Friday, September 26, 2003
Kirby On Crack
“If you’re smoking dope, or committing a crime walking down the street then I don’t think you have an expectation of privacy.” – Kirby Wilbur, KVI (Seattle) morning show host.
That was Kirby Wilbur pontificating about how the puke who calls you just when you’re sitting down in the loo has the absolute right to access your phone to sell you security systems, vinyl siding and a three-year subscription to Entomology Illustrated.
I beg to differ. So I wrote the following e-mail to him:
Kirby, what are you talking about? Are you actually comparing having a telephone to smoking marijuana on a street corner? I’m sorry, my friend, I usually agree with you, but you’re so wrong on this one that I’m forced to institute an “intervention” here.
When I paid for my house to be built I purchased a front door. I also paid for its installation. Should I wish to do so (and I have in the past) I can post a sign at the end of my driveway stating that solicitors and religious representatives are not permitted on the premises. This means that, in addition to prohibiting access to my driveway, it also prohibits access to my front door (which, I remind you, I paid for).
Now should some intent solicitor, or inspired prophet, decide to ignore my stated wishes (i.e. the sign) and proceed to my front door regardless, I am free to utilize a local government service (in my case the Kitsap County Sheriff’s Department) to correct the situation. Oh, by the way, since I pay property taxes (which includes the tax on my front door) I’ve paid for that government service as well.
Is this a violation of our commercially-, or religiously-minded friend’s rights to free speech? Let’s get back to that.
When I had my house built I also arranged for phone lines to be installed. I also paid for several phones. As a result of the changes after the breakup of Ma Bell, those phones belong to me. I paid for them… they’re mine. Like my front door. They’re my property.
I’ve also paid for the phone service that activates the phones. Not only that, but I also pay taxes on that service. So, in that way too, those phones are mine. And so is the service. They belong to me.
Now, I purchased my front door to allow egress and entrance to those to whom I give leave to do so (of course, my wife exercises her privileges to this service independent of my say-so!). So, too, I purchased my phone and the accompanying service (and paid taxes on both) to provide my home (and its residents) with communications into and out of the home.
I did not expend those funds to allow third-party people/organizations/businesses to use my property to pursue their own goals. Just as they have no inherent right to cross my property to knock on my front door (provided I’ve set up a sign prohibiting this), neither do they have the right to use a service and a piece of personal property, that I’ve paid for, to lay siege to chunks of my time. They certainly have no right to waylay me at times of their choosing in my own home.
A billboard on the side of the highway is free speech. A billboard hastily erected in my kitchen is trespassing.
Their “free speech” isn’t free. It costs me my time and my money. They have no right to abscond with my recourses to fund their endeavors.
Is the FCC the wrong agency to stand in as my “yard sign” proscribing access to my property for the purposes of advertisement and solicitation? Who cares. Sure, it’s fun to watch a judge stick his finger in the eye of the federal government, but once that legal nicety is settled that issue goes away.
Your point has been based on free speech and personal responsibility. Their (advertisers, religious representatives, charitable organizations, etc.) speech isn’t free to me. And I have taken the personal responsibility to add my numbers to the “Do Not Call” list (which I have also paid for via taxation, like the local sheriff).
You want a conservative value through which to see this issue? Try Property Rights.
Regards,
Ken
I’ll let you know if he responds.
“If you’re smoking dope, or committing a crime walking down the street then I don’t think you have an expectation of privacy.” – Kirby Wilbur, KVI (Seattle) morning show host.
That was Kirby Wilbur pontificating about how the puke who calls you just when you’re sitting down in the loo has the absolute right to access your phone to sell you security systems, vinyl siding and a three-year subscription to Entomology Illustrated.
I beg to differ. So I wrote the following e-mail to him:
Kirby, what are you talking about? Are you actually comparing having a telephone to smoking marijuana on a street corner? I’m sorry, my friend, I usually agree with you, but you’re so wrong on this one that I’m forced to institute an “intervention” here.
When I paid for my house to be built I purchased a front door. I also paid for its installation. Should I wish to do so (and I have in the past) I can post a sign at the end of my driveway stating that solicitors and religious representatives are not permitted on the premises. This means that, in addition to prohibiting access to my driveway, it also prohibits access to my front door (which, I remind you, I paid for).
Now should some intent solicitor, or inspired prophet, decide to ignore my stated wishes (i.e. the sign) and proceed to my front door regardless, I am free to utilize a local government service (in my case the Kitsap County Sheriff’s Department) to correct the situation. Oh, by the way, since I pay property taxes (which includes the tax on my front door) I’ve paid for that government service as well.
Is this a violation of our commercially-, or religiously-minded friend’s rights to free speech? Let’s get back to that.
When I had my house built I also arranged for phone lines to be installed. I also paid for several phones. As a result of the changes after the breakup of Ma Bell, those phones belong to me. I paid for them… they’re mine. Like my front door. They’re my property.
I’ve also paid for the phone service that activates the phones. Not only that, but I also pay taxes on that service. So, in that way too, those phones are mine. And so is the service. They belong to me.
Now, I purchased my front door to allow egress and entrance to those to whom I give leave to do so (of course, my wife exercises her privileges to this service independent of my say-so!). So, too, I purchased my phone and the accompanying service (and paid taxes on both) to provide my home (and its residents) with communications into and out of the home.
I did not expend those funds to allow third-party people/organizations/businesses to use my property to pursue their own goals. Just as they have no inherent right to cross my property to knock on my front door (provided I’ve set up a sign prohibiting this), neither do they have the right to use a service and a piece of personal property, that I’ve paid for, to lay siege to chunks of my time. They certainly have no right to waylay me at times of their choosing in my own home.
A billboard on the side of the highway is free speech. A billboard hastily erected in my kitchen is trespassing.
Their “free speech” isn’t free. It costs me my time and my money. They have no right to abscond with my recourses to fund their endeavors.
Is the FCC the wrong agency to stand in as my “yard sign” proscribing access to my property for the purposes of advertisement and solicitation? Who cares. Sure, it’s fun to watch a judge stick his finger in the eye of the federal government, but once that legal nicety is settled that issue goes away.
Your point has been based on free speech and personal responsibility. Their (advertisers, religious representatives, charitable organizations, etc.) speech isn’t free to me. And I have taken the personal responsibility to add my numbers to the “Do Not Call” list (which I have also paid for via taxation, like the local sheriff).
You want a conservative value through which to see this issue? Try Property Rights.
Regards,
Ken
I’ll let you know if he responds.
Comments:
Post a Comment
