Wal-Mart and free speech or First Amendment rights.

[Cleita]

Four years ago I stumped for a Democratic Congressional candidate in my district, who didn't win against the corporate bought Republican who had been groomed by his predecessor to replace him when he retired. This was as close to a coronation as you could get without having one. But one brave Democrat tried to run against this guy. Well, we tried to spread the word with a really small budget and no corporate cash. One of the ladies in our campaign group decided to set up a table outside in the Wal-Mart parking lot with pamphlets and buttons to advertise our candidate. Now I have noticed the Salvation Army and various clubs solicit donations and petition solicitors are quite welcome, but our lady was unceremoniously told to leave because she was trespassing. The police were called and Wal-Mart invoked their private property rights.

Now, I have a question. With today's ruling about the rights of persons even if they are corporations to have the right for freedom of speech under the First Amendment, may I be able to now exercise my freedom of speech, if I'm still considered a person, in Wal-Mart? I think it would be fun to conduct a tour through Wal-Mart with references to the various sweat shop enterprises and other ways goods get to Wal-Mart, not to mention how they conduct their human resources principles for their employees? Do you think I have a right under the First Amendment, as a person, to do this?

[Tansy_Gold]

1. Property rights trump all, even free speech rights

Walmart has the right to control "speech" on their property, just as you would have the right to prevent someone from putting up a sign for some other candidate on your front lawn.

Sorry.



TG

[Cleita]

3. You are sort of right. However, let me tell you how I don't have the same rights.

I get constant robocalls on my land line that interrupt me sometimes at five in the morning. I am on the no-call list which people seem to ignore. I also get unsolicited text messages on my cell phone. When I watch television, I am subjected to commercials in my living room of which many are unprincipled IMHO. I am really thinking of turning the TV beast off, but I still need the little news I get on it. I live in an area with a nuclear plant, possible earthquakes and possible wildfires, so I have to be able to tune into emergency broadcasts. The electric company comes by and prunes my trees at will and string up poles with all kinds of wires that sometimes kill birds and do other damage, but I have no rights here. They can come on the family's property any time they want to. So I am trying to figure out where my rights are.

[Tansy_Gold]

5. Not quite the same

1. The robocalls can be controlled -- get a caller ID and screen them out. Don't answer the phone. Etc. However, they are not a protected invasion of your privacy/property, since they are in fact violating the law. I get them too, though more of mine are robosolicitations for carpet cleaning, credit repair, car repair insurance, etc. The thing is, neither the telephone or the lines are your "property," and by allowing to have them installed, you are granting the other users the right to invade your privacy.

2. Don't read the text messages. Again, as with the land line, when you make the decision to avail yourself of the benefits of communication devices, you do so with the awareness that they facilitate invasions of your privacy. You can choose to do without them at any time. It's a matter of determining which is more important -- the ability to communicate or the absolute right of privacy.

3. Television is paid for by those commercials. Without them, everything would be pay per view. Again, it's your choice. Do you want to pay the price, in terms of watching commercials you don't like, to have the information, or would you rather pay for each minute of "news"?

4. By hooking into the power company's grid, you agree to allow them to maintain their equipment. They get a "right of way" to put up their poles and string their lines or bury their cables because this is a public benefit. (Yes, I'm a socialist.) This gives them the right to trim the trees -- or in my neighborhood, the cactus) when they pose danger to the lines. It also gives them the right to come on your property to read or replace meters.

In all of these cases, you are given clear choices -- get the benefit with a small inconvenience as a price, or do without. When you choose to accept the benefit, then you must also recognize that you give up a little "freedom."

The difference between these examples and someone's wish to go into Walmart and protest their business practices is that in the four examples you cited, the "infringements" are part and parcel of the benefit you are enjoying. Free broadcast tv comes to you courtesy of the commercials, and you don't have to buy any of their shit if you don't want to. You get electricity brought to your home via those wires, and trimming the trees allows the wires to continuing bringing you that electricity.

Your going into Walmart and protesting their sweatshop sourcing threatens their ability to make a profit on their own property and you don't bring them any benefit in exchange for the price they'd have to pay.

Just my non-constitutional-scholar take on it




TG

[Cleita]

6. Gone, gone, gone.

All of the above I have done and they have figured out how to get around it. I think I will disconnect the land line. I don't give a crap about TV...probably gone as well. I can't do anything about the electric until my landlord agrees to letting me put solar on my roof. He's thinking about it. (My son-in-law.)

I still really want to go into places like Wal-Mart, Banks and places like that and exercise my right of free speech. I do realize I will have to organize a movement to do it.

[Wapsie B]

2. I believe that if we're so concerned about First Amendment rights of corporations

we need to allow people like yourself at Walmart as well as employees of these corporations their First Amendment rights at work. My freedom of speech should not stop at my employer's doorstep.

[Cleita]

4. Absolutely right, but they do.

It's time to use this decision in our favor with the actions of unintended consequences.