Pepper Spraying Students at UC-Davis

[PeterPan09]

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterPan09
I support the right for ALL Americans to protest wherever they want about whatever they want peacefully without being pepper sprayed. Please, protest on my sidewalk-if I agree with you, I'll join you. If I don't, I'll give you a friendly wave as I pass by. I thought that would be how most Americans would feel, but maybe I'm wrong. Or, it could be more of the unique universe that is the DIS.

What if they sat in front of your driveway so you could not move your car and would not move when asked?

That was in response to the above which was presented as a hypothetical.

then I'd find another way. Luckily I live close to almost everything, I own a bicycle and there is a good bus system. Yes, it would be an inconvenience, yes, it might even be annoying. But to me, the First Amendment is important enough to withstand inconvenience and annoyance. Like I said, if it's a cause I support, I'd probably sit right down with them! If I didn't, I'd say something about supporting their rights even though I think their position is wrong.

I'm a history/political science major. I know that when people start giving up their freedoms, the next step down the road is not good. It really saddens me to see how many people here would happily take those freedoms away from others because it might inconvenience someone, or they disagree with the reason for the protest, and because they just look down on the protestors. The attitude here seems that everyone should just shut up and take whatever gets dished out to them and never dare to raise their voice or protest against it-and if they do, they deserve whatever they get even violence. You know what happens to a society that does that??

 

[Scornelius]

And what you don't seem to understand is that many of us don't care what the students were protesting about. You don't pepper spray peaceful protesters. Period. Every time we allow the government to do such a thing, we lose a bit more of our freedom. I don't care what your message is. You don't use a CHEMICAL WEAPON that has been BANNED IN WARFARE on peaceful American protesters.

Where is the stand up and cheer smilie? This is it exactly. I'm so boggled that people are not only disagreeing, but seem to be arguing that pepper spray is a perfectly acceptable action for the smallest violation.Sorry, your 'right' to walk on a sidewalk doesn't trump my right for peaceful Assembly and protest.

Exactly how many times must the police request that the peaceful protesters disperse before it becomes a criminal act by the protesters? Had the protesters obeyed the request to end the protest they would not have had the experience of being pepper sprayed. They were at school so it must qualify as a lesson learned?

Do you understand the concept of police brutality? It is never, ever, EVER ok to respond to a peaceful protest with pepper spray! What part of that don't you get? It's NOT ok. Can I punch my child for wetting the bed? What if I warn him that if he doesn't stop wetting the bed, I'm going to punch him?

I was raised that police work for the people and not the other way around. Blind obedience isn't part of my DNA and never will be. A cop saying 'stop doing XYZ or I'll spray you' doesn't mean he has the right to do it. In this particular case, the cops used fear tactics that didn't work, and then made the poor choice to follow through on those ILLEGAL tactics. A cop is not a judge, jury or God. I used to work at the biggest university in Canada and became very close with our campus police force. Every single one of them is appalled by this incident and think the officer should be fired and charged.

I think quite a few Americans need to go back to school and the first class should be "The First Amendment".

Seriously.

 

[ford family]

Where is the stand up and cheer smilie? This is it exactly. I'm so boggled that people are not only disagreeing, but seem to be arguing that pepper spray is a perfectly acceptable action for the smallest violation.Sorry, your 'right' to walk on a sidewalk doesn't trump my right for peaceful Assembly and protest.

But your right to protest trumps my right to walk on the sidewalk?

Interesting.

ford family

 

[Acklander]

But your right to protest trumps my right to walk on the sidewalk?

Interesting.

ford family

According to the constitution, yes - a persons right to protest trumps a persons right to use the sidewalk. And I wouldn't have it any other way.

 

[undertheradar]

They were allowed to protest. They were requested to end the protest after a reasonable period of time. They refused to end the protest and created the situation in which they were pepper sprayed. The protestors were exercising the first amendment and took it too far. They were requested to end the assembly and refused. They were warned and still refused to end the assembly. They could have ended the protest in a peaceful manner but chose to ignore the request of the administration and the police. There was ample time for the protest, for the protest to end , and the students chose to ignore the request of the authorities to do so.

Again, how long is a reasonable time to allow for the protest before action should be taken to end it? If the protestors refuse to follow the instructions of the authorities, how should the authorities respond? While the exercise of free speech is protected, the act of assembling on private property without permission (school administration requested the end of the protest after a reasonable period of time), permission rescinded by the administration, creating an act of illegal assembly, making it a criminal offense.

As for proper procedure, what is the procedure when a large assembly refuses to follow the instructions of the authorities?

 

[undertheradar]

According to the constitution, yes - a persons right to protest trumps a persons right to use the sidewalk. And I wouldn't have it any other way.

I've read the amendment and I don't see those words in it. In fact, a provision of the amendment addresses assembly to air greivances against the government. The protestors were assembling to protest a tuition increase being voted on by a board of regents, not the government. Exactly how does your right to peaceful assembly allow you to trump my right to use of public space? Human decency should dictate that we could both use the sidewalk at the same time and that what we should all expect. The very definition of peaceful is another arguable debate. We each have our own idea of what is peaceful.

 

[WebmasterAlex]

They were allowed to protest. They were requested to end the protest after a reasonable period of time. They refused to end the protest and created the situation in which they were pepper sprayed. The protestors were exercising the first amendment and took it too far. They were requested to end the assembly and refused. They were warned and still refused to end the assembly. They could have ended the protest in a peaceful manner but chose to ignore the request of the administration and the police. There was ample time for the protest, for the protest to end , and the students chose to ignore the request of the authorities to do so.

Again, how long is a reasonable time to allow for the protest before action should be taken to end it? If the protestors refuse to follow the instructions of the authorities, how should the authorities respond? While the exercise of free speech is protected, the act of assembling on private property without permission (school administration requested the end of the protest after a reasonable period of time), permission rescinded by the administration, creating an act of illegal assembly, making it a criminal offense.

As for proper procedure, what is the procedure when a large assembly refuses to follow the instructions of the authorities?

When the first amendment is changed from

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

to

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble untill some authority decides they have been reasonable and then the authority may use any force neccesary to remove the peaceful protesters without a court order, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

[ford family]

Duplicate post.

ford family

 

[tasha99]

I think quite a few Americans need to go back to school and the first class should be "The First Amendment".

Zing!

It's scary to me how there are so many people who will bow down to authority, even when the authority is in the wrong.

 

[Scornelius]

But your right to protest trumps my right to walk on the sidewalk?

Interesting.

ford family

Um, yes. Yes it does. Perhaps you'd prefer to live in a country where that's not the case? China, Iran, North Korea maybe?

 

[Zippa D Doodah]

According to the constitution, yes - a persons right to protest trumps a persons right to use the sidewalk. And I wouldn't have it any other way.

So if I want to occupy the White House as an act of protest I will be welcome?

 

[cornflake]

So if I want to occupy the White House as an act of protest I will be welcome?

You're welcome to protest outside on the public sidewalk all you want.

 

[No.17CherryTreeLane]

You're welcome to protest outside on the public sidewalk all you want.

You can protest on a sidewalk, but can you block a sidewalk?

 

[No.17CherryTreeLane]

You're welcome to protest outside on the public sidewalk all you want.

Woops, double post....sorry

 

[themilesfamily]

I think people need to remember that civil disobedience is a form of protest. When the protestors at UC Davis refused to comply with the requests of the school, they were practicing civil disobedience.

(Civil disobedience: The refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest.)

This is a protest tactic that has been used in this country all the way back to the Boston Tea Party.

Did the protestors expect to be arrested for this? Probably, yes. Or at the very least, they knew it was a possibility. The fact that they were pepper-sprayed in the face is the issue here. That's what people are reacting to. It was an outrageous action for the police to take. Had they simply arrested the students, this wouldn't be the news story it has become.

 

[PeterPan09]

I think people need to remember that civil disobedience is a form of protest. When the protestors at UC Davis refused to comply with the requests of the school, they were practicing civil disobedience.

(Civil disobedience: The refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest.)

This is a protest tactic that has been used in this country all the way back to the Boston Tea Party.

Did the protestors expect to be arrested for this? Probably, yes. Or at the very least, they knew it was a possibility. The fact that they were pepper-sprayed in the face is the issue here. That's what people are reacting to. It was an outrageous action for the police to take. Had they simply arrested the students, this wouldn't be the news story it has become.

Exactly. And I think that's where the discussion began. However, it seems some people here would only allow protesting if you do it in your own yard. Don't go anywhere with that protest that's going to inconvenience anyone! You don't have the right to do that, and if you do-you deserve whatever treatment you get.

 

[Liandro]

I never ever would hire a student that was protesting. That kind of people only cause trouble.
Sorry but whit this kind of actions there only are throwing in their own windows and remember internet has a looooooooooooooooooong lasting memory.

 

[cornflake]

I never ever would hire a student that was protesting. That kind of people only cause trouble.
Sorry but whit this kind of actions there only are throwing in their own windows and remember internet has a looooooooooooooooooong lasting memory.

Well, WHILE they're protesting, they'd be busy. Aside from that, I kind of assume you're kidding.

On the off chance you're not, and apparently wouldn't hire Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela, Gloria Steinem, Bobby Kennedy, the Founding Fathers, Susan B. Anthony, etc., etc., etc. we as a nation have hired a lot of students who protested, and we didn't even need the Internet to remind us, there are plenty of photos and video and news reports.

 

[Acklander]

I never ever would hire a student that was protesting. That kind of people only cause trouble.
Sorry but whit this kind of actions there only are throwing in their own windows and remember internet has a looooooooooooooooooong lasting memory.

See? That's what's great about America. Some prefer to hire sheep to do everything exactly the same way, and never question anything. And some prefer to hire thinkers, who are going to look at a situation from all angles, and come up with ways to get the job done, no matter the obstacles in front of them.
Don't worry about the students willing to put themselves out there for what they believe in. Even though you would never hire them, there are plenty of bosses who are willing to look at the whole picture of what a person is able to bring to the table.

 

[ford family]

What this thread does illustrate is why the US has the highest number of lawyers per capita of any country in the world.

ford family