Here's Your Answer, Todd....
 

A couple of points, Todd...

QUOTE:

He gets my ISP to boot me the newsgroup, if he had a problem he should
of went to google it their system not consolidated. It is also my
humble opinion don't know @@@@ about free speech.....the little ####er
don't understand that the real concept of free speech, no instead he
gives us the nazi version of free speech.

UNQUOTE

Todd, MY free speech was to ask you over and over to stop
being profane, obnoxious and abusive in public. NO LAW in the United
States REQUIRES me to tolerate being abused in a public forum.

And please don't give me the "If you don't want to read it..."
silliness. If people let themsleves be pushed around by every creep
that thought that it was their "right" to be a bully or public potty
mouth this would be a very sad place to live indeed.

Sorry you don't agree.

There is a very painful and delicate balance between the lattitude
permitted by what we call "free speech" and where your "right" to be
abusive in public stops.

Unfortunately, even in the United States, there has to be limits to
ALL things if people are going to live in a productive and (relatively)
peaceful society.

You just can't have this many people with disparate ideas living
together unless there is a certain amount of tolerance AND a certain
amount of restraint.

I asked you (others asked you) over and over to watch your mouth
and tone it down. You didn't. You got what you deserved.

And I was serving the very same Constitution that you so
flagrantly abuse before you reached puberty, Todd. I know a bit more
about it than you.

QUOTE:

One thing more I would like to know from that ###hole what "wanton
violation of federal regulation" am I suppose to be promoting??? then
again coming from a ####ing liar.....

UNQUOTE

Todd, You've bragged about your "pirate" operations over and over
and have stated you'd do it again.

Operation of any type of RF radiator without a license that
doesn't fall within the few license-free categories (certain subparts
of Part 95 and Part 15) is a violation of federal law.

It really is THAT simple.

Enjoy life from the sidelines...There's nothing more to say to you
except see ya later...most likely under "enforcement actions".

Steve, K4YZ

"K4YZ" wrote


Unfortunately, even in the United States, there has to be limits to
ALL things if people are going to live in a productive and (relatively)
peaceful society.


Spoken like a true control-freak.

Fortunately the US Constitution which we are blessed to live under places limits
on very FEW things, as opposed to the "there has to be limits to ALL things"
mindset often found in the "Constitutions" of petty dictators who have the need
to "regulate" their society.

ZBM2,

de Hans, K0HB

K=D8HB wrote:
"K4YZ" wrote


Unfortunately, even in the United States, there has to be limits to
ALL things if people are going to live in a productive and
(relatively)
peaceful society.


Spoken like a true control-freak.

Too bad you don't watch the news on occassion, Hans...Or spent
some time in an Emergency Room or Sheriff's Department booking
department where you gt to see the results of "freedom of speech" and
living in excess gone bezerk.

Life's a lot cozier when you set yourself off from it.

Isn't it...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ

"K4YZ" wrote


There is a very painful and delicate balance between the lattitude
permitted by what we call "free speech" and where your "right" to be
abusive in public stops.


"As it is an ancient truth that freedom cannot be legislated into existence, so
it is no less obvious that freedom cannot be censored into existence."
-- Dwight David Eisenhower (1890-1969), 34th US President

"Our liberty depends on the freedom of speech and that cannot be limited without
being lost."
-- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), 3rd US President

The only valid limitation of free speech under our Constitution is your
individual right not to listen.

ZBM2,

de Hans, K0HB

"K4YZ" wrote

Life's a lot cozier when you set yourself off from it.

If you say so, Steve.

Personally I live life and pursue freedom to the fullest. Sometimes it isn't
cozy, but that's the price of liberty. If you want "cozy" you'll have to
sacrifice your freedoms --- I'm not into that kind of sacrifice, and so far our
beloved Constitution hasn't been repealed.

"Congress shall make no law.... abridging the freedom of speech...."
--Amendment I, US Constitution

ZBM2,

de Hans, K0HB

"KØHB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"K4YZ" wrote


There is a very painful and delicate balance between the lattitude
permitted by what we call "free speech" and where your "right" to be
abusive in public stops.


"As it is an ancient truth that freedom cannot be legislated into
existence, so it is no less obvious that freedom cannot be censored into
existence."
-- Dwight David Eisenhower (1890-1969), 34th US President

"Our liberty depends on the freedom of speech and that cannot be limited
without being lost."
-- Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826), 3rd US President

The only valid limitation of free speech under our Constitution is your
individual right not to listen.

ZBM2,

de Hans, K0HB



In a practical sense there are de facto limits. One is perfectly free to
commit slander and libel. It's not illegal and one cannot go to jail for
it. Yet people CAN be held finanicially liable for the effects of their
slander, etc. This liability for the effects of one's "free speech" are a
limit even though it is not censorship.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Dee Flint" wrote


This liability for the effects of one's "free speech" are a limit even though
it is not censorship.


There can be a PRICE for exercising free speech, but there is no LIMIT.

"Congress shall make no law.... abridging the freedom of speech...."
--Amendment I, US Constitution

A limit is unconstitutional on it's face, and imposing a limit CAN put you in
jail.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"KØHB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Dee Flint" wrote


This liability for the effects of one's "free speech" are a limit even
though it is not censorship.


There can be a PRICE for exercising free speech, but there is no LIMIT.

"Congress shall make no law.... abridging the freedom of speech...."
--Amendment I, US Constitution

A limit is unconstitutional on it's face, and imposing a limit CAN put you
in jail.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Yet we all know yelling "fire" in a theater is illegal and forbidden by
law...yet no one has been able to overturn such a law as being
unconstitutional. Other limits on "free speech" include a whole
array of "hate crime" laws and other PC limitations on speech.
As for anyone being put in jail for imposing a limit on speech???
Frankly, I have no idea how that would even possibly come about.

The constitution ONLY restricts government from
imposing free speech limits. There is no such
limitation on private entities imposing all kinds of speech
limitations. Businesses do it all the time and fire employees for
violating their business speech limitations. That's also why ISPs
can take the action they do to ban people from their services if they
so choose based on things they have said in newsgroups,
email and/or on web sites. Happens all the time.

Just some additional things to consider...it isn't just a black and
white issue. There's all sorts of grey areas in the realm of free
speech limits.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Bill Sohl" wrote


Just some additional things to consider...it isn't just a black and
white issue. There's all sorts of grey areas in the realm of free
speech limits.


Hi Bill,

Long time, no see! Hope you're well.

Everything you've described is a PRICE, not a limit.

In accordance with the US Constitution I can say anything I want to say. The
price I pay may be that I lose acess to a particular channel communications
channel, but I am in no way limited in what I may say. The control freaks may
persuade the likes of "Consolidated" to decline to carry Todd's words to us, but
in no way can they prevent him from saying them. Unfortunately, rather than
engage in an honest two-way dialog with someone with the grapes to identify
himself, it is likely that Todd will become another of the many "Lloyd's" who
infest rrap.

"Congress shall make no law.... abridging the freedom of speech...."
--Amendment I, US Constitution

I know that by pointing this out I stand in danger of the same treatment as
accorded to Todd, but let Steve do "his best" as he earlier alluded in relation
to a member of my family.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Bill Sohl" wrote

A limit is unconstitutional on it's face, and imposing a limit CAN put you in
jail.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Yet we all know yelling "fire" in a theater is illegal and forbidden by
law.


Abridging freedom of speech means denying a person the right to express their
ideas. Yelling "fire" in a theater (when no fire exists) is not the expression
of an idea, but rather an act calculated to cause panic. The legal sanction is
not against stating the word "fire", but rather against "public endangerment".

I'm sure you can dig up all kinds of laws against "public endangerment", but I
challenge you to find one specifically against yelling "fire".

"Congress shall make no law.... abridging the freedom of speech...."
--Amendment I, US Constitution

73, de Hans, K0HB