I am making the argument that if a non-state actor is actively suppressing your speech with illegal activities and the state does nothing to prevent it, then th

I am making the argument that if a non-state actor is actively suppressing your speech with illegal activities and the state does nothing to prevent it, then the state is complicit in those actions. Take speech and the First Amendment out of it for a second; if a non-state actor oppresses you via illegal activities and the state does not step up to stop said illegal activities, then it is complicit in that oppression. But you seem to be ignoring that aspect of what I'm saying. It is the same argument used in the civil rights era when certain states turned a blind eye to racial injustice. The state wasn't always directly oppressing the minority community with their powers, but the Federal government had no issue labeling and punishing those states for oppressing those people. Partly because of the inaction of preventing illegal activities against the minority communities. I don't recall many stories of state officials lynching young black men under the power of the law, but I've heard many of white men doing it with impunity with the law refusing to respond. All for the purposes of oppressing that community. I grew up in the South, I saw such racial injustices throughout my life all the way to college. It's a major reason why I have this attitude about oppression of people. Please point me to where I have stated that free expression and free speech should allow the violation of property rights. I don't even understand how you can make that statement. I have not included the idea of third-parties being involved in anyone's speech. I have never claimed that one should have the right to post whatever you want on Facebook and that they can be forced to host it. I do not agree with that and feel that Facebook can do whatever they want with their property. I'm confused as to how Facebook even comes into this discussion. I'm not a big fan of pointing out fallacies, but I'm sure you made a couple with that one. I believe straw man is a popular one. As your thoughts on the right of free expression; depending on your feelings about the United Nations, they disagree with you: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights : Article 19 : Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Now, granted, the UN tends to ignore that themselves when it comes to several of their member states. But it's there, and it's a natural right due to any free human being. As for assaults and violence being ignored by police, any news media of your choice will likely lead you to stories on the subject. I fail to see how the government could be unaware of it. I see you skipped over the Chicago and San Jose examples. Also, the assaulted is not required to report to the police for action to be taken if the assault happened in the open.