Free Speech Zones

[DennisK]

I never realized this until today, but did you know we have "free speech zones" and "non free speech zones" in the US?

A free speech zone is an area set aside for protesters, within which law enforcement supposedly will not interfere with them if they stay inside it, but may arrest or assail them if they venture out of it. It is often at a remote location from which the protesters need not be seen or heard by those attending the event being protested.

What are your thoughts?

[curiosityandthecat]

We've got little ones all over campus. They're pretty prominent areas, here. I always thought it was a rather odd concept, but once I saw it being used in person, I have to admit it's kinda nice. You can walk down the street without having to worry about fighting your way through protesters.

[DennisK]

I think it sounds good on paper, but sounds like it's being exploited a lot by our 2 political parties.  I can see having an area off to the side so as not to block anyone from entering a building, but to have roped off areas a few blocks from a political event?  That's nuts.

[curiosityandthecat]

I think it sounds good on paper, but sounds like it's being exploited a lot by our 2 political parties.  I can see having an area off to the side so as not to block anyone from entering a building, but to have roped off areas a few blocks from a political event?  That's nuts.

Well, yeah. If they're effectively removing protesters from the event, then they're also effectively silencing them. I guess it doesn't really apply here because the campus is relatively small (in comparison to, say, OSU or that really big one in Texas).

[VanReal]

A lot of this has to do with providing safety to the protestors.  I think back to when the KKK marched in Harlem and they were restricted to a certain "path" in which they had a permit and had police escorts not only to keep them on their path but to provide safety to them.  You'd like to think you could just gather somewhere and say what you please but have to imagine that it can easily escalate into violence if not structured properly.

[Whitney]

When soon to be ex president Bush came to speak at Oklahoma State in 06, they established a free speech zone at least a half mile away on the library lawn.  A lot of people were very upset that he was speaking at graduation.  Protesting isn't really my thing, so I didn't bother; especially since it wasn't even visible from where he was speaking.

I don't think free speech zones are constitutional....we should be able to say what we want whenever we want as long as we aren't calling for violence or otherwise being a danger to others.

[Kyuuketsuki]

What are your thoughts?

Whilst I don't think that's a good thing it's important to understand that freedom of speech is not an automatic right.

Kyu

[DennisK]

A lot of this has to do with providing safety to the protestors.  I think back to when the KKK marched in Harlem and they were restricted to a certain "path" in which they had a permit and had police escorts not only to keep them on their path but to provide safety to them.  You'd like to think you could just gather somewhere and say what you please but have to imagine that it can easily escalate into violence if not structured properly.

That is how they are selling it, yes.  But a "peaceful protest" means a silent one.  If you protest in any way occurs outside that zone (miles away from an event), then by law you can be arrested.  Theoretically, you can be arrested for simply disagreeing.  I see this as a precursor in taking our "free speech" and other civil liberties away.  By use of fear and under the guise of "safety" we are sold the Patriot Act, Homeland Security and the Military Tribunal Act.  We have to keep these things because we haven't been attacked since 9/11, so they are working.