But if the people find it important enough to limit permitting, They will do so through elections and through demanding the government drop the rule.
Except that whoever is elected simply plugs into the apparatus of power and uses it. It's not like power is limited by who is in office. Permiting laws exist and are employed by whoever is in power, thus the vote doesn't work.
If the assembly is peaceful - which it was - there should be no reason to disband it. Oakland city hall and the police were looking for a pretext because they used their power instead of their brains. Seriously Cain... use yours now. They disbanded a protest due to camping regulations, and they do so violently, even injuring people seriously. There is no excuse for that.
Oakland deserves everything it's getting right now.
If the people decide to give government that power, then so be it. It is on.....................The People to decide... not you, the individual.
The people didn't give the government permit powers, the government invented those powers. In other words, the powers aren't real and sanctioned by the people. When did anyone vote on the First Amendment requiring a permit or a special protest zone to be exercised?
Ever since the popular protests of the 60's and 70's (which actually caused major change in politics), it is increasingly difficult to exercise First Amendment rights in large groups. Simply doing that gives them an invented pretext to disband the mob.
I agree with Ikari that some violence may be necessary at this point, since the government is not respecting the rights of the People.
What part of "freedom of assembly" do they not understand? If that means 10,000 people are blocking a major part of the city, then guess what? So be it. That doesn't mean city hall gets the right to disband or relocate these people.
I believe we are going to see more violent protesting in the coming year, as government becomes increasingly violent in its oppression of protests.