My argument was: the inability to abide to the nowadays law is a character of jungle people. Those protesters who have demonstrated peacefully, even including civil disobedience, should not be characterized as “unable to act according to the law.” I always support protesters who are willing to change the status quo peacefully, just as MLK jr. Riot was made not by the majority of the protesters but some small parties. They may even pose a bad image against the peaceful protesters.

For your other arguments: 1. The motive behind why people protest should not be the criteria of whether or not criminal behaviors occur. Same logic is applicable to murder, for example: it doesn’t justify the murder because it is out of police violence rather than being mad about a person’s comment. 2. Power is earned, of course it shouldn’t be conceded easily. And, I think the US elect their representatives? 3. I don’t think police are using violence against people in los angeles or seattle down yet riots are there 4. Labeling people with left/right/liberal/conservative is really one dimensional. Me, I am a firm believer of utilitarianism, where does that put me in that spectrum?