Disruptive Protest Legality
The cluster debates the distinction between peaceful protests protected by law and disruptive actions like blocking roads or public nuisance, emphasizing that protesting does not excuse illegal behavior or infringement on others' rights.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
You're conflating a protest with a protest that involves breaking the law and risking peoples lives (blocking a road interferes with emergency services).
It's one thing to protest peacefully. But it's completely different to protest by infringing on the rights of other people to travel.
Is this for protest or mischief?
A case against someone peacefully demonstrating? How so?
Protesting in that manner isn't without consequence even if the thing being protested for is right or something else is worse to do. "It was in protest" is a reasoning not an absolution.
No, you see, it's a protest. They can do anything they want with no legal repercussions.
You could protest but then you'd be arrested for disturbing the peace.
Why is that absurd? In most countries, including the US, protests are only allowed under certain conditions. You can’t do things like take over public infrastructure. Such protests are violent, not peaceful, and should be treated as such. I think it’s absurd that some people think that they’re owed an audience for their unpopular ideas. They can use normal discussions and the political system to convince others. But stealing from them (their time and therefore money) is not okay.
This wasn't a peaceful protest so the amendment doesn't apply.
The fact that you describe protesting as illegal kinda says it all.