UC Davis Chancellor: Police Defied Orders by Pepper-Spraying Occupy Protesters

• Jenn, You are partially right: it's about education. And that's the whole point: kids WANT to be educated, but the UC system is making it difficult for anyone but the richest. Do you realize that UC tuition tripled over the past 10 years? The CPI increased less than 24% during that time. If someone tripled your rent or your mortgage or your gas, you'd be pretty angry too. As a UC mother, I support the students and am proud of them. They are standing up for what is right. As Americans we moan about our citizens falling behind other countries. We don't have enough engineers for example. Yet we make college unaffordable. We cannot have it both ways.

• Wait a second how is that anarchy? Do you realize that UC tuition tripled over the past 10 years. The CPI increased less than 24% during that time. If someone tripled your rent or your mortgage or your gas, you'd be pretty angry too. As a UC mother, I support the students and am proud of them. They are standing up for what is right.

• Why can't students just go to school and concentrate on their studies and just STAY away from any situation which could turn violent??  And if students want to SIT on a walkway or sidewalk to "protest"....who cares?? WALK AROUND THEM! There's NO EXCUSE to pepper spray them or use force, unless the students are blocking an emergency exit or are putting other students at risk...what's the problem? It seemed like it was a well contained protest...as long as business at the university can continue as usual, and the students pose no threat to anyone's safety, and they aren't taunting the police or threatening the police...who cares? But I do disagree with just sitting there when a crowd of police show up and ask you to leave. I personally would leave immediately because what else can I do?...get pepper sprayed?? yeah, I think I'll pass.  JUST FOCUS ON YOUR STUDIES, GRADUATE COLLEGE AND LIVE YOUR LIFE. WHY MAKE THINGS HARDER FOR EVERYONE BY PROTESTING ESPECIALLY ON A COLLEGE CAMPUS?!?? The students who do that have NO respect for the 20% of students who are there TO LEARN. If you want to cause a scene or protest, do it outside the school, not in a place that is supposed to be a SAFE ENVIRONMENT FOR LEARNING!!! God what is wrong with everyone today??

• They were standing still on the sidewalk.  How is that NOT blocking it?

• If you think they'll be in jail you're wrong. Worse case they'll be fired and hired at a different department. Which is effed up. The police were walking on the sidewalk. They weren't sitting there blocking the sidewalk arms locked. You say i'm making shit up?

• You could find any "flaw" in the way people express themselves.  Making up stupid shit like "blocking the sidewalk is illegal!!" is fucking absurd.  By the way, those cops were also blocking the sidewalk, as clearly seen in the photos.  Guess they should all be in jail -- which they may soon be for their illegal use of pepper spray.

• Blocking a sidewalk is illegal. Their right to free speech was observed. So was their constitutional rights. If they exercise their free speech thats cool. But doing so while breaking the law is still breaking the law. People don't run around writing threatening letters to the President now do they?

• Sitting on the sidewalk isn't illegal. And even if it was, it wouldn't be an excuse to stomp out their rights to free speech.  Again, this is a free country -- not North Korea.  It sounds like you'd fit right in there.

• They're still blocking the sidewalk. Sorry, that is illegal. 

• These protestors are also protesting the laws, Digi. Laws that are allowing the wealthy and influential in this country to make more and more money on the backs of the rest of the people.  You might be right about the public access law.  But that's just completely beside the point.  Laws like the one you cite are how the 1% keep the rest down.  And they count on exactly what you are doing - people focusing on public access laws because they're too scared or complacent or in denial to admit that there's much more at stake than whether somebody's right to use a public sidewalk is being impinged.

• You can see IN THE PICTURE that there's plenty of room to walk around them.  Try again.

• They were sitting arms interlinked on a sidewalk?

• So can you prove your assertion that they were "blocking," well, anything? Because those who were there dispute the claim.  Even the Chancelor herself says it wasn't true. If you have to lie and re-write history to make your point, you don't have one.  Calling me a troll won't change the fact that you're a totalitarianist.

• Are you kidding me? How do you get that i'm against civil rights protests from I think that if you break the law you should pay the time for the crime. If they had not been blocking public access ways they would not be arrested, we would not be here, and their protest would go on. The Civil Rights protests from the 50s, 60s, and 70s, are nothing like this. They were protesting the LAWS THEMSELVES. So naturally people had to break them. These students were not protesting the laws of blocking public access ways. They could have done their protest elsewhere like on the lawn, or hell even on the sidewalk while letting people through. But they chose to break the law (a law they were not protesting against mind you), so they get arrested. They did the same thing you're doing now. Trolling. They got burned, so no I dont feel sorry for them. I may think the pepper spray was unnecessary but as far as the arrest no. As for totalitarianism, Sorry i'm not. I believe in their right to say whatever the hell they want. But not at the cost of other people's rights. Other students, faculty, and guests of that campus have the right to use the public sidewalk.

• So again, you are AGAINST the civil rights protests.  Just to make that clear, this means that you think we should still live in a segregated society. Otherwise, you'd be a hypocrite.

• Uh, what right? They have a right to a Lawful Peaceful Assembly.. Blocking a public pathway so that others cannot use it is not lawful. You're not stating the truth and you're twisting what i'm saying then labeling me. Then claiming its the truth? Do the Crime, Do the time. Should they have been sprayed? Probably not, but thats up to a court of their peers. Should they have been arrested for breaking the law, Certainly! If I block a doorway and don't let people through, i'd be arrested too. 

• You think we should take away people's freedoms for violating minor laws.  It's not an ad hominem if I'm stating the truth -- in this case, that you're a totalitarianist. 

• An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it. Secondly, these same stupid anti-free speech arguments from ------totalitarianists such as yourself----- have been used at least as far back as the civil rights era Yup. Looks like it fits to me!

• First of all, you should look up what the word "ad hominem" means because you're not using it correctly. Secondly, these same stupid anti-free speech arguments from totalitarianists such as yourself have been used at least as far back as the civil rights era and have been applied to every major protest.  I guess you think we should still live in a segregated society, otherwise you wouldn't be making this argument.

• The first amendment guarantees the right to a "Peaceful Assembly". The supreme court has ruled time and time again that the right to a Peaceful Assembly can have reasonable restrictions placed on it by the state. This means the California Penal Code still stands. Take that totalitarian crap and get out. Ad Hominem is not a valid argument.

• That being the case they should be arresting and waterboarding Wall Street and the banksters along with GE, all of the Bilderberg group, Blackwater and Bushco. But wait, no they work for those murderers and thieves.

• So you believe the first amendment isn't as important as a bunch of state penal codes?  Come on.  The right to freedom of assembly is actually important -- just look at everything that happened in the Arab world recently.  Just because you disagree with their message doesn't mean that we should take their freedoms away. If you want to live in a totalitarian state, visit North Korea and tell me how that works out for you.

• At what point do we finally realize that "Unlawful Assembly" outlined by California Penal 407 is a crime and will be appropriately dealt with by police authorities who will use the lowest level of non-lethal compliance weapons available for police to do their job without risk to their own safety? All too many ignore the fact that protesting becomes illegal once a protestor restricts or deprives routine public access or free use of public property.  It simultaneously becomes illegal once the police announce to all present (usually via a loudspeaker, but not required to use a loudspeaker) telling participants in specific terms their actions have moved away from “peaceful protest” and are now illegal in accordance with 407 PC. I am certain everyone who participates in these protests “clearly hears and understands” that their personal failure to disperse will result in probable arrest and/or use of a police compliance tools designed to encourage dispersal. Locking arms and refusing to leave is not dispersal! A person may not use passive resistance or interpose any obstacle which in any manner impedes, hinders, interrupts, or delays a lawful arrest. A person who becomes intentionally inert or limp and thereby requires that [he] [she] be dragged or lifted bodily to make an arrest is passively resisting arrest.   Failure to leave the area as directed by authority, places the individual in jeopardy of violating California Penal Code 69 PC.  “Every person who willfully resists, delays, or obstructs any public officer, peace officer, or an emergency medical technician, as defined in Division 2.5 (commencing with Section 1797) of the Health and Safety Code, in the discharge or attempt to discharge any duty of his or her office or employment, when no other punishment is prescribed, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.   We can all agree the First Amendment of the US Constitution provides citizens the right to freedom of speech BUT the liberal theorists believe it should also allow anarchy and the right to block, restrict or exploit the normal use of public or private property by those who are not part of the protest.   We need to stop wasting valuable resources and services that are necessary to ensure those who have anarchy or unlawful rebellion as their objective, are not allowed to close or restrict access to public properties. We need to allow our police and public service personnel to do their jobs.

• At what point do we finally realize that "Unlawful Assembly" outlined by California Penal 407 is a crime and will be appropriately dealt with by police authorities who will use the lowest level of non-lethal compliance weapons available for police to do their job without risk to their own safety? All too many ignore the fact that protesting becomes illegal once a protestor restricts or deprives routine public access or free use of public property.  It simultaneously becomes illegal once the police announce to all present (usually via a loudspeaker, but not required to use a loudspeaker) telling participants in specific terms their actions have moved away from “peaceful protest” and are now illegal in accordance with 407 PC. I am certain everyone who participates in these protests “clearly hears and understands” that their personal failure to disperse will result in probable arrest and/or use of a police compliance tools designed to encourage dispersal. Locking arms and refusing to leave is not dispersal! A person may not use passive resistance or interpose any obstacle which in any manner impedes, hinders, interrupts, or delays a lawful arrest. A person who becomes intentionally inert or limp and thereby requires that [he] [she] be dragged or lifted bodily to make an arrest is passively resisting arrest.   Failure to leave the area as directed by authority, places the individual in jeopardy of violating California Penal Code 69 PC.  “Every person who willfully resists, delays, or obstructs any public officer, peace officer, or an emergency medical technician, as defined in Division 2.5 (commencing with Section 1797) of the Health and Safety Code, in the discharge or attempt to discharge any duty of his or her office or employment, when no other punishment is prescribed, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment. We can all agree the First Amendment of the US Constitution provides citizens the right to freedom of speech BUT the liberal theorists believe it should also allow anarchy and the right to block, restrict or exploit the normal use of public or private property by those who are not part of the protest. We need to stop wasting valuable resources and services that are necessary to ensure those who have anarchy or unlawful rebellion as their objective, are not allowed to close or restrict access to public properties. We need to allow our police and public service personnel to do their jobs.

• Go Team OWS, by keeping it Peaceful, you are making the other side look really really ugly.

TotalComments: 25