Originally posted by Teallaura
View Post
Honestly? The car or dog analogy isn't really a good one. You do not have a right to a either. they are privileges, not rights, and as such, the government is free to make them as onerous and expensive as it wants, so long as it does so fairly and doesn't infringe on other rights as it does so. Instead, the ownership of a gun should be compared to exercising another right.
Let's take free speech. I believe that the 2020 riots, the attempted baseball shooting that injured Scalisce, and attempted assassination of Kavanaugh, and the Jan 6th, have shown how dangerous unregulated speech should be. So, let's apply the regulations from gun control/abolitionists perspective to speech.
1. Licensing. To discuss politics in public, you must first be licensed. This would mean passing a test showing you can tell disinformation from truth. It means showing that you can demonstrate the ability to debate without inflaming the emotions of others. It also means that some states will require you to show an "actual need" to speak in public. Finally, you must maintain your permit. This requires you take 24 hours of public speaking classes every year. These classes will be provided by for-profit businesses, and you are responsible for paying for the classes.
2. Large crowds. In order to keep things safe, the capacity of audiences must be limited. I propose a limit of 100 in-person audience members. Public speaking to an in-person audience of more than 100 people is considered highly dangerous and will be banned.
3. Insurance. The 2020 riots caused billions in dollars of damage. January 6th riots cause millions. These came as a result of public speaking/protests. As such, the organizers of those protests should be required to carry insurance and be responsible for any damage that results from their speech.
4. Absolute Legal Responsibility. Again, the 2020 riots had dozens of people killed. Those who spoke at those riots and protests must be held legally responsible for those deaths.
5. Taxes. The permit in #1 will be met with a very large tax, say $1000 per person annually to maintain the license. In addition, ongoing training will be taxed at 1000% of the price of the class itself.
6. Background Checks. For each public speaking engagement you wish to engage in, the venue must perform a background check. It costs $50. You will be denied the permit if you have violated speech requirements in the past, if you have been convicted of harassment, incitement, or disruptive behavior. There will be no back-yard or private venue loophole. Any crowd greater than 15 people constitutes a public speaking engagement.
7. Red Flags. People may monitor your speech. If they suspect that you are too emotionally unstable, and may engage in emotionally charged speech while public speaking (creating a danger to those around you), then those people may report your to local authorities. At which point, a court will remove your license and bar you from speaking in public.
8. Non protected speech. Online speech is covered by it's own regulation scheme. You have no right to free speech on line, and the government may choose to regulate online speech how it wants. The founders could not have imagined the internet, tv, radio, or audio/visual recordings. As such, the 1st amendment does not cover them, and only applies to print publications and physical public speaking.
With all of the above in place, you will now be able to exercise your right to free speech. It's not burdensome, after all, no rights are absolute. Nobody wants to take your speech rights away from you.
Comment