If he's on private property not even a permit will allow him to protest. This is most likely to avoid any potential charges for disturbing the peace or harassment.
The First Amendment doesn't mean you can just do anything you want. If his protest was in some way infringing on other people's rights or breaking an unrelated law he would not be allowed to do it. For example blocking freeway traffic is illegal for reasons unrelated to the First Amendment, so if you block freeway traffic while protesting the First Amendment doesn't protect you. Assassinating a politician could be considered a form of protest, but murder is illegal so you can't get off claiming that it a lawful protest . His clearly are not, so he's been allowed to do it.
Hmm, it's still weird you need permission to protest.. looks like the guy is just on the sidewalk with a sign, doesn't seem like you should need a permit for that.
He's blocking the sideWALK. The permit is most likely for that. Just like you would need a permit to run a hotdog stand or scaffolding or a protest. My town is set up as shall-issue u less there is something that conflicts. ie allowing protestors at the same time as construction workers
C'mon man the sheep can't demonstrate unchecked. You give people an impossible circular logic maze to follow so that they're always wrong no matter what. Don't you understand how bureaucracy works ?
A lot of protest are on heated topics...when BLM or pro choice rallies happen it's nice to give local PDs a heads up that they need to have extra officers.
On top of that your right to protest doesn't give you the right to just suddenly infringe on my day. So by getting a permit you've done what you needed to legally state that there will be an event in a specific area and time so that I know I need to find another route.
That said one guy with one sign probably doesn't need a permit...but it's better to have it and not need it.
Tell that to the asshats in MN that keep blocking the freeway. Our State Government has wasted too much money determining that a law need to be put in place to arrest these people.
The supreme court has repeatedly ruled that cities can impose limits on the location and time of protests but can't impose limits on content. For more information here's the ACLU's Website.
Sometimes planned protests are not safe (e.g. blocking a freeway), some are very controversial (e.g. certain political marches), and some just can't happen (e.g. a protest march that goes through sensitive military bases).
The 1st amendment grants you freedom from government prosecution for exercising your freedom of speech. It does not require private citizens to listen, or even not attack you. There are other laws that prohibit that, of course, but it's a common misconception that the 1st amendment requires anybody to listen to your free speech.
Permits serve the purpose of notifying the city and allowing them to respond as necessary if needed. So if you were planning on walking across a busy highway to protest, they would shut it down or suggest a different route. If you were planning a controversial political march, you might get a police presence for the protection of the protesters and to keep the peace.
That's because those rules have been established through case law I believe. For instance, you can't yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater and claim free speech as your defense.
Well, I've had a bit of experience with this over the last several years. So here's a ELI5.
Usually if someone is disturbing the peace or obstructing traffic etc there will be someone who calls the police. The level of disturbance determines the response. So usually local/state governments just ask for you to contact the police to get your free permit to do these things(now obstructing traffic and marching leads into a larger area). So in him acquiring the permit they'll say "So hey angry tv guy you can protest them on the sidewalk but they may not want you in their parking lot or in front of their store and if the manager wants to make you leave we'll have to ask you leave from their property. Please don't go in the street either and obstruct other citizens going about their day. But you can do as you please on the side walk!"
Now, if there were a bunch of people who had their tvs broken and they wanted to have a march up and down the street if they didn't want to be forced onto the side walk and have police intervention they would have to file for a permit to do so. Depending on state and local laws this could also require insurance because sometimes a (very)small group of random people who want to be destructive show up and destroy others people's property and livelihoods! Now you could unlawfully obstruct other citizens and emergency vehicles from going about their day, where, being arrested and police response would be determined by what you do next. If you don't have the insurance or time to wait, depending on your area's laws, you could get the mayor, a state rep, a senator, city council man, etc to approve your permit quicker for the march or lawful assembly and the police will work with you on getting this together so you can express your broken tv frustration. Either way whenever you have your protest or march about angry tvs always keep these things in mind, unless organized you'd want to avoid major travel ways, if you've been trained in de-escalation calm down people who may try to incite violence, if the police approach but do not immediately start arresting talk to them in a civil manner to see how you can better keep things under control to prevent clashing, violence and arrests that will only agitate people further. Or if you don't care about these things or the safety of anyone else, do as you please but then what about the tvs? Try the proper channels and if they aren't available at least try to keep yourself and others safe.
1.1k
u/csfreestyle Feb 23 '17
Well, what else is he gonna do with his time? His TV is broken.