Do 'Free Speech Zones' Muffle Speech?

[kentuck]

This would renew my hope for this country
============================================================
http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=031113&cat=us&st=usprotest_zones_031112&src=abc

<snip>
- Brett Bursey knew he might get in trouble when he went out to protest at an appearance by President Bush, but he didn't expect the government to make a federal case out of what he saw as exercising his right to free speech.

Bursey, 55, is set to go on trial today on federal charges of entering a restricted area, after he objected to going to a "free speech zone" during a visit by President Bush to the Columbia Memorial Airport in South Carolina in October 2002.

"Free speech zones" or "protest zones" are areas set aside by law enforcement during presidential visits or other major events for people who want to demonstrate. Police say the practice is needed for reasons of security and public safety.

Bursey's lawyers have subpoenaed Karl Rove, Bush's political adviser, and Attorney General John Ashcroft to testify, claiming that they can provide evidence that the White House and the Justice Department have told the Secret Service to keep anti-administration protesters away from the president.

[Goldmund]

1. I thought the United States itself...

...was a "free speech zone".

[RetroLounge]

2. Exactly!

eom

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

3. Prior to the Squatter-in-Chief, "Free Speech Zones" have never...

...existed as a means to keep demonstrators confined to areas well away from the person or idea being protested.

Prior to Dubya, free speech could be exercised ANYWHERE in the United States within reason, to include being within shouting distance of the object of the protest.

Even under Nixon protest was allowed to take place for any reason, and Nixon was pretty paranoid about that kind of thing.

[Bandit]

5. Actually that is not true

The term Free Speech zone may not have been around but the idea was put into effect by action taken by pro-choice groups to keep anti-abortion protesters at a decent distance from family planning clinics. Anti-abortion protesters were getting in the faces of women entering the clinics and causing major distress. They were sued and the ruling was they had to maintain a certain distance (not sure what it was) away from the entrance of clinics. Bush* used this ruling in a convoluted way to establish "Free Speech Zones" Might be legal I don't know. Certainly not meant for public protest of public officials but leave it to Bush* to distort things all out of context.

[kentuck]

6. True Bandit...

The courts had to take recourse against those people that would get in the faces and taunt and threaten women going to health clinics, for abortions or whatever. Bush decided that this somehow applied to him???

[Media_Lies_Daily]

8. Thanks...I stand corrected on that issue.

[bushisanidiot]

4. By Seting Up a "Free Speech Zone" The Repukes Are Designating everywhere

else as non-free speech zones. The repukes are against free speech. You will tow the party line or be banned.. that's the repuke law.

[JM]

9. The issue in a nutshell

1) In the case of the abortion issue, people were using protest to prevent or otherwise hinder others from pursuing what they were allowed to do by law. In this situation they expressed their intent to hinder.

2) In the case of the Bush Admin free speech zones, they are preventing a class of people from expressing their views based on expectation, not action. No group protesting the President has expressed any intent for illegal action against the President. If they had, they would be in jail already.

This is clearly a misapplication of law by the misadministration.

Allowing someone to speak but preventing them from delivering the message to the intended recipient in the absence of any other overriding law is restriction of speech, plain and simple.

Later,
JM