass out land to everyone :-)  )  Imagine the exchange, if our laws had
followed from this:

Neighbor (running away after shooting you):  ho ho ho! (a very jolly neighbor)
 
You: Officer, He shot me! Stop him!  (okay, this is cheap melodrama)

Officer: Sorry son, he's not in any way, shape, or form affliated with the
   government, so I can do a thing to stop him.  Even if I could, you see,
   I'm part of the government, so I have to protect his life from me, so even
   then I couldn't do anything.

You (bleeding):  So what can I do?

Officer: Get a gun.  But better not get it from a private vendor, they can
  choose if you can bear arms or not.  Try the government, they have to let
  you have one.