Posted on 01/06/2009 4:56:29 PM PST by Golden Gate
Could knowledgeable attorneys, judges, activists please explain our Firs Amendment Rights at Shopping Malls, Airports, Restaurants, Sidewalks, Parking Lots?
Thanks.
To: Jim Robinson; Admin Moderator
On FR, I have never understood why the
one "News/Activism" Forum is not separated
into Two different forums.
FR needs to have a seperate "Activism" Forum.
You have the right to remain silent
My lawyer always adds "For God's Sake... use it"
/johnny
/johnny
What about the obligation to remain silent for the sake of good taste?
|
You have the right to say anything you like.
However, the first amendment is not a blanket grant of immunity. It only protects you from government prosecution for what you say. It does not give you the right to speak on private property like a shopping mall. You can avail yourself of the easment at the driveway, but you have no right to the doors, nor are you free to spout whatever inside the building.
The first amendment does not give you immunity from those who might disagree with you either so speak at your own risk.
No, those are Frasier Firs Amendments...
The Second Amendment does.
LOL!
GG,
Here’s a non-authoritative guide:
Sidewalks along most private property are public ‘easements’ and you usually have the right to peaceably assemble there, often without a permit.
Private property other than an easement—is at the discretion of the owner.
Public buildings often require a permit application, sometimes in advance, sometimes with a deposit.
Pinging a few others...
The "peaceably" part is important. Courts recognize the importance of the First Amendment, but have to balance it against other desires such as a state of general order. Put simply, your behavior should not be unruly, threatening, disruptive, or disorderly. Courts give extra protection to political speech, so there is more leeway for speech (which includes signs, etc.) related to political issues than, say, your favorite football team.
It is hard to define the boundary of protected speech, which is why there are many court cases related to the First Amendment, but a good rule is to have exemplary behavior. Do what the police tell you to do if or when they arrive, and asking permission or notifying them ahead of time is often a good idea.
“You have the right to say anything you like.”
Can you provide a reason to believe that assertion is true if what you would like to say is a lie about someone else?
You don’t have a right to be heard!
It should read like this.....You have the right to say anything you like, but you better be prepared to suffer the consequences.
What was it Mark Twain said?
“Its better to keep one’s mouth shut and be thought a damn fool than to open it and remove all doubt.”
Or some such.....
“You have the right to say anything you like,...”
Can you provide a reason to believe that assertion is true if what you would like to say is a lie about someone else?
“...but you better be prepared to suffer the consequences.”
Does one have a right to impose consequences on someone else who exercises a right to say anything they like even if what they say is a lie about that one? If not, should good people defend such liars from such consequences?
Don’t expect any lawyers or judges to answer the question for nothing. Lawyers make their livings arguing about things like this, and judges make their livings carefully ruling on things like this in such a way as to insure that the living of lawyers and the future of judges will be safeguarded above all else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.