Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site dg_rtp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!dg_rtp!goudreau
From: goudreau@dg_rtp.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Reply to Sevener on Property Rights
Message-ID: <184@dg_rtp.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 25-Feb-86 15:11:50 EST
Article-I.D.: dg_rtp.184
Posted: Tue Feb 25 15:11:50 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 27-Feb-86 20:56:06 EST
References: <1691@bbncca.ARPA> <536@whuts.UUCP> <1636@ihlpg.UUCP> <540@whuts.UUCP> <1641@ihlpg.UUCP> <551@whuts.UUCP>
Reply-To: goudreau@dg_rtp.UUCP (Bob Goudreau)
Organization: Data General, RTP North Carolina
Lines: 31

In article <551@whuts.UUCP> orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER) writes:
>I see. In order to have a right to free speech I have to own a mall.....
> 
>     tim sevener   whuxn!orb

No, Tim.  You don't have to own a mall.  There are still public areas that
are accessible, even if only a curbside on the approach to the mall.  What,
you say that no one will bother to stop their car and read your petition?
Too bad.  These are private citizens choosing to take their commerce to a
specific place; most of them are fully aware that a mall is private property.
There is no law *forcing* people to spend some of their time on public
property just so every organization can make the most of its free speech.
Those who seek this (such as you) can choose to boycott malls, for example.
If there are enough of you, malls will wither and downtown squares will
prosper again.  Or, you can attempt to reach people in other ways: mailings,
telephone calls, door-to-door visits.  You can invite everyone to *your*
home and have no restrictions on who sets up tables or gives out flyers.

The point is still that malls are private property, used as the owner sees
fit.  Having a significant portion of the "community life" happen at a mall
doesn't require the owner to relinquish property rights.  After all, in
some communities the church building is an important location for social
intercourse.  Should a synagogue have to provide "equal time" for the KKK
once it allows B'nai B'rith, for example?

Of course, this whole issue is separate from the story of how property
was allocated in the first place.  But most of American society (and all
of American jurisprudence) accept the concept of private property, so it
looks like we'll have to take that as a given.

Bob Goudreau