Why is it that many peaceful, law abiding people are starting to promote anarchy? Firstly, let's get the definition for anarchy clear as it's often confused with chaos.
an•ar•chy: Absence of government.
an•ar•chism: The theory that all forms of government are incompatible with individual and social liberty.
So why would someone want to be without a government if they are good people? Could it be because government rules and regulations are causing harm or preventing us from helping our fellow man? On the face of things, government regulation can seem to make sense, but it doesn't take into account individual circumstance and this is where it is failing miserably.
I met a woman who had taken it upon herself to help some of the many homeless people she was coming across in Adelaide. She’d often stop and talk to them, spend some of her time listening to their stories, but wanted to start doing more. So she asked for donations of items in good condition or sealed food to make up bags that could be given to them. Things went well and she reported back to the donors on how grateful these people were and how much something as simple as a new pair of socks brightened up their day. But then a government official intervened and said that only officially registered charities were allowed to assist them.
Not wanting to give up, the lady got in touch with the homeless centre and asked if they could take all the donations she'd collected to distribute. They were reluctant to, because they had no more room to store them, but they did eventually take them. Unfortunately this one shelter in Adelaide can't reach all the homeless, so those ones that this woman could have helped, now have to go without.
You might ask why the homeless didn't just go to the shelter. There are probably a variety of reasons. Firstly, the shelter is in the city centre and can only sleep so many people. If someone turns up for the night and are turned away because it's full, they are not allowed to sleep within a certain distance of the city centre, so they then have to leave the city in the dark and try and find somewhere to sleep. There is also a high likelihood that many are afraid to go to the shelter as they aren't always the safest places to be. I wouldn't know personally, but have a read of 
I recently read an account of an odd encounter by 
Let's look at road ‘laws'. Now don't get me wrong, speed and drink driving limits make sense. After all, you are traveling at high speed in (or on) a big, unyielding metal contraption. If you lose control it can do a lot of damage. I personally would never get behind a wheel if I'd had anything to drink. I also try to stick to speed limits, but anyone can make a mistake and either drift over the limit a bit or miss a change of speed sign, get caught out and receive a fine. In fact, someone who doesn't purposely speed is more likely to be caught out because they aren't as hyper aware of speed cameras as someone who knows very well that they are speeding. So who does this law affect?
In Australia we have a lot of two and three lane roads and there are rules that you should ‘keep left unless overtaking’. However, there are also roads that go off to the right and you need to be in the right hand lane to turn onto them. So, if you're pulled over for being in the right hand lane, who makes the judgement that you are not overtaking or turning right shortly? Apparently the police do as people are being ticketed for not keeping left, even when they need to turn right!
Peaceful people have questioned government before, but it's amazing how easily they can be made to be seen as dangerous and violent, given the right propaganda. In Europe, one of the most dangerous groups in government eyes are gypsies and travellers. Probably because they are free and don't pay into the system. They wouldn't want the rest of the people getting ideas; so the media tends to vilify them, calling them thieves and destructive. I have to admit that I was taken in by it. When a group of travellers turned up at the pub I worked in I was worried about what they'd do. I needn't have been. They were more respectable than some of the locals we had in. What was funny was that they were all wearing the latest fashions from the local shops, but they'd kept the tags on so they could take them back when they'd had their night out. It was cheeky, but it wasn't illegal, unlawful or even against the shop rules.
The Battle of the Beanfield In the UK was an atrocious incidence, but it had the outcome that government wanted. Essentially the police violently destroyed a growing community of peaceful new age travellers and the courts made sure that they received no compensation other than to cover legal costs after many had their homes destroyed.
If you prefer to read, then this is what Wikipedia has on it.
So when certain types of people in your country start being called evil or terrorists and their only crime is questioning the status quo, maybe stop and think a moment before becoming part of the lynch mob.