They didnt have to but for some reason they did. Once people showed up to listen others violated not only the rights of that Milo (who i dont really care about) but also the right of any of those that showed up to listen. I think all those people that were busy infringing on others rights should have been appropriately punished, given a night in jail, and made to pay for any property damage they caused.That precedent had already been set. Ever heard of Selma, Alabama? Or MLK?
And we should be diligent to not accept that again. By allowing suppression to happen we set ourselves up for future failure where the speaker actually has something meaningful to say. Nobody has to give him a stage to be a dick from. Nobody has to listen to him being a dick. If he had any balls or integrity, he'd go to Speakers Corner and make use of the rights provided to him.
If your ideas cannot withstand the court of public opinion, then your ideas are bad and do not deserve a public stage. This has always been, and always will be, simply due to common sense. His "rights" were not violated. He took a public stage, and the public didn't like what he had to say, and he ran away. Comedians get heckled. That's not violating their "rights". And the skilled comedians who actually have talent and strong ideas, can turn the tables on hecklers. Milo doesn't have that intellectual skill or integrity in actually believing what he says, so he turned tail and ran like a little bitch instead of inviting his hecklers on stage to debate on equal footing with him.
So according to that statement gay rights are bad idea in Russia and women's rights are a bad idea in the Middle East. I disagree. I think the court of public opinion can be wrong quite often and should not be used to judge what speech can be said.If your ideas cannot withstand the court of public opinion, then your ideas are bad and do not deserve a public stage. This has always been, and always will be, simply due to common sense.