A contrast in protests

This is my ramble day, so I'm just going to write a little about something that caught my attention yesterday morning.

Two examples of protesting in the news:

-----------------------------

A few anti-health care reformers carried weapons visibly to protests they participated in. Completely legal in their respective states.

Yesterday morning I read the story of a motorist facing 90 days in jail for honking in support of a protest against a congressman since the state law is that honking your horn is supposed to be for emergency purposes only.

-----------------------------

Although carrying the gun to the protest and carrying it visibly is legal where these people did it, I know exactly how I'd feel if I was on the opposite side of that protest (and I am). I'd be intimidated, I'd worry that if I said something that caused a strong reaction by this guy I might be endangering myself and those with me. I personally find it chilling.

The second case, although it is strictly illegal to use your horn that way in that state, people use their horns to support protesters they agree with all the time and everyone honks to catch the attention of people they know, this goes on everywhere. My bet is an examination of the use of this law will show that it is almost never applied. So my guess is in this case a law is selectively applied by those in authority for political reasons.

What's my point? I don't know, that's why this is a ramble. I do know that I personally would not try to suppress someone else from speaking out for what they support even if I disagree (obviously there are some boundaries I would have issues with too though perhaps it's the perception of where the line gets crossed that is the core of the problem?)and I would personally rail at a law being unequally applied to me.

I'll have to think on it a bit more before I have something more to say.