Submitted by abhikavi t3_126wcne in massachusetts
DumbshitOnTheRight t1_jeb90ef wrote
My personal feeling is to limit each speaker's "Citizen time" to two minutes or so. If they refuse to stop they can then be ejected, same as anyone else disrupting the proceedings.
abhikavi OP t1_jeb9w76 wrote
I'd be fine with that. It sounds like the boards are afraid that'll be the next lawsuit though, because this court case didn't clarify whether time limits etc could be imposed.
majoroutage t1_jebbip9 wrote
Banning it still sounds like the worst of all the options, though, in all honesty.
abhikavi OP t1_jebbstb wrote
Yeah, I'm pretty unhappy with it.
UltravioletClearance t1_jebrn21 wrote
Courts have consistently ruled the government can set reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on free speech. Limiting debate time would absolutely comply with that since limitless free speech time would cause municipal governments to grind to a halt.
CheruthCutestory t1_jebhq5c wrote
It will surely be a law suit but they are on pretty firm ground of content neutral time, place and manner restrictions then. As long as they enforce the time restrictions equally.
AutomationBias t1_jebp3bs wrote
I go to town meeting every year, and as much as we're all annoyed by the cranks who monopolize the microphone, it's not really practical to limit individual speakers to two minutes - especially when there are big ticket items to be discussed.
Splime t1_jecbvoa wrote
Funnily enough, here in Littleton everyone gets a 3 minute limit at Town Meeting, apart from the board presenting the article which gets 10 minutes. At least here though, if something has made it to Town Meeting, the important discussions have already happened.
UnrulyLunch t1_jecbpw9 wrote
That's what my town does.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments