Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!acf4!mms1646
From: mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Freedom of Speech and Assembly in Public vs Private Property
Message-ID: <2380054@acf4.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 27-Jun-85 21:22:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: acf4.2380054
Posted: Thu Jun 27 21:22:00 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 30-Jun-85 03:25:14 EDT
References: <656@whuxl.UUCP>
Organization: New York University
Lines: 25

>/* orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) / 12:57 pm  Jun 24, 1985 */

>I exclude the public as a whole from my home as it is a private place.
>I do not make money from inviting the public at large to buy or sell
>goods or services in my home.  Therefore my right to privacy is
>protected. 

Why does the mere fact that someone engages in business transactions
in a place make that place non-private.  Why is a private business deal
between two parties a special case of interpersonal interaction that has
such ramifications?

How did yo aquire you house?  Using money?  Then  perhaps it should not
be considered private.
 
>Would you think it fortunate if all property now publicly held were
>placed in private hands and the Courts ruled that there was no freedom
>of speech or assembly in *any* private property?

I don't think the property should be "placed" in anyone's hands.  Instead,
the government should either just give it up, or sell it.
 
>                              tim sevener  whuxl!orb

						Mike Sykora