Suppressing free speech because of the threat of a violent reaction by the hearers is called a “heckler’s veto” and has already been found unconstitutional.
It’s not like “screaming fire in a crowded theater,” because this is simply an irresponsible or malicious act involving a lie that does not express an opinion of any kind. Speech of this nature and certain others, such as libel, is not protected (except in some circumstances, for example, when it is directed at a public figure). On the other hand, speech expressing an opinion is protected even if it may generate a hostile reaction.
It’s not like “screaming fire in a crowded theater,” because this is simply an irresponsible or malicious act involving a lie that does not express an opinion of any kind. Speech of this nature and certain others, such as libel, is not protected (except in some circumstances, for example, when it is directed at a public figure). On the other hand, speech expressing an opinion is protected even if it may generate a hostile reaction.
Very good. Thanks for the clarification.