No argument is more popular, on both the left and right, with those who restrict free speech. Oliver Wendell Holmes used it as ane excuse after WWI to justify a terrible violation of the first amendment. This popular catch phrase also obscures reality. The person who is shouting fire in a crowded theater is guilty of violating the property rights of the owner and the contractual rights of those attending the show. That particular example has NOTHING to do with the first amendment and everything to do with property and contract rights. Gates had a right to free speech on in his own home!!! If he doesn't have that right, we might as well have a bonfire with the bill of rights.
“That particular example has NOTHING to do with the first amendment and everything to do with property and contract rights.”
So, you are willing to ignore the “yeller’s” 1st Amendment rights OVER the property/contract rights of everyone else. Aren’t you being a little hypocritical here? The last time I checked, the 1st Amendment does not say you have the right to free speech, but only on your own property.
Again, you ignored my new saying. By your logic, the property owner has a 1st Amendment (and property owner) right to create havoc, panic and endanger everyone - but he would be violating the contractual agreement with the patrons. Since he has two rights, I guess that overrules the contractual rights. Yes? No? Huh??