Given what I researched for this article, restrictions on free speech are acceptable. Restrictions depend on context and variable situations. From my past experiences, people cannot distinguish between normal speech and speech that inspires aggression. There should be a balance between citizens' freedoms of speech. One example is that different people should have different levels of free speech. Those who write, print or speak to the public should have maximum freedom of speech. They should be able to express their opinions and facts to the public. Those with criminal records should have their right to speak limited because they will be the most likely candidates to spark disorder and endanger public safety. In a different perspective, using prisoners, we will examine how prisoners' rights are enforced after incarceration. The overall goal of a prison's needs is to be safe and comfortable. In 1987 the Supreme Court case Turner v. Safley argued that prison guards were restricting their free speech by not allowing them to exchange letters. The ruling in this case led to the creation called the “Turner Standard”. The Turner Standard consists of a series of four questions that describe whether speech content or prison policy is considered constitutional. The four standards are: the policy in question must address a valid issue of prison safety or rehabilitation, prisoners must have alternative means of communication, courts must consider the impact of speech on other prisoners, guards and prison resources, and there are other alternatives that would not limit a prisoner's freedom of expression. In another Supreme Court case there was an interrogation of reading material in the prison library. In this case every prisoner has the right to receive reading material such as books and magazines. The limitation is