The angry, often violent, organized protests that have accompanied Donald Trump’s rallies in states holding Republican primaries are a preview of the kind of behavior likely in store for us at both the Republican and Democratic conventions in July.

This is a consequence, for good and bad, of democracy and the constitutional protections for freedom of speech and assembly in our republic. But those protections aren’t absolute. They apply only up to a point. Mobocracy goes beyond that point. Freedom of speech doesn’t include incitement to riot; peaceful assembly is guaranteed, but unlawful assembly isn’t. None of the individual protections guaranteed in the Bill of Rights entitles anyone to trample on the rights of others.

When the Republicans convene in Cleveland, anti-Trump fanatics (and I don’t mean Republicans who oppose Trump) will be out in force. Democrats in Philadelphia will find disgruntled Sandernista “revolutionaries” and crackpots even farther to the left doing their thing. In both of those venues, destructive or violent acts will most likely come from lefties. It’s what that crowd does for fun, self-indulgent expression and to give “meaning” to their lives. Conservative activists, like the Tea Party, are better behaved.

What was the logic of the recent anti-Trump riot in San Jose where Latinos proudly waving Mexican flags and setting fire to American flags physically assaulted peaceful Trump supporters attending a rally? The answer is there was no logic. It was mindless or contrived rage. Yes, I understand that illegal immigrants, mostly Mexicans, and their defenders oppose Trump’s pledge to build a border wall and deport those who entered our country illegally. But there’s no place for brown-shirt tactics.

Millions of Mexicans have abandoned their country in search of a better life in the United States, replete with economic opportunities and generous government benefits like free public education and medical care for those unable to pay for it. Mexico, whatever its virtues, is notorious for its political corruption. The country these immigrants have adopted, ours, is holding its quadrennial peaceful exercise in democratically selecting presidential candidates.

There’s absolutely no justification for those who have violently protested the outcome of that process. If they don’t like Trump, they’re free to not vote for him. What the Republican Party does as an institution in nominating a candidate is its business. Who do these thugs hope to impress or persuade with their lawless behavior mimicking the brutality of Mexican drug lords and gangs in their native country? Do they really want that here?

I’ve been critical of Trump’s verbal and stylistic excesses myself. I much preferred other Republican candidates. However, I’ll vote for him mostly because I regard Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and their coalition of leftist, statist Democrats as a more repugnant alternative.

I’m old enough to vividly remember the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago where legions of left-wing radicals protesting the Vietnam War were well-organized and hell-bent on disrupting the proceedings and aggressively provoking the Chicago police. They got what they wanted. The police reaction ─ and, arguably, overreaction ─ became known as the “Battle of Michigan Avenue.”

Ironically, the unintended consequence was ultimately the election of Richard Nixon as president, the last thing the protesters wanted. That violence in Chicago played right into the hands of Nixon’s “law and order” campaign, pushing back on anti-war demonstrations, not always peaceful, throughout the country. Nixon rallied the so-called “silent majority,” which helped him defeat Democrat Hubert Humphrey by more than 100 electoral votes.

Donald Trump is clearly mining a political vein, appealing to an unexpected number of Americans who say they “want their country back,” whatever that means to some. Wouldn’t it be ironic if an eruption of unruly and violent anti-Trump protests backfire to get him elected president?

Mike Rosen is a KOA News Radio personality.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.