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