And to address the wider point of violence in protests is it not sometimes necessary? If you believe your government has become tyrannical and they are willing to use force against you then what other option do you have?
You've got that arse-about.
They were met with regular uniformed police, like in the BLM protests that happened multiple times in the last 12-18 months.
The BLM protesters managed to remain peaceful, didn't assault reporters, bystanders, or police, and didn't damage property. They protested, and then dispersed on their own.
All while protests were illegal.
Ummm no that's just false. You can easily search the amount of damage caused by those "protests". There were billions of dollars in property damage.
https://www.axios.com/riots-cost-property-damage-276c9bcc-a4...
https://nypost.com/2020/09/05/black-lives-matter-protesters-...
https://nypost.com/2020/09/16/riots-following-george-floyds-...
The links you provider are all about the US.
The Australian BLM protests remained peaceful.
It's also not necessary the same governments, or just government at all.
The federal government abdicated their responsibility to manage quarantine and border security to the states. It's been the states that have been managing quarantine, largely through Hotels (except in the Northern Territory, where they've had the Howard Springs facility.
The 3rd alternative is that you're not aware of what BLM means when they discuss systemic racism. It is not just guilt, it opines that the entirety of western civilization is corrupt due to it's creation by racist evil white men.
There were uniformed police there as well but they were definitely met by public order response teams who are much more heavily armoured/equipped and travel around in vehicles with blacked out windows. [1] [2] [3]
[1] https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSXL5iC...
[2] https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSiM5bT...
[3] https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/cee5e8e0abbb5138fa1c8d40...
You said:
> The problem is that when you make protests illegal and meet them with riot police only the most hardened/radical protesters will turn up.
This is not what happened. The initial response was, as is typical with all large scale protests - to have regular uniformed police monitoring it, and controlling traffic/the direction of the protest.
The specialist/better equipped teams like the Public Order Response Team are almost always on standby during a large protest/march. They're only deployed when things get heated or actually turn violent.
This is pretty much the same thing that happens in other western countries whenever there's a large protest.
Please point out where protesting is illegal.
* Shopping for necessary goods and services
* Caregiving or medical care
* Authorised work or education
* Exercise (limit of 4 hours a day)
* Social interaction (included in the same 4 hour limit above)
* To get a vaccination
As you will see protest is not a permitted reason to leave home.
Even if a protest of 10 people was permitted that's not a serious argument. Basically all protests aim for strength in numbers.
Talk about misrepresenting facts to mislead.
People who were rioting were met with force. These protesters weren't being peaceful, they were attacking camera crews and reporters. They were assaulting police officers.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/sep/21/victo...
> it's normal to be required to take surveillance photos of themselves in their own residences
It's not.
If you're talking about the quarantine system that's under trial, yeah, I'm not particularly keen on that either. It's optional. You can choose to stay in hotel quarantine instead.