Dissent has nothing to do with breaking laws, breaking laws is called disobedience.
Well that's a patently nonsensical statement. So people who indulge in 'civil disobenence' are not practicing dissent? During the 80's in the UK, we had an unjust tax called the Poll Tax, many refused to pay it - and thereby broke the law. On one occasion many thousands of people marched to London and engaged in what can only be desribed as a 'popular uprising' (others called it a riot). Less than a month later the law imposing the tax was revoked.
This was just one example of many I can think of where breaking the law as a means of popular dissent, proved to ultimately be effective. You of course (if you live in America) will recall your own instances of this. Indeed if breaking the law as a means of poplular disent hadn't taken place at many points throughout your history, America would be a very different and far more unpleasant place than it is today.
From my own experience of my time on this earth, breaking the law may be the only effective means of dissent that some people have. You can say its wrong all you want, but ultimately it is everyone who benefits from the risks these people take on our behalf.
Q
