"Operationally, government will have to decide, then, who's right to vandalize theaters, and who should be arrested for doing so. Correct?"
Not necessarily. In the case of the Boston Tea Party, King George was the government.
Try to see vandalizing theaters as a way to outshout the vocal minority that has been getting its way for so long.
I don't see it that way, though. If the assertion is that it's okay for people to vandalize cinemas for a good cause, but not okay for people to vandalize them for a bad cause, there has to be some authority who decides whether someone was justified in vandalizing a cinema, or whether they should be arrested for it. In the case of the colonists, they knew they would get in trouble with the authorities, but they did it anyway.
So, to clarify: are you saying that people who vandalize cinemas in what you see as a good cause should be arrested, but given moral support by those who agree with their cause? Or are you saying that if people vandalize in a good cause, they should not be arrested for it?