What's right and wrong

The short article about the cussing canoeist had me raise my brow to a few things especially the reasoning for such frivolous laws that a lot of US states may or may not have. Because if we can't say what we're feeling, free of prosecution, then how free are we really? What's not very surprising to say the least is the fact that such laws exist, laws that prosecute and punish people who aren't normally the criminal type. In the case of Timothy Boomer the judicial system really struck a blow against one such man, by ruling against him in a court of law finding him guilty of a century old law that still exist that probably nobody really knows about. The point of the justice system is to punish those who are guilty of breaking laws, and in that respect alone i find the ruling of the jury reasonable since Mr Boomer did in fact break a law. No law is really up for interpretation it either is or it isn't. If you allow for some laws to be bent than you have more farther reaching implications in the entire judicial system. Simply put if one person can be granted a pardon for breaking the law, then who's to say that other people breaking similar yet slightly more severe laws cannot also be granted that same pardon. I feel that the jury in this case probably weighed out the impact of an innocent verdict on a guilty man more questionable, than just simply saying whatever to the situation and letting it slide. Regardless of how frivolous it may have been. Because without law and order they're could be no peace, even if that peace means punishing those who break laws that shouldn't exist.