洛杉矶游行示威者手册
作者：yehere
来源：猫眼

首先感谢meokey网友，他在某个帖子中贴出了洛杉矶对游行的规定，看了让人觉得很长知识
我花了2个小时翻译了一下。
译文在前，原文在后

你的抗议和示威权力
本指南供以下人士参考：游行者，示威者，演讲者或其他想实践宪法第一修正案权力的人

问：如果我想说的观点是有争议的，我会被限制发表任何我想说的言论吗？
答：不。宪法第一修正案禁止针对发言内容而作的言论限制。尽管如此，这并不意味着宪法保护任何环境下的任何发言，警察和政府官员可以对“时间，场地和方式”进行适当的非歧视性的限制

问：我在哪里可以进行言论自由集会？
答：一般来说，在传统意义上的公共广场进行的任何表达方式都是受保护的。比如人行道和公园。如果街道有合理的条件，也可以用于游行。另外，言论自由在其他公共场合也是允许的，比如专门开放给公众用于言论自由集会的政府大楼前的广场。

问：我要是想在私人场所进行言论自由集会呢？
答：基本的原则是除非私人场所的的主人同意，不能在该场所进行言论自由集会。尽管如此，在加利福尼亚，法院将大型购物中心列为例外，在那里可以发传单和请愿书。购物中心的负责人有权对这种活动设定规章限制，比如限制在商场搞这种活动的人员数量，给这种活动划活动区域。在大部分购物中心制定的详细自由演讲规则中，都要求事先获得允许。最近的法庭判案发现这种“购物中心例外”并不仅限于单独的自选商场，比如沃尔玛和Trader Joe's。

问：在我搞言论自由集会前需要得到批准吗？
答：一般不要。尽管如此，有些类型的活动需要得到允许。他们一般包括下面这些：1.游行不仅限于在人行道上，或是因为其他原因会阻塞交通和封闭街道。2.集会需要使用扩音设备。3.集会要在特定用途的公园或是广场进行，比如属于总务管理局管理范围的联邦财产。
很多的审批程序需要在几周前进行书面申请。尽管如此，宪法第一修正案保护那些因为不可预料和新事件而搞的突发集会，不能以未申请的理由禁止它。
另外，警察和官员有很多可以自行判断处置的权力来影响集会的方式，比如游行的路线或是扩音器的音量。如果官方的限制超出了保障交通和公众安全的必要，或是他们有目的干扰特定人群有效的表达自己的观点，那就违反了宪法第一修正案。官方不能以游行是有争议的或是表达观点是非主流的就拒绝游行申请。

特别问题
问：如果组织者没有事先获得许可，我们可以在哪里搞游行？
答：如果游行是在人行道上进行，并且遵守了交通规则和信号灯，那么即使没有事先获得许可这种活动也是受保护的。游行者要给普通路人留出足够通过的空间，并且不能无理由的阻断道路或者限制路人通过。

问：我可以在人行道上发传单和其他手册吗？
答：可以。可以在路边以赠品的方式发传单，报纸，请愿书。只要留够足够的空间给人通过，也可以为这种活动摆桌子。只要没有阻断路人通过，没有搞强行的身体接触，这种活动都是合法的，不需要事先获得许可。

问：我有权在人行道上设岗哨（picket）吗？
答：可以。这也是一个不需要事先获得许可的活动。当然，岗哨必须以有序合理的方式布置，不能阻挡路人通过和进入建筑。（下面这段没看懂）Contrary to the belief of some law enforcement
officials, picketers are not required to keep
moving, but may remain in one place as long as they
leave room on the sidewalk for others to pass.

问：政府能对言论自由集会征收费用吗？
答：地方政府在维护言论自由条件方面，付出了一些经济费用。包括审批的经费，安保费用或警察的加班费。不幸的是，这些直接费用和间接费用（如法院批准的临时交通绕行）都平摊到了所有人头上。这样如果一个集会的成本过高（比如太具争议或者预计会有太多敌对者来破坏），需要太高昂的安保费用，法院可能会不允许发生这么高昂的代价。
另外，如出台对游行收取费用的规定，会导致那些不富有的团体无法承担费用而放弃组织言论自由集会，不收取费用是为了让草根组织不会因为费用的门槛而被排除在外。

问：如果有演讲者让群众激愤起来，是否要禁止他发言？
答：一般来说不。即使是最具煽动性的演讲者也不应仅仅因为鼓动听众而被惩罚。一个演讲者只有在下面情况下才会被逮捕和审判：他鼓动暴力和违法行为，并且在他鼓动下这些违法行为马上就要发动。

问：集会的反对者也有言论自由吗？
答：是的。尽管集会的反对者不允许以物理的手段去中断集会，他们也有权去发出他们的声音和观点。警察可以隔开观点相反的两派，但允许他们相邻。

问：质问（heckling）是被宪法第一修正案保护的吗?
答：虽然法律没有规定，质疑是被保护的。除非质疑者企图以物理的方式中断对手，或是以大声盖过对手。（翻到这里我想起了“四条腿好，两条腿坏”。用大声喊口号让对手在议会上不能正常发言，是列宁曾经用过的方法）

问：如果过去曾有过同样目的的言论集会，对我们有影响吗？
答：是的。政府不能因为集会有争议内容就歧视它。如果你可以指出过去曾有和你们相似的集会被批准（比如老兵或阵亡将士日游行），那么如果你们的申请被拒，就可以认定政府是有倾向性的选择。

问：还有什么其他言论自由活动是被保护的？
答：宪法第一修正案包括了各种的表达方式，比如音乐，话剧，电影和舞蹈。宪法也保护那些符号式的表达观点的行为，比如戴面具，化装，或持烛守夜。尽管如此，如果像政活动和温和抵抗包括了不合法的行为，是不属于宪法保护范围的，可能导致逮捕和审判。因此，坐在道路上表达政治主张，会因为阻塞交通的罪名被处罚。

问：如果我的权力被警官侵犯怎么办？
答：尽量不要和在街头执勤的警察争论，这样一般不能解决问题。要求和更高级的负责人面谈并且解释你或那个警察当时的情景，指出你没有妨碍任何其他人的活动，并且你的行为是受宪法第一修正案保护的。如果你抗拒某个警官，你可能被从集会现场逮捕。如果法庭判决宪法第一修正案赋予你的权力被侵犯，你不会被判任何罪名。

如果想了解更多信息，请联系国家律师公会。

文章提交者：meokey

猫眼看人

看看洛杉矶是如何规定的：

http://www.nlg-la.org/free_speech_rights.pdf

Your Rights to Demonstrate and Protest
A guide for demonstrators, marchers, speakers and others who seek to exercise their First
Amendment rights.
GENERAL GUIDELINES
Q. Can my free speech rights be restricted
because of what I want to say – even if it’s
controversial?
A. No. The First Amendment prohibits restrictions
based on the content of speech. However, this does
not mean that the Constitution completely protects
all types of free speech activity in every
circumstance. Police and government officials are
allowed to place certain non-discriminatory and
narrowly drawn “time, place and manner”
restrictions on the exercise of First Amendment
rights.
Q. Where can I engage in free speech activity?
A. Generally, all types of expression are
constitutionally protected in traditional “public
forums” such as public sidewalks and parks. Public
streets can be used for marches subject to reasonable
permit conditions. In addition, speech activity may
be permitted at other public locations such as the
plazas in front of government buildings which the
government has opened up to similar speech
activities.
Q. What about free speech activity on private
property?
A. The general rule is that free speech activity
cannot take place on private property without the
consent of the property owner. However, in
California, the courts have recognized an exception
for large shopping centers and have permitted
leafleting and petitioning to take place in the public
areas of large shopping centers. The shopping center
owners, however, are entitled to impose regulations
that, for example, limit the number of activists on
the property and restrict their activities to designated
“free speech areas.” Most large shopping centers
have enacted detailed free speech regulations that
require obtaining a permit in advance. Recent court
decisions have found that the “shopping center
exception” does not apply to single, free-standing
stores, such as a Wal-Mart or Trader Joe’s.
Q. Do I need a permit before I engage in free
speech activity?
A. Not usually. However, certain types of events
require permits. Generally, these events include:
(1) a march or parade that does not stay on the
sidewalk and other events that require blocking
traffic or street closures; (2) a large rally requiring
the use of sound amplifying devices; or (3) a rally at
certain designated parks or plazas, such as federal
property managed by the General Services Administration.
Many permit procedures require that the
application be filed several weeks in advance of the
event. However, the First Amendment prohibits
such advance notice requirements from being used
to prevent rallies or demonstrations that are rapid
responses to unforeseeable and recent events. Also,
many permit ordinances give a lot of discretion to
the police or city officials to impose conditions on
the event, such as the route of a march or the sound
levels of amplification equipment. Such restrictions
may violate the First Amendment if they are
unnecessary for traffic control or public safety, or if
they interfere significantly with effective
communication with the intended audience. A
permit cannot be denied because the event is
controversial or will express unpopular views.
SPECIFIC PROBLEMS
Q. If organizers have not obtained a permit,
where can a march take place?
A. If marchers stay on the sidewalk and obey traffic
and pedestrian signals, their activity is constitutionally
protected even without a permit. Marchers
may be required to allow enough space on the
sidewalk for normal pedestrian traffic and not
unreasonably obstruct or detain passers-by.
Q. May I distribute leaflets and other literature
on public sidewalks?
A. Yes. Pedestrians on public sidewalks may be
approached with leaflets, newspapers, petitions and
solicitations for donations. Tables may also be set
up on sidewalks for these purposes if sufficient
room is left for pedestrians to pass. These types of
free speech activity are legal as long as entrances to
buildings are not blocked and passers-by are not
physically or unreasonably detained. No permits
should be required.
Q. Do I have a right to picket on public
sidewalks?
A. Yes. This is an activity for which a permit is not
required. However, picketing must be done in an
orderly, non-disruptive fashion so that pedestrians
can pass by and entrances to buildings are not
blocked. Contrary to the belief of some law enforcement
officials, picketers are not required to keep
moving, but may remain in one place as long as they
leave room on the sidewalk for others to pass.
Q. Can the government impose a financial charge
on exercising free speech rights?
A. Increasingly, local governments are imposing
financial costs as a condition of exercising free
speech rights. These include application fees,
security deposits for clean-up, or charges to cover
overtime police costs. Unfortunately, such charges
that cover actual administrative costs or the actual
costs of re-routing traffic have been permitted by
some courts so long as they are uniformly imposed
on all groups. However, if the costs are greater
because an event is controversial (or a hostile crowd
is expected) – by such things as requiring a large
insurance policy – the courts will not allow such
costs to be imposed. Also, regulations with financial
requirements should include a waiver for groups
that cannot afford the charge, so that even grassroots
organizations can exercise their free speech rights.
Therefore, a group without significant financial
resources should not be prevented from engaging in
a march simply because it cannot afford the charges
the City would like to impose.
Q. Can a speaker be silenced for provoking a
crowd?
A. Generally, no. Even the most inflammatory
speaker cannot be punished for merely arousing the
audience. A speaker can be arrested and convicted
for incitement only if he or she specifically
advocates violence or illegal actions and only if
those illegalities are imminently likely to occur.
Q. Do counter-demonstrators have free speech
rights?
A. Yes. Although counter-demonstrators should not
be allowed to physically disrupt the event they are
protesting, they do have the right to be present and
to voice their views. Police are permitted to keep
two antagonistic groups separated but should allow
them to be within the general vicinity of one
another.
Q. Is heckling protected by the First
Amendment?
A. Although the law is not settled, heckling should
be protected, unless hecklers are attempting to
physically disrupt an event, or unless they are
drowning out the other speakers.
Q. Does it matter if other speech activities have
taken place at the same location in the past?
A. Yes. The government cannot discriminate against
activists because of the controversial content of their
message. Thus, if you can show that events similar
to yours have been permitted in the past (such as a
Veterans or Memorial Day parade), then the denial
of your permit application is an indication that the
government is involved in selective enforcement.
Q. What other types of free speech activity are
constitutionally protected?
A. The First Amendment covers all forms of
communication including music, theater, film and
dance. The Constitution also protects actions that
symbolically express a viewpoint. Examples of such
symbolic forms of speech include wearing masks
and costumes or holding a candlelight vigil. However,
symbolic acts and civil disobedience that
involve illegal conduct may be outside the realm of
constitutional protections and can sometimes lead to
arrest and conviction. Therefore, while the act of
sitting in a road may be expressing a political
opinion, the act of blocking traffic may lead to
criminal punishment.
Q. What should I do if my rights are being
violated by a police officer?
A. It rarely does any good to argue with a street
patrol officer. Ask to talk to a superior and explain
your position to her or him. Point out that you are
not disrupting anyone else’s activity and that your
actions are protected by the First Amendment. If
you do not obey an officer, you might be arrested
and taken from the scene. You should not be convicted
if a court concludes that your First Amendment
rights have been violated.
For more information, contact the National Lawyers Guild
(323) 653-4510 • www.nlg-la.org