I have no words for this one,

[Ten Bears]

I think A-CON's point was that the photo would provide a source of identication, nothing more.

riot
n. 1) technically a turbulent and violent disturbance of peace by three or more people acting together. 2) an assemblage of people who are out of control, causing injury or endangering the physical safety of others and/or themselves, causing or threatening damage to property and often violating various laws both individually and as a group. The common thread is that the people in a riot have the power through violence to break the public peace and safety, requiring police action. Often a riot is declared after the crowd has been informed by police officers that the people constitute an "unlawful assembly" and are ordered to "disperse" immediately (historically in England called "reading the riot act"). If the crowd does not disperse, its members become subject to arrest for the crime of rioting, disturbing the peace, resisting arrest or other separate crimes ranging from assault to unlawful possession of firearms.

http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=1861&bold=||||

Arrest is probably what the little silver spoon sucklers wanted. The recruiter is probably laughing at the moronic behavior.

 

[MattK]

A-Con Universities in the past and present are a sounding ground for new or radical ideas. Universities are full of idealists. Students are at Universities to voice their opinions. Protests have been a part of the University system for as long as I can remember and speaking to my dad, for as long as he can remember. I can disagree with them on their "issues" but I can't disagree with their right to protest. The recruiter is smiling which tells me he didn't feel he was in too much danger. A picture says a lot but it doesn't give the before and after of what happened. The caption says he was escorted by security guards, hell that happens outside a peaceful rock concert or country concert for that matter. I believe the recruiter had some idea of what would happen when he put up his table. If there's any over reaction, I would say you're the one over-reacting. "Lighten up Francis" (from the movie Stripes).

 

[Ten Bears]

MATTK, show me where anybody has a "right to protest". As far as I know, people have a right to free speech, but are restricted from "rioting". Please feel free to correct me when you find supporting material for that "right to protest".

 

[dgibson]

I wonder how many of these students "protested" Bush's presidency by voting against him in November. Furthermore, you have to wonder what the point is of harassing some poor shmuck who's just doing his job. The military recruited at job fairs long before Iraq and long before W took office. Personally I think they made asses of themselves, but in America it's your right to be an ass!

 

[A-con]

MattK, whats "new or radical" about this protest ? Students are at universities to voice their opinions ? Funny, I though they were there to get a higher education.
I fully support anyones right to "protest" in a peaceful, lawful way, but in this case, they prevented someone else from doing something that he had a "right" to do. That is really the bottem line, once they prevented the recruiter from doing what he had a lawful right to do, the line was crossed. I really am suprised at the reaction by MattK and Guppie9 to the idea of expulsion. What do you think is the proper response to these people denieing this recruiter the chance to do his lawful job ? What if some "anti-hunters" followed you around during hunting season, vandelized your hunting equipment and shouted, interfearing with your hunt ? Do you see any difference ?

 

[BigHornRam]

I have two words for it. Brain Fungus. This is condition that occurs in areas of heavy precipitation such as Seattle and Portland. It can also occur when an individual has their head in their ass for prolonged periods of time.

 

[1_pointer]

Harassment of hunters is against the law in for than a few states, IIRC. Vandalizing of personal property is different than tearing up brochures that are free to the public. I'm guessing they were sitting on a table for anyone who wanted to pick one up could, as that is how job fairs were conducted that I've attended (sample size = 1).

They didn't deny him anything IMO, they just made his job harder than it should be. As far proper response, what laws are University rules did they break? If none, then none. If the broke laws or University rules their punishment is already set, as that is part of making a law/rule.

I don't agree with the 'why' for the protest, but do agree with their right to do so even if, IMO, it was a bit mis-guided. "Don't shoot the messenger..."

 

[MattK]

BHR- You seem to know a lot about Brain Fungus...Were you diagnosed? Have you found a cure yet?

If you feel Universities are only for Higher Education, you are kidding yourself and trying to pass it on to others.

TB- The constitution was built by people who protested! They weren't real peaceful about their protesting ie. Boston Tea Party. May want to ask a 3rd grader about that one, they can tell you the whole story. You may wish to get an interpretation on the entire 1st amendment, I believe protesting is covered in that section.

In fact, the founders of the constitution believed it necessary to be able to overthrow a government. Hard to believe but I guess they were radicals with new ideas.

 

[feclnogn]

What I posted was the entire Yahoo article with the photo, I have the link to yahoo at the bottom of the page.

 

[A-con]

1 pointer;

"After about a 10-minute standoff during which protesters tore up U.S Army literature, the protesters were successful in getting Due and another recruiter to leave their table under escort by campus security officers."

The "literature" was the property of the U.S. Army, until such time as the recruiter gave it out. I know, I know, its only paper, but they still tore it up, and they still caused a situation where the recruiter had to be "escorted by security". I don't see any great crime hear, just a minor one, that should have minor consequences, like throwing their butts out of school.
Another point to consider, what about the rights of the students who wanted to talk to a recruiter? Is it OK for the protesters to deny them that right, when the school allowed a recruiter on campus?
The protesters had every right to stand by and voice their opinion in an orderly fashion, and if they moved outside, the right to scream their heads off, but I’ll say it again, THEY CROSSED THE LINE.

 

[guppie9]

I think we may all be reading too much into this. Ten Bears...at what point in this article did it say that these kids were rioting...let me answer...nowhere. It simply says they were protesting...if this indeed were a riot, I am sure it would have been much bigger news. The fact that some college security officers (probably other students...I was one when I was in college) had to escort the recruiter does not make it a riot.

A-Con...I thought that you originally were saying that they should be expelled because they protested. If your reason is because they tore up some pamphlets...I still don't agree with you, but I can see your point. Remember that students in college do MUCH worse things then tear up some pamphlets and don't get expelled. I think that for a misdemeanor such as this, expulsion seems awful extreme. I can't believe that you think expulsion is a minor consequence.

As for someone following me around during hunting season...there is a law in Alaska forbidding that exact thing. There is not, however, a law against protesting. We have a street corner in Fairbanks that has protesters every weekend speaking out both for and against the war.

Let me sum up my points here. Did the students break any laws by protesting? No. Did they break any laws by tearing up pamphlets? Maybe...depends on if they were given to them or if they were taken from the recruiter without his permission...the article doesn't say. Do I agree with the protesters? Absolutely not. Do I agree that they have the right to do what they did? Absolutely yes. If the students broke a law by tearing up the pamphlets, should they be expelled for that? No...try not to let your judgement be clouded by the situation...if they broke a law, it was a very minor one. I think that expulsion for something that small is an extreme reaction based upon the situation. Let me ask you this...if the students were protesting against Sadaam supporters and tore up their literature, would you be clammoring for expulsion than???? Just a thought.

 

[MattK]

A-Con Hate to say you're wrong but you are. Just recently a court upheld the right of a woman to enter a building to get an abortion. People can still protest but have to stay 8 feet away from the person entering the building. They must stay 32 feet away from the building but only in the case of a woman entering a clinic. The courts were very specific on the rights of people to still be able to protest and for that right not to be infringed upon.

 

[Calif. Hunter]

Matt - your example of the abortion clinic also illustrates that the recruiter has the right to not be interfered with, and that is my major point. The Constitution is there to, among other things, protect the minority from the "tyranny of the majority." There are laws that protect people from interference with a lawful activity (not just hunting) - like an owner's lawful use of his own property, the right to peaceful assembly, the "pursuit of happiness," etc.

The students can set up tables to pass out an opposing point of view, they can march with signs, they can chant, etc., etc. ad nauseum. But haven't you ever seen the protesters being drug away as they lie there limp, to make the cops job more difficult? They are being arrested - not for protesting, but for their illegal behavior in blocking doors, trespassing or interfering with others' legal activities.


People are sheep -

"The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep.

Any sheepdog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.

Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog trade in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa." Until the wolf shows up, then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog."

The soldier represents the sheepdog. The sheep do not like to be reminded that they need protection.

 

[1_pointer]

I agree completely with guppie. Expelling them for breaking a minor law, even if in fact they did, would be akin to expelling them for a traffic ticket or public intoxication. Which would also have to be enforced on the students that tore up the pamphlets later, right? Neither are gonna happen and they shouldn't. If they are thrown out of school, the loss of tuition makes it less than a minor ramification. Of course those that support the expulsion of these students, would support the expulsion of the Utah Valley State College students that protested against Michael Moore speaking???

As for the escort for the recruiter, that was just a safety measure. Probably for those that would do him harm! If it diffused the situation to allow the job fair to continue, I think it was the right choice.

 

[Calif. Hunter]

We're mainly arguing semantics here - but who decides what is a "minor" law? How is threatening someone's freedom of speech or exercise of lawful rights the same as a traffic ticket? It is nonsense to even make that comparison! The students would be the first to "protest" if the shoe was on the other foot, just like the ACLU does not support all civil liberties. But I agree that "no harm = no foul" and that expulsion is probably too drastic an action.

But that is another subject and not really what was going on here. I agree that the picture is probably more inflammatory than what was really going on, and that many of those pictured were probably hamming it up for the camera.

 

[Nemont]

It was a protest, it is now over. Let us move on. There are a lot more important things to worry about then a bunch of whiny college students who have never sacrificed anything for their country and most likely never will. So why worry about snotty nosed liberal brats who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground they have a right to protest. So be it. Doesn't make them right.

There were 35 brave men killed in Iraq today trying to do some pretty nasty and unforgiving work in a nasty and unforgiving part of the world. They didn't ask to be sent there but went when they were told they had a mission to accomplish. Every whiny college kid should serve their country in some form, either military or peace corps, etc. and then maybe they would appreciate what they have.

I defend these punks right to protest and I disagree with what their protest is about.

Nemont

 

[MattK]

It's funny you should lump protesters in as "snotty-nosed" liberals. I feel it is not only their right to protest but their job to protest. People shouldn't be herded as sheep are. You may like to be sheered on a regular basis and put to slaughter, I personally am against it. (Although a good hair cut is needed every few months.) If you want to call the Einsteins, George Washingtons, Thomas Jeffersons, Ben Franklins, Abe Lincolns...."snotty nosed liberals" so be it. They all constitute some of the greatest thinkers/leaders/ and activists of the current era. They all had radical new ideas that were not supported by the way things were. You ask what is radical about opposing a war. Look at the posts here. Not many oppose the war, so a radical idea would be for someone to oppose it. Their ideals are still in tact unlike the mindless masses that exist today. You want to talk about some sheep, look around. I don't particularly care for what these students are protesting and in most cases don't agree with their protests. However, it is vital and their duty to protest to keep everyone thinking.

 

[MattK]

Nemont- You may wish to speak to congress, senate and president when you talk about whiny kids that should be sent to Iraq. It sure is easy to send someone to a desert to be killed, if you have nothing but words at stake. Would you send your relatives in support of this war?

 

[Calif. Hunter]

"If you want to call the Einsteins, George Washingtons, Thomas Jeffersons, Ben Franklins, Abe Lincolns...."snotty nosed liberals" so be it. They all constitute some of the greatest thinkers/leaders/ and activists of the current era."


Current era? I hate to break the news to you, Matt - they are all dead.

In any case, I didn't hear anyone mention them, but you. Who called them "snotty nosed liberals?"

 

[feclnogn]

Matt, I have no problem with these folks protesting, but if your going to protest they should direct there wisdom at the Presidents policies and not the soldiers who are following orders. You see these protesters and they say the support the troops but not the war. Thats bullshit. Go spend some time at DU and see how they tear down these young men and women. What do you think is more likely going on in this photo

1. They are saying to this soldier:
Thanks for your service
Thanks for your sacrifice
We support you

2. They are saying to this soldier:
Go home you baby killer
Murderer
Torturer


??