...the government cannot arrest you for what you say. Within limits.
It does NOT mean what you say will not come without consequences by your fellow citizens. And consequences can be good for you, bad for you, or nothing at all.
If you threaten me, and then I break your arm, I did NOT violate your right to free speech. But there are consequences to my actions, just as there was for your words.
Same for the right to bear arms. The government cannot arrest me for owning a gun. Within limits. Why does society water down this right with respect to how the free speech right is held in esteem? Is it as simple as the right to bear arms takes work to keep, and such a small segment does all the work, unlike the Press for free speech?
It does NOT mean what you say will not come without consequences by your fellow citizens. And consequences can be good for you, bad for you, or nothing at all.
If you threaten me, and then I break your arm, I did NOT violate your right to free speech. But there are consequences to my actions, just as there was for your words.
Same for the right to bear arms. The government cannot arrest me for owning a gun. Within limits. Why does society water down this right with respect to how the free speech right is held in esteem? Is it as simple as the right to bear arms takes work to keep, and such a small segment does all the work, unlike the Press for free speech?
