Where does the idea come from that the law, however conceived is the moral paramount? Other values might indeed prevail in certain situations. Some might says that its democracy as a system that defines this paramount, but democracy is a dynamic process by no means limited to acts of parliament or the act of electing it. In that sense, breaking a law set by parliament, or by juries or magistrates in caselaw are just one part of the democratic process.

there's many i haven't started yet I've finished a few though

you're wit is a shit as your politic

I onder what 'good cause' that copper who gave Ian Tomlinson a shove thought he was acting for?

What do you call it when the police are breaking more laws than the protesters? Should in fact the police be using the minimum amount of force necessary to maintain order. Does a shattered window justify a cracked skull, and will any protesters skull suffice? If the average citizen distrust their police force and perceive it to be out of order, is there any hope for a decent society?

In the States, if millions break the law for a political purpose Obama has the legal authority to declare martial law ("for a 'national emergency'"). The law is written in the broadest possible terms to give Obama the maximum power and to limit any liability from implemening it.

Luddite, thanks for the question.

I don't think you can argue that at the end of the 19th century Britain was ruled by a mixture of the Landed Gentry and the wealthy business colonial class. The House of Lords still had a veto on all legislation from the House of Commons.

From then on the two world wars won by the British working class and the threat of a Soviet style revolution happening in the UK meant that concessions were given to democracy and the welfare state.

Its no coincidence that since 1980 and in particular since the fall of the Soviet block, the British business elite have realised they no longer need the working class in this age of globalised capital and free trade.

All the concessions to democracy earned between 1900-1950 are being eroded, the welfare state and NHS are slowly but surely being dismantled.

As I said, most progress has been achieved by violence, the threat of violence and war. Anything Parliament does can be undone, we are seeing all the progress of the first half of the 20th being undone because business capital no longer wants to pay for it.

Tommy you can't see further than your nose. The police wanted to have a quiet day but unfortunately somebody started breaking the law in front of them. Do you honestly think that the police want to arse about 'policing' people just for the fun of it?

I know police men and women, and I can assure you that if they could just take it easy they would. Someone broke the law and they had a job to do.

Have you any idea of the number of 'disputes' the police go to? Do you really think that disturbances in London were anything 'unusual' for them? Do you think they make work for themselves? Give me a break. Don't you know people?

It's only ever acceptable when not just the government but the whole political system itself has lost any semblance of legitimacy - when democracy is abolished, when minority groups are severely persecuted, when the state begins to actively try to injure its own people.

When those conditions are met, any action to overthrow the regime that does not produce disproportionate damage becomes morally defensible.

Anything before that, and it's not acceptable. Understandable sometimes. Never acceptable.

So we can protest. We can shout slogans, even if they never scan properly. We can engage in acts of civil disobedience. But we cannot go round smashing things as an expression of anger. That breaks the social contract every bit as much as cutting back the welfare state does.

And on a personal note, the violent protesters on Saturday can all go to hell. I marched on Saturday to show my opposition to cuts. I didn't march to allow a couple of hundred nutters to keep some central London glazers in work, in the frankly explicable belief that smashing some windows would spark a revolution.

Paul H: 'As I said, most progress has been achieved by violence, the threat of violence and war.'

Unbelievable take on history. Progress has been achieved despite the violence. Progress is the result of innovation, hard work, surplus and savings. Inequality means that some people can be supported by others but this is a good thing because some people like scientists are able to flourish.

The importance of inequality is hugely underestimated. It allows freedom for some people and this freedom results in progress.

the violent far left have been protected by the left wing media for to long now in my opinion,,sure, a few members of the shadow cabinet secretly admire these far left rampaging thugs because it reminds them of there student days and core marxist idealogy and dreams of overthrowing democraticaly elected goverments by violent revolution,,i hope the courts deal with these far left thugs in a very harsh manner and sends out the message, enough of your vile and disgusting behaviour on the streets of london and elsewhere...