At 9:13 PM -0700 12/22/97, Paul Spirito wrote:
It's true that in the absence of public libraries this would not be an issue; however, it is an example of the state acting as sovereign, not employer. We're concerned with the right of patrons to access material, & they are not state employees. The situation is analogous to a public park: just because the state owns it, does that mean it can forbid, say, criticism of the state in it? No, of course not, though it has broader discretion in limiting the speech of public employees in the park, while on-duty.
Well, to move this away from First Amendment issues, for the sake of novelty, I know of several nearby state-owned parks (literally) which forbid discharge of firearms or even carrying of firearms. Whither the Second Amendment? (Or has it withered?) --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."