Erik 22EnglishFinal DraftToo Much of a Good Thing Over two hundred years ago, at the second Constitutional Convention of 1789, Federalists and Anti Federalists were engaged in a heated debate. The Constitution had just been written two years earlier, as a result of much compromise between parties. Now, however, the Anti Federalists were worried that the Constitution did not do enough to protect the rights of the American people. In other words, they called for a bill of rights. After a bit more debate, they agreed that a Bill of Rights would be added as the first ten amendments to the Constitution, the most important of which being the first. In the modern day, our society has seen a definite drift from the original Bill of Rights. Nowadays, violent protest, and the public’s general opposition to the use of due force to control it, has left hundreds of millions of dollars of property destroyed and many innocent citizens and police officers dead. It has become obvious that these protests have stepped outside the boundaries allowed by the Constitution. It has become obvious that peaceful protest has gone too far. Firstly, protesting has gone outside what the Constitution outlines in the First Amendment. According to the Constitution of the United States, “Congress shall make no law… prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (U.S. Constitution, amend. I). This basically means that the government can not make a law that prohibits free speech, press, and the right to assemble peaceably. The key word here is peaceably. According to the dictionary, peaceably means: “inclined to avoid argument or violent conflict.” Nowadays, however, many protests are started with violent conflict in mind. An example of this would be the recent Anaheim California protests, which escalated to protesters throwing rocks at police. This is one of the regular forms of protests in our current society, and it is a far cry from what the Founding Fathers originally intended by adding the First Amendment. Secondly violent protests often end in the destruction of property, and the injury of innocent bystanders, as well as law enforcement. Protests that escalate to violence often end up destroying the property of innocent people and businesses. People just parking their cars without knowing that an extreme protest is going to take place later may return to find their car windows broken. Those people weren’t actively disagreeing with the protesters, they were just going about their daily business. College campuses are places where students just walking to class can be pulled into protests that do not even support, sometimes ending in injury. Also, innocent civilians are often the ones that are injured during protests, as well as law enforcement officials. One example of such massive property destruction and loss of life were the Los Angeles Riots of 1992. According to Edward L Glaeser, a Harvard economist “The Los Angeles riot of 1992 resulted in 52 deaths, 2500 injuries, and at least $446 million in property damage” (Glaeser, 2002). Most of the monetary damage caused by protests is charged to the taxpayers, as the protesters themselves are often near impossible to identify. This should not be the case, as almost all of the taxpayers had nothing to do with the protest. Also, police are criticized for trying to stop protests and restore peace and order, which can result in anti police sentiment and further protests. Instead of being congratulated for saving lives and property, police officers are ridiculed and physically afflicted. As a society, we also have to show appreciation to the agency that exists to keep us safe. Lastly, after all the destruction they cause, does violent protesting really work? Do the protesters end up getting what they want? According to researchers, the answer is most likely no. Max Fisher says that “An uprising becomes about 50 percent more likely to fail if it turns to violence” (Fisher, 2013). This is just the beginning of an overwhelming set of research that says that violent protest hurts the cause instead of helping it. Mr. Fisher also points to research done by Erica Chenoweth. According to Ms. Chenoweth, 52 percent of peaceful protests end in success for the protesters, compared with only 23 percent for violent protests (Chenoweth, 2013).  According to the same study, 57 percent of violent protests result in no change in policy, with the rest resulting in partial success  (Chenoweth, 2013). Moisés Naím says that “Government responses to violent protests usually amount to little more than rhetorical appeasement, and certainly no major political reforms” (Naím, 2014). While some may argue that violent protest is the only way to make their voices heard, this research shows that protesting peacefully is much more likely to grant success in the end.In conclusion, violent protests nowadays have gone outside the rights to peaceful assembly that the Constitution establishes. Violent protests cause unnecessary deaths and property damages, most of the time to innocent civilians. College campuses are no longer strictly safe for students, as protest is liable to spring up at any time. Police are losing the respect they deserve for keeping us safe. In addition, an overwhelming amount of research shows that protesting peacefully is a much better way to petition the government or a business, and most violent protests end unsuccessfully. Although it could be argued that violent protest is the only way to make your complaints heard, we as a society need to make a firm decision that we can not stand by and watch as protests become more and more violent, and more and more civilians and law enforcement officers are slain. These protests that are nothing but destructive must be stopped. If society allows these violent protests to continue, life will become more unsafe than we could ever image, and our country will grow more and more unstable. Let us act now, before it is too late.