I doubt if we'd see eye-to-eye but there's a lot of what you're saying that I empathize with. College kids who are protected from contrarian views, no matter how abhorrent to current thinking are not college kids, but coddled kids. They should learn to think for themselves - the world is full of people who don't agree with how they think. If they believe that at school we can just eliminate other ideas by banning them then they will probably want to do the same when they get into government and that's not going to work out well.
And jury nullification - yes, more people need to know about this. The people - the fourth arm of government. The government should not be "the man" or something else, it needs to be we, the people. However, be careful because jury nullification goes both ways - especially when "the government" has conspired with the oligarchs to dumb down the people to the point where they don't know a fact from their asshole.
PS. Found your post via the #atheism tag - seems like there are very few of us around on Steemit.
Not sure why you "doubt we'd see eye-to-eye", but maybe you're right, if you support the initiation of force in some self-contradictory way. For example, a lot of the Bernie Sanders crowd thinks they can support giving the government absolute power, and that, if successful, the government wouldn't use that power unjustly and arbitrarily, as it currently does.
For this reason, government power itself must be minimized. It does no good to run any candidate who does not want to minimize government power. Even those candidates can be no more than 25% of any solution (although, any solution at all looks incredibly unlikely, at this point).