Your comment is just ridiculous political pandering, trying to focus the topic other events that aren't similar in the slightest.
The inside/outside dynamic is not the only part of the location that matters for the dangers these events present. The big protests mainly occurred in big cities and were mainly attended by locals. The Sturgis rally happens in the middle of nowhere, people come from all over, and then head back home to places that are generally more rural. Sturgis is therefore much more likely to spread the virus to people and places who wouldn't have had much exposure otherwise.
Also we can't have this conversation while ignoring the false equivalency of these two events. There is a fundamental difference in the urgency of attending a protest versus attending the Sturgis rally. If they both presented the exact same danger to the population, Sturgis would still be a more egregious gathering due to being an entertainment event. We are in the middle of a pandemic. We can cut down on these large entertainment gatherings whether it is Sturgis or Coachella.
The constitution deliberately makes no such distinction.
From a moral perspective, getting people killed in order to have some fun is less defensible than getting people killed in support of civil rights. I wouldn't think that is a controversial statement.
The relevance is obvious.
These are enumerations, not distinctions. One person's right to protest is not of any more importance than another's right to associate freely at a motorcycle rally.
That's irrelevant. The virus doesn't care about the urgency. If both presented the exact same danger to the population, they should be handled exactly the same. Otherwise we are not arguing science but politics.
The Sturgis rally is on the long list of things we can skip for a year because its importance does not justify the risks involved.
I think the biggest difference is the protests skewed young and motorcycle rallies skew boomer.
+1 for the boomer skew.
Now for my generally useless tidbit, In my city it was very hot and humid during the early summer protests. Mask compliance was probably about 50/50, with most of the folks not complying were wearing them incorrectly or taking them on and off repeatedly. Demonstrators used the time as an opportunity to socialize and share meals, with lots of incidental physical contact.
The data and official guidance I have seen supports the idea that masks (and being outdoors) significantly reduces risk.
The data I've seen suggests that being outdoor reduces risks, I have not need any data or studies that compare being outdoor with or without a mask. I'd love to read your studies if you have them.