[Vision2020] If You Look Young, Don't Buy Spray Paint ;-)

[Paul Rumelhart]

Bill London wrote:

>I stand by what I wrote.  It is legitimate to use chalk on a public sidewalk
>to present your political message.
>It is not legitimate to use spray paint on private property to present you
>gang wannabe message.
>If you can't see the difference, I suggest you take a few moments to read
>the Bill of Rights
>BL
>
>  
>

I agree that there is a big difference.  You could maybe argue that 
writing in chalk on a public sidewalk is still "injury by graffiti", 
it's just easier to cleanup.  Certainly, it would be "injury by 
graffiti" if the message was written in oil-based paint or acid.  
However, writing on sidewalks with chalk is mostly considered ok, as the 
various sports teams at the U of I do it as do (I'm sure) lots of other 
organizations. 

You are dead-on about the big difference between gang slogans on private 
property and political messages in public places.  The ironic thing is 
that people who stand up for Freedom of Speech almost always end up in a 
position where they are defending somebody whose message they disagree 
with.  Freedom of Speech is bigger than any particular message, 
including "Hitler Youth".  There is a slippery slope you won't want to 
start down.  The minute you claim that something is so bad that you 
don't have the freedom to say it, then you have just rephrased the 
argument in such a way that you are now arguing exactly how you tell how 
bad something has to be to be against the law.  In that direction is 
fascism.

Just to throw some gasoline on the fire, I have come to think that "hate 
speech" laws are bad for just those reasons I outlined above.  Trying to 
say that speech is unlawful if some nutcase can twist it into a reason 
for doing something bad is not a good enough argument for banning that 
speech, in my opinion.

Paul