Hi j-t,
freedom is anarchy unless it is constrained by the rule of law.
where you don't have law, rule is procured only by the most powerful.
it's pretty simple. but many people seem to think freedom works in the absence of law.
so - the perception that a person has untrammeled freedoms is really like saying they want anarchy.
freedom involves the freedom to do things and the freedom from the things other people want to do that intrude upon me. logically, therefore, a balance between individual freedoms is intrinsic.
hence the bill of rights is misleading about the nature of freedom when read strictly.
so, for instance, you cannot have an unrestrained freedom to bear arms without having the expectation that this freedom for individuals will impose harms on others.
same goes for speech. there are limits. and every one of these involves harms visited upon others - in particular upon the vulnerable.
| 
