Tungtide

Free Speech Zones II

Posted by tungtide on August 6, 2008, 9:57 pm

My original post covered the restriction of free speech in regard to where protesters are allowed to, well, protest. The upcoming Democratic National convention in Denver (Aug 25-28) was one of the examples. As much as I may disagree with the message that DNC protests might bring, I fully support the rights of dissenters to protest and disagree.

It is with a heavy heart that I must update the situation. A federal judge has ruled that the defined “free speech zones” are, in fact, legal.

U.S. District Judge Marcia Krieger agreed that the protesters would suffer some infringement on their freedom of expression but said those interests had to be balanced with security concerns.

I officially call bullshit.

This is the same tired argument that the White House has been using for almost eight years as an excuse to chip away at our civil liberties. It’s always in the “best interest of security” and delivered with a father-knows-best attitude (or in this case, mother-knows-best).

Should we sacrifice security? Of course not. Is it possible to balance the need for security with the rights of citizens to express themselves peacefully? If not, we are doing something seriously wrong. I can’t think or write straight right now, so I’m just going to end this here.

Advertisements

2 Responses to “Free Speech Zones II”

  1. DB said

    The irony of this pisses me off. I can understand the need for security, but they need to do a better job “balancing”our rights. It is a shame that both parties are more interested in avoiding the ensuing controversy of protesters than allowing those who are deciding their fates to engage in our first amendment rights. A shame.

  2. tungtide said

    It would be wonderful if either of the candidates actually stood up and denounced these actions.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: