From Boots & Sabers:
Justice Holmes' "crowded theater" test is actually a good test, but it has been twisted from its real meaning. The right to free speech, like all rights, is bounded only by the rights of others. As such, I may stand on a soap box and say whatever I wish, as long as I am not violating anyone else’s rights. In the crowded theater test, if a person shouts "fire" in a crowded theater, he is violating the rights of other people. He is violating the right of private property of the theater owner by harming his business. He could violate the right to life of the people in the theater if they become trampled to death in the panic. By Holmes' test, the person may not unnecessarily shout "fire" in a crowded theater precisely because to do so would violate the rights of others.
This has been twisted to mean something quite different. People have started to use the "crowded theater" test to mean that people’s right to free speech may be regulated if it causes disorder. No one has a right to live in constant order, so the state of disorder does not actually violate anyone's rights. How many times to we hear of people being arrested or detained because they caused disorder? I'm not supporting those who would disrupt people's movement or damage property, for those actions violate the rights of the people being disrupted. No one is harmed, however, if a protestor stands within sight of a politician with a sign and shouts. This effort by the government to maintain order has lead to cordoning off protestors, denying permits to assemble, and generally suppressing free speech.
Emphasis mine. Disorder is natural, order requires help from your neighbors, which may not be conscripted by force.
[I am a strong believer in Natural Order, which we'd have if we quit jackin' around with our neighbors, but many of government's actions interfere with the natural human desire to get along with our neighbors. Primarily by subsidizing ingratitude and other social gaffs.]
I think this gentleman may soon be getting a link from here.
By the way, you've got to read Lance's examinations of government incentives from the inside. Start here.