In the debate over implementing speech codes on college campuses, the opponents argue that speech codes are unnecessary because the rules in place are already doing an adequate job of keeping racist hate speech to a minimum. On the other side of the debate, the supporters argue that college campuses need to inject speech codes because the current rules are not working well enough, and that such speech is not allowing an equal opportunity in the pursuit of education. In this paper, I will conclude that speech codes are unnecessary. In the article titled, “The Debates Over Placing Limits on Racist Speech Must Not Ignore the Damage It Does to Its Victims,” Charles R. Lawrence concludes that speech codes will curtail racist hate speech in common areas. A couple contextual informational points by Lawrence are racist hate speech and common areas. Racist hate speech is any kind of speech that it focused on a person's race and is intended to cause harm to an individual. Common areas as …show more content…
Ergo, if someone in a position of power and authority, publicly comes out against a type of speech, those whose best interest is reliant on being obedient to them, will do what they can to keep their nose clean. Another point of Volokh's is that, speech codes can deter even well reasoned, meaningful, and polite arguments due to the chilling effect. The chilling effect happens when people become concerned and overly censor themselves. Speech codes will in turn, also weaken faculty control over the university itself. Since the chilling effect makes people censor what is said, it would also make a sincere apology nearly impossible. A sincere apology implies you realize you violated a real rule. Normally you could apologize and move on, but if an official rule is broken then legal action needs to be