This page is for discussion of the March 4, 2010 Public Education Protest. The protest generated significant controversy that played out in the comments of the protest page. In order to keep that page more manageable, the bulk of the discussion should take place here, leaving the root page for info on the protest and aftermath. For more information you can read up on the UC Davis Budget Cuts.

Stories and Thoughts

You must be logged in to comment on this page. Please log in.

2010-03-04 18:54:55   The recent and apparently on-going behavior of the students is not endearing me to their cause. All California's people are suffering, I don't know one person is has not been effected by that state's budget crisis, both mine and my husband's income has been effected and I am sending a son to college next year, my daughter's elementary class will likely grow in size next year, her teacher requested we buy her reams of paper so the kids could get homework assignments. These college students need to grow up, suck it up and start being part of the solution, not creating more problems. —HazelWatson

2010-03-04 18:56:08   Anyone protesting budget shortages and rate hikes who goes and graffitis on campus should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. It's destructive, it's hypocritical, but most of all, it's counter-productive. You're only going to decrease the credibility of anything you (and anyone associated with you) has to say, and you're going to cost the campus a lot of money in cleaning it up. I'm sure plenty of the protesters believed in what they were saying, but some of these people are just obnoxious morons who are more interested in mayhem and troublemaking than in any real message. —TomGarberson (Please see my lengthier criticism for a more complete explanation of my throughts)

2010-03-04 19:09:12   I seriously question the extent to which the protesters understand what it is that they are protesting. The fact they tried to walk onto a major interstate indicates that this is as much mob mentality tempered by youthful ignorance as it is students rallying for real reform. Again: the protesters tried to walk onto a major interstate. By what logic could that even begin to be considered a good idea? Whether you agree with their stated stance or not, they are going about it in the wrong way. —SarahEdwards

  • Let's be fair, though: These people are, self-evidently, uneducated. —JoePomidor

2010-03-04 19:47:30   I'd like to point out how much money these protests have cost the University, City, county, and state in terms of overtime, cleanup costs, and a wasted workday for many. In an era where the state is more or less bankrupt, protesting like this is not the way to help your cause in the eyes of anyone with a brain. Trying to shut down I-80? really? Just plain dumb. —ARWENNHOLD

2010-03-04 19:49:01   According to one of the Facebook event pages, they were fighting to defend public sector workers and public education. Public sector workers need more defending? Most of them make much more than they would if they had the same job in the private sector and are nearly impossible to fire. And by defending education, I would have to assume means more tax dollars towards education? Then who are they protesting? This is exactly what the administrators want, for protesters to embarrass the state so that politicians funnel more tax dollars into education (tax dollars that come from you and and your families). These protesters are basically the administrator's puppets. They are allowing the bureaucrats at the top to continue spending without transparency and accountability, which are the things that we really need, especially if what says is true. And by pulling all the nonsense that the protesters did today, they hurt students, faculty, staff and the townspeople of Davis by wasting money and other resources. The protesters called themselves the crisis and I believe they are right in a way. The protesters are a crisis since the supposed best and brightest are nothing but a bunch of self-important ignorant cry-babies. —hankim

  • 100 teachers in Davis Joint Unified School District got pink slips. This happening throughout the country. Doesn't sound like the public sector workers nor public education are being defended by the government. So the people have to do it. —JessicaRockwell
    • What about those teachers in New York and Los Angeles who are not qualified to teach anymore because they did something questionable but the districts were unable to fire them due to unions holding too much power? Now those teachers sit in a room all by themselves and get paid to play cards all day. Or how Vallejo public sector workers managed to choke all the money out of the city because they would not give into any pay decreases? Or how I believe it was BART had to close an extension that took only a short increase in time to run, but union rules forced them to give breaks for that extension causing BART to shut it down? It is quite unfortunate when good teachers lose jobs, but currently the system is overrun with abuse. —hankim

2010-03-04 20:00:14   No one is happy with raised fees for anything, especially education. However with the condition the great state of California is in, everyone is suffering, not just the students. Protesting, being destructive, and walking towards a major highway is counter-productive and stupid. Exactly what was the message being sent by these actions? It's not like protesting and doing stupid things will alleviate fee hikes or anything else. I wonder how much money was spent trying to keep peace and order. Money being wasted to stop students protesting about paying too much money. How ironic. —BenLee

  • Maybe they were trying to show people that they were pissed off and willing to take such desperate action. They're trying to show people that the crisis has gotten out of control and that people will fight to bring justice. You complain that a lot of money was spent on trying to keep peace and order. I have a strong feeling that if things in this country keep going the way they are, with the classism, racism, sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism along with many other issues present in our capitalist society, things will get much worse. Think of the protesters as trying to prevent what could become an escalated situation (and therefore more money being spent on police) if the government doesn't get itself in check and does a shift in priorities so that everyone can have a free, high quality education. —JessicaRockwell
    • How are yesterday's activities in any way related to any of that? Are you familiar with hyperbole? —TomGarberson
      • Proof that race and education are tied together:

Percent of Adults with No High School Diploma (California, 2000) Percent and number of California adults with no high school diploma, by race/ethnicity, 2000

- 20% of African American adults have no high school diploma.

- 23% of Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander adults have no high school diploma.

- 24% of Native American and Alaska Native adults have no high school diploma.

- 19% of Asian adults have no high school diploma.

- 52% of Latino adults have no high school diploma, more than any other racial/ethnic group, and almost 5 times more than their White counterparts.

Source: U.S. Census 2000, U.S. Census Bureau —JessicaRockwell

  • For a fair comparison, could you give how many Caucasians have no high school diploma? —hankim
    • read the information i posted completely......the answer to your question is there.....
  • There's quite a number of sociologists whose life work is this stuff, I think this is a bit oversimplified. Anyway, please see a few comments below regarding admissions.
  • I'm not denying that there's discrimination or inequality in our society, or that fewer minorities receive a quality education. Those are all true, and they're all a problem. They're also red herrings. My question was "how are yesterday's activities in any way related to any of that?". Those numbers have no bearing whatsoever on the protest, or on the damage and disruption by the protesters. —TomGarberson
    • ummm, the protest was for education....
      • "For education" how? I'm asking you how yesterday's activities are rationally related to any method of alleviating any of the problems you mentioned. -tg

2010-03-04 20:04:32   I don't support all of the tactics of the protestors, but I support their cause. This is not about over-privileged students whining about a few fee increases. This is about students already working full-time in order to go to school who have now been hit with 32% fee increases — and what do they get in return? Fewer, more crowded classes. Programs eliminated or reduced. Staff reductions. Faculty hiring freezes or slow downs. This used to be the best university system in the world, and one of the things that made it the best was that it was available to everyone who qualified academically. It was a world-class education where low-income students mixed with upper-income students, not an elite school for the wealthy only. Now we've got a University in decline that is unaffordable for many. Lots to protest. —CovertProfessor

  • I spent today going to class and working. I doubt too many of the protesters were students who work full time and even with the budget cuts, California still pays for all of the tuition if your family makes less than around $60,000 a year. This only makes the university less affordable to the middle class. The decline in quality is something that I do not blame on lack of funding, but more on the misuse of funding. —hankim
    • You can say what you like, but many struggle to afford school, and that's a fact. Some drop out because they can't. I don't care whether the protestors themselves are low-income, middle-class, or wealthy. My point is that everyone is affected by what is happening to the UC system, and so there is reason to protest (peacefully). And when I say "everyone," I mean students, staff, faculty, and citizens of California in general. The UC was a big draw for people to move to the state and produced many fine entrepreneurs, thinkers, civil servants, etc. A less educated populace is bad for California. —CovertProfessor
      • I do not disagree that everyone is affected and I agree with the protesters that fee hikes are not the answer. What I disagree with are the solutions pushed by the majority of the protesters as well as their methods. It almost seems that they have lost their original intent and are now just protesting for the hell of it. There are plenty of better ways to make school more affordable and accessible. Tax increases and unsustainable budgets only make things worse.—hankim
  • Well stated, CP... but I don't really see those principles being reflected in the actions of the protestors, from locking themselves in Mrak back in the fall to vandalism and protesting freeways. —TomGarberson
    • Freeways are destructive to the environment and cause many deaths each year. Furthermore they are sometimes the products of eminent domain, which is evil and unfair. —hankim
    • As I said, I don't support all of their tactics. Peaceful protest is fine. Vandalism and blocking freeways (endangering lives) is not. —CovertProfessor

2010-03-04 22:34:48   I think the greatest irony was how they were protesting to improve the quality of higher education by ruining it for a day for many students. So many fire alarms were pulled in many buildings, interrupting students in class, some even taking exams. Oh, and they thought doing it to the library several times would be a good idea too. All they were were a disruptive, loud, unruly mob. Hardly a protest that united students like they wished too. —MattBlair

  • Everyone in the UC system is lucky to be going there. With the cuts to education, it is threatening people's access to have a good education. There should not have been any exams given that day. Instead, the professors, tas, staff, faculty, students, custodians, etc. should have been out demonstrating. Not hiding from the problems that are effecting everyone. —JessicaRockwell
    • Sorry, but "there should not have been any exams that day" is for one thing, a terrible justification to what had occurred. Not only was it selfish to disrupt the studying/learning that every student has the RIGHT to do, considering we already PAID for this education, but it's incredibly disrespectful as well. If you don't respect your own peers - and trust me, I dare you to talk to anyone who was not a physical part of the protest but was affected by these disruptions - then who are you gonna fall back on for support? — Gino
    • That's your opinion. Others clearly disagree. Some prefer to show their displeasure at the polls, rather than damaging school property and endangering human lives. Are you arguing that they don't have the right to pursue their higher education if they so choose? Or just that they don't have the right to express their beliefs in a manner of their choosing, and that their desire for a higher education is secondary to your right to disrupt it? —TomGarberson (Please see my lengthier criticism for a more complete explanation of my throughts)

2010-03-04 23:25:35   I'm starting a counter-protest movement to (peacefully) combat and speak out against these irrational wacko protesters. I've tentatively named the movement "the UC Loyalists" but it could be changed if anybody thinks of a better name. E-mail me at [email protected]JamesChalmers

2010-03-05 00:20:10   This I-80 protest reminds me of when I was an anti Vietnam War student activist at Cal State LA. In 1970 after the shootings of Kent State students and at the height of student protests, some students were gathered and one male student (I still remember his name.) said, "Lets go to the Freeway." (The I-10 San Bernardino Fwy in East LA - I didn't go.) They walked there and stopped traffic for about 20 minutes if I remember correctly. It was a big news story of a questionable protest. —BruceHansen

  • yeah, about a million students protested after the shootings at Kent State and the death of 4 students shot in Ohio. That was a sad sad event. —JessicaRockwell

2010-03-05 00:55:20   Now, as I understand it, the point of the protests is to get the UC system to cancel or roll back the planned tuition increases. A lot of you are saying that it makes no sense to protest this in a way that costs the school(s) money. I disagree. In fact, the most effective form of protest is one that makes the offending policy costly to maintain. If the result from the tuition increases is that there are continuous protests which incur costs greater than those of the increase, the tuition increase becomes more costly than it is worth. I do agree that there are less destructive ways to do it than spraypainting grafitti (sue for tuition back due to furloughs and cancelled classes, transfer to a college or university that isn't doing this), but anything that costs the university money to maintain their program is an understandable tactic. I'm a little hazy on where blocking the highways makes sense in this. I guess it costs the state money in commerce lost? I think I understand the effect it was used to during the Vietnam War protests, but it doesn't make as much sense to me as a response to this situation. Anyway, my point is, costing the University system money is precisely in keeping with the goals of the protest, especially if the students continue to be active and pursue it, because it sends the message that the tuition increase isn't going to be a fruitful way to increase revenue. And of all the messages to send, that is the one most likely to get the people responsible for policy to change their course. —JodyNorthup

  • It also sends a message to the taxpayers funding the system that their dollars might be better spent elsewhere. I think your logic is serious flawed. Take a look at the comments on this page. These are people that generally support the University and its student body. These actions are not doing anything to endear any of us to your cause. —DavidGrundler
  • David was too nice to say it outright, but I will: that's ridiculous, and you should be ashamed of yourself. Why do you think they're cutting jobs and raising fees? For shits and giggles? It's because they don't have enough money to do everything they used to do. Do you think you can change that via the school administration? The people you should be going to are the ones who have the power to give more money to the university. As for the idea that making it more expensive to raise tuition will somehow get them to lower tuition, are you out of your mind? Do you think that when you convince the administration that it's a bad idea, they'll just print up some more money and take care of the problem? Are they going to issue bonds? Are they going to pick up some more money in Sacramento and drop those fees back down? Of course not. They can't do those things. Sure, they could find different ways to save money. How about more layoffs? Oh, wait, many of the same students locked themselves in Mrak over that. It is so unbelievably naive to think that by WASTING money, you're going to magically create more in the system so they can fix the problem. And it's unbelievably selfish and hypocritical to go around and interfere with others' education in an attempt to "defend" higher education. These people and anyone who embraces their obnoxious and self-destructive tactics should be ashamed of themselves. —TomGarberson (Please see my lengthier criticism for a more complete explanation of my throughts)
    • You seem to be suggesting this is just about a bad economy. But it isn't. The amount of money going to the UC has been decreasing for many years — even when we had a good economy. Many have also noted that the amount going to prisons has increased over the same time. Many of us would like to see that reversed. Again, I don't condone the tactics of this protest, but protesting locally (if it had been done peacefully) isn't a bad thing to do. We need to get the adminstrators on our side, to do their jobs and make the case for us ("us," being the UC). —CovertProfessor
      • I agree with you on every single point. What happened yesterday had no rational relationship to any of that, though. I'm not objecting to the protestors' ostensible goals. -tg
        • In January 2010, the Governor, in his State of the Union address, proposed a constitutional amendment that would guarantee at least 10 percent of the California budget for the University of California and California State University systems, gradually scaling back prison funding to reach that number. Awesome, right? If state voters approve the amendment, funding would begin shifting from prisons to universities as early as 2011. By 2014-15, prisons would be limited to 7 percent of the state budget. -ES

2010-03-05 00:55:41   Too bad the University cannot quickly determine the cost of all of the extra emergency response vehicles for the fire alarms, the cost of all of the extra law enforcement officers, and the cost for cleanup and repair for all of the damage caused by the protesters, and then divide that by the student population and tack it on to the student fees... I thought the UC was supposed to be the best and the brightest?!? These actions are quickly proving otherwise. —DavidGrundler

  • The best and the brightest.....yeah right!! How can the black population in California be 6% yet at all of the UCs there is 3% or less? Are you telling me it's because black people have some inherent quality about them that makes them not part of the best and the brightest? The truth is that the UC is part of a racist, classist, sexist, homophobic society that is perpetuating the situation rather than improving it. —JessicaRockwell
    • Are you saying that the UC system turns away qualified black people just because they are black? —hankim
      • Or it's simply that simplified? I thought there were quite a lot of socioeconomic factors involved, although I'm not a sociologist. Also, I think there's quite a mixed message up. Different people seem to be protesting different things about the UC here. Besides, there's data out there. Why is there a supposed correlation in % of student attendees? The data is available at There were some ~4350 self-identified African American applicants to the UC system in 2009, and some ~2370 admitted. Out of 40,0007 admits for Fall 2009, UC wide. (data here. Guess what? That's...... 5.85%. Probably a coincidence, but I don't see what this really has to do with educational funding cuts. -ES
    • I would be extremely hesitant to claim that unequal outcomes in admission are proof that the UC system is excluding students because they're black. —rfrazier

2010-03-05 03:52:45   I'm in total support of the protests, one should know that even as an alumni of the UC system, not even going to UCD anymore, I still try very hard to participate, and to support these events. I thought this was going to be a "peaceful" protest. There are some things I'm not liking about this protest, the way things have played out. Choices made on behalf of the students, as well as law enforcement. This goes back to the townhall meeting, had I stood up and said what I felt like saying, I'd have people attacking me for my views being that we need to figure out alternative ways of protesting, and getting our voices heard that will not give birth to violence and mayhem.

Pulling off fire alarms, which I have seen so many posts from people today saying that it interrupted their classes and their studies... that wasn't a very good thing to do. Hell, blocking off the freeway isn't much of a hassle. I can take Russell boulevard if I have to. I think there are alternative measures that can be done to spread the message in a better light, than to block off a freeway entrance that isn't a major crossing which is pretty much cycling the message back to Davis, not our Capitol building, policy maker's offices, what overrules our budget and our education as a whole.

It's becoming "us vs. them" again. And this is what I hated in last series of protests. US being "those who chose to take part in the protests, to fight for the rights of the students." THEM being "those who chose not to fight for students' rights, those who just went to class, those who don't give a damn about our education."

This dynamic that drove me crazy because even though I had priorities to take care of like work, and class. Work in which if I did not go to, I'd be living on the street, people would accuse me of not caring about the protests, not caring about the issue, not being supportive, etc etc etc.... This to me, is hurtful. —ThUn

  • Speaking as one who's always just gone to class, I think it's highly arrogant of you to assume that I don't give a damn about my education. I've never been a fan of the mob mentality and the kind of idiocy that occurs at these things. If you want to make a difference, do it in a way that benefits higher education rather than detracting from it. Go to the capitol and protest there. Make your movement look GOOD, rather than BAD. Bring ideas instead of spray paint. Offer solutions instead of pulling fire alarms. Try to help the school save money, instead of costing it hundreds of thousands of dollars. I give a damn about the quality of education in the UC system, which is why I think these yahoos need to STOP what they're doing, since they're only hurting it. —TomGarberson (Please see my lengthier criticism for a more complete explanation of my throughts)
    • Two replies: 1) People reasonably disagree about where the blame should be laid. 2) Even if the blame is ultimately on the Capitol, people might reasonably think that our local administrators should be doing more to stand up for them. I agree, however, that the people who went to class (and the professors who held class) should not be condemned. We all fight this in our own ways. —CovertProfessor

2010-03-05 08:19:12   What surprises me is that people are surprised by the I-80 thing. It makes a ton of sense - what else would give more publicity? I imagined it more like a game of chicken: the protestors hoped they'd be stopped in time, but had to carry on the bluff and the police couldn't chance it not being a bluff. There is no surer way of getting on national news and having people in every state hear of you than being the dummies who almost got on a major highway. —EdWins

2010-03-05 08:31:35   "There's no such thing as bad publicity," huh? It worked for Sarah Palin... oh, wait. —TomGarberson

  • Don't celebrate too soon. *shudder* —cp

2010-03-05 09:27:10   I agree with the sentiment: clearly taking out our state's budget shortfalls on individual students trying to obtain higher education is problematic, however destructive protests seem counterproductive to me.

Picketing, sit ins, etc., sure, but blocking freeways and vandalizing buildings all while wearing masks doesn't help your cause. It gets you attention, sure, but it makes people think "screw these dumb kids, they're just criminals anyway". Wearing a mask sends the wrong message. The point of a protest is to visibly take a stand for something you believe in. Making yourself anonymous is an indication that you are embarrassed by or ashamed of the actions you're taking. It also sends the wrong message to the public as it makes them mentally associate you with criminality, especially when you wear what frankly looks like the kind of mask a stereotypical criminal would wear.

Getting attention is only half the battle. You need to get attention and get people on your side. —rfrazier

2010-03-05 16:09:30   Wow, a lot of you Amerikans REALLY DON'T seem to understand what a STRIKE is about. —PxlAted

  • First, from what I've seen and read about it, it wasn't a strike. Second, why do you keep spelling it "Amerikans"? And third, perhaps you could elucidate what this "strike" was really about? Because I still haven't seen any hint of a connection between the destructive side of the activities and the purported goals. —TomGarberson (Please see my lengthier criticism for a more complete explanation of my throughts)
  • Ah Pxl, always happy to alienate anyone who might possibly agree with you before you even start to explain your position (assuming you have one). —rfrazier

* Tom: March 4th was a strike. Read about strikes in Mexico or France or spain or even CANADA for comparisons to how strikes happen elsewhere. Re: rfrazier, Just saying it's funny to hear people whining about a strike being inconvenient. —PxlAted

2010-03-05 18:13:05   I was at the SF Civic Center protest that day, and I was amused by the rather composition of the protesters. For example, one group of people had put up signs saying that Obama and the Dems were not the answer to the problems while there were a number of people chanting "Yes We Can" in various languages, a phrase most typically associated with Obama. I was also wearing a "Save Darfur" shirt which got a few compliments despite the fact that this was supposed to be a day about education. I really think that the idea of solidarity amongst different groups has diluted their messages so much that in the protests of modern day, the messages don't really spread. —PaulAmnuaypayoat

  • Well, I think that what happens is that when people hear that there is a protest on, everyone who has a cause shows up. I remember during the "no war on Iraq" days, the "kill all the jews yay palestine" folks kept showing up trying to make common cause. I guess it's hard to say "no, I'm sorry you can't stand in our mob, this mob is for lowering tuition, not protesting Obama. I like the "less jails more schools" guys. We have waaaay too many people in jail in this state. We need to break the prison guard union and repeal 3 strikes. —rfrazier
    • I remember years ago when the Davis College Republicans would show up to counter protest various rallies, many people were pretty vocal about their desire for them to leave. I think the idea of "If you are not against us, then you are for us" is causing a lot of people on the fence to turn their favor away from the protest movement because they may be turned off by some of the fringe groups leeching off of the main rally. I am sure the guys at the SF rally with large pictures of Obama with a Hitler mustache must have offended some potential education rally supporters. - Paul Amnuaypayoat
    • This whole thing supports my take in the issue: many of the people out protesting aren't there because of the issues; they just like the mayhem. It's not a protest, it's a mob. Or at least the seed for one, which never quite got its roots down. —TomGarberson
  • I get the feeling you had never been to a large protest before, LibPaul. They never, never have the same agenda, they only hate similar things. —BrentLaabs
    • Ah, hate, nothing brings people closer. —hankim

2010-03-06 02:33:31   Well, I think that making a statement could have been more effective if they had: 1) stuck to a single topic; and 2) been more aware of WHOSE attention they needed, so that they wouldn't punish people who had no power to change their(/our) misery. OF COURSE the students and professors know that fee hikes and the whole budget situation are lame— Go to the people/person in charge of assigning/distributing education budgets! Or at least distribute contact information or information about leaders and policies and whatnot... so that the not-so-angry but slightly annoyed passerby might potentially be more interested in getting involved. $0.02 —Myself

2010-03-09 02:39:06   As the unwitting observer/self-described documenter of the event, I will say that good and bad things happened that day. While the protest had novel goals, it was a bit disjointed for its own good. As I entered while the group left Wellman for the MU, I heard a rather troubling remark that said that some of us were "only" joining to photograph. Yes, I was there to photograph, but I stayed to fight. Not a good start.

I was also somewhat troubled by the relatively disjointed nature of the protest. One-half of the people came to protest the fee hikes while another half cam to protest homophobia, so I was somewhat confused by the main objective of the protest was.

To cap off the "bad things" that happened, I really wish people didn't say things like f- the police. It really does not help the police see us in a better light if we're telling them to f-off. Did they do some somewhat questionable things (there was an assault rifle in a police car)? Yes, but come on, people.

I'll post up the good things later. —HarrisonM

  • They always keep a variety of firearms in their cars, it's not like they decided to bring them specifically for protesters. —hankim
    • I am aware of that, but there was a pretty heavy duty assault rifle just sitting in the center console, in between the front seats. —HarrisonM
      • I always see some mean looking rifles there whenever I take a peek inside a police car, which I do quite frequently because the front part looks so cool with all the equipment. —hankim
        • HK, out of curiosity, do you know about the Black Panther Party? —JessicaRockwell
          • I know a little about them, why? —hankim
            • you might want to check out how the government and police killed the members of the bpp. Bobby Hutton: On April 6, 1968, in West Oakland, Bobby Hutton, 17 years old, is shot dead by Oakland police. In a 90 minute gun battle, an unarmed Bobby Hutton Bobby Hutton is shot ten times dead, after his house is set ablaze and he is forced to run out into a fire of bullets. Just two days earlier, Martin Luther King is assasinated, after he had begun rethinking his own doctrines of non-violence, and started to build ties with radical unions." Fred Hampton: On December 4th, at 4:00 a.m. in the morning, thanks to information from an FBI informant , Chicago police raid the Panthers' Chicago apartment, murdering Fred Hampton while he sleeps in bed. He is shot twice in the head, once in the arm and shoulder; while three other people sleeping in the same bed escape unharmed. Mark Clark, sleeping in the living room chair, is also murdered while asleep. Hampton's wife, carrying child for 8 months, is also shot, but survives. Four panthers sleeping in the apartment are wounded, while one other escapes injury . Fred Hampton was 21 years old when he was executed, Mark was 17 years old. According to the findings of the federal grand jury, Ninety bullets were fired inside the apartment. 1 came from a Panther — Mark — who slept with a shotgun in his hand. All surviving Panther members were arrested for "attempted murder of the police and aggravated assault". Not a single cop spent a moment in jail for the executions. ' —JessicaRockwell
              • Is this an argument that cops should not be allowed to carry firearms? —hankim
                • Yeah, I'm also at a loss as to the point of that whole thing. What does it have to do with anything we've been talking about? —TomGarberson
                • This also ignores that the shooting of Bobby Hutton occurred after he and Eldridge Cleaver ambushed some police officers with the stated intent of "spark[ing] ghetto uprisings across the country" source. This is not to say that the police's actions were justified, and I definitely do not mean he deserved to die, but simply that there is more context that shows that both sides were at fault. As shown in the other example in Jessica's statement, in regards to Fred Hampton, the police are very much capable of overexerting their powers. However, it is negligent to imply that this example has anything to do with Davis. In addition, the police are now almost universally held to be at fault in the Fred Hampton murders, and it is ridiculous to imply that all police today should be judged based on the actions of some misguided people who committed murder over 40 years ago. —JoePomidor
              • Why do police carry assault rifles today? Here's why: The North Hollywood shootout was an armed confrontation between two heavily-armed bank robbers, Larry Phillips, Jr. and Emil Matasareanu, and patrol and SWAT officers of the Los Angeles Police Department in North Hollywood, California on February 28, 1997. It happened when responding patrol officers engaged Phillips, 26 and Matasareanu, 30 leaving a bank which the two men had just robbed. Ten officers and seven civilians sustained injuries before both robbers were killed. Phillips and Matasareanu had robbed several armored vehicles prior to their attempt in North Hollywood and were notorious for their heavy armament, which included automatic rifles. Local patrol officers at the time were typically armed with 9 mm or .38 Special pistols on their person, with some having a 12-gauge shotgun available in their cars. Phillips and Matasareanu carried fully automatic rifles, with ammunition capable of penetrating police body armor, and wore military grade body armor of their own. Since the police handguns could not penetrate the bank robbers' body armor, the patrol officers' efforts were ineffective. SWAT eventually arrived with weapons that could penetrate and several officers also appropriated several AR-15 rifles from a nearby firearms dealer. The incident sparked debate on the appropriate firepower for patrol officers to have available in similar situations in the future. —ARWENNHOLD
              • I thought you might be interested in reading up on it. You might also find it interesting to read about what led to not being able to have concealed weapons in public. Btw, people here are hostile.—JessicaRockwell
              • What does all of this have to do with the protests at Davis? —IDoNotExist
                • Don't you think if people are going to protest, they should be aware of the forces they will go up against and the tactics used? I think it's good information for people know and people here might learn something rather fascinating.
                • There is no evidence that the police in Davis do anything that even remotely resembles what you are talking about. You can probably find some example somewhere in history that illustrates that at some point, someone took some particular action. But that doesn't mean that anyone in the present situation is at all likely to do the same thing. It's just not related! —IDoNotExist
                  • Sean Bell, an unarmed black man, died in 2006 after New York City police officers shot 50 bullets on his wedding day. The police were not charged with manslaughter, and the US Justice Department said police will not face criminal civil rights charges. link and CNN
                  • Oscar Grant, an unarmed black man, was shot in the back by a police officer at a Bart station in 2009. Amnesty International, CNN.
                    • Again. How does this relate to the Davis protests? I'm sure you can continue to post examples of police brutality, excessive force, illegal actions, etc. all day. But none of this relates to the March 4th protests, nor to any protest that has ever taken place in Davis. All it does is divert attention from the issues that the protest was actually protesting! Seems rather counterproductive to me. Is this about university funding, or is it about Jessica? —IDoNotExist
                      • You said that just because things like this have happened in the past (which you're wrong about because they're happening NOW), it doesn't mean in the present situation it is at all likely to happen again. This is tied in with racism, which is what people were protesting about, not just education. This isn't about some people at some points in history. This is an ongoing problem.
                        • In Davis?
                          • Weren't cops called in from other (metropolitan) areas? If you want to know about Davis cops, you can look at the Wiki, especially the section under racial profiling. This isn't something new. Also look at Police Misconduct Stories. Davis Police Department.
                    • Jessica, what does this have to do with the March 4, 2010 Public Education Protest? —TomGarberson
                      • I've answered the question twice.

2010-03-10 12:42:59   Jessica, you seem to be implying that if something happens anywhere, it happens everywhere. Just because something currently happens in some other (metropolitan) area, there is no evidence whatsoever that it can or will happen here. As an example, right now the Japanese allow a limited number of whales and dolphins to be caught and killed for their meat. This has nothing to do with Davis, so it would be absurd for me to then go on to say that we should closely monitor fishermen around here and be aware that they might start engaging in some spontaneous whaling. It's a different situation, and if you are unwilling to provide some context or logic that relates these examples back to Davis, then people are going to automatically discount what you say, since it isn't relevant. —JoePomidor

  • Weren't cops called in from other (metropolitan) areas? If you want to know about Davis cops, you can look at the Wiki, especially the section under racial profiling. This isn't something new.Also look at Police Misconduct Stories. Davis Police Department.
    • It seems like a bit of a stretch to use the racial profiling problems as the basis for an argument that the police are about to open fire on a band of people who they are trying to prevent from walking on to a busy freeway.—JoePomidor

2010-03-10 12:56:06   This is a tale full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. It's an attention grab that will never stop so long as we pay any attention to it. Please don't feed the Jessica. —IDoNotExist

2010-03-10 12:57:38   Yeah, I'm out too. This is obviously something that has moved beyond the realms of logic. —JoePomidor

2010-03-10 16:30:00   I just saw the blues brothers movie for the first time. so great and so true. —PxlAted

2010-03-11 16:38:53   I actually came late to my 9AM class, only to find that they were gone. Luckily I was able to text a friend to find out where they'd relocated. Thanks for pulling the fire alarms...

Looking back at the last time we had a protest/rally to take back our campus, I remembered being absolutely proud that we weren't UCSC or UCB, holding up buildings, ruining campus property, and disrupting classes. We were committing acts of civil disobedience, using the only thing you really need: our voices. March 4 has disrupted this pride, and has made me think that nothing's going to change. After all, no one negotiates with terrorists. —AmyOhe

* Actually people negotiate with "terrorists" all the time, even real terrorists. —PxlAted

2010-03-11 20:18:48   This page is dedicated to the CONTROVERSY, and so now all the pro-March 4 protesters have a chance to understand the reasons why non-protesters DID NOT find certain aspects of the March 4 protests effective. If your ultimate objective is to compel non-protesters to do something (join in the protests, sign a petition, vote for a certain politician, etc..), then you might want to listen in (non-defensively) for constructive feedback. For communication's sake. $0.02 —Myself

  • Couldn't have said it better, Myself, even if I did exist. :-) I do hope that the people who were pulling fire alarms and trying to march onto a major interstate will read this. To be effective, you really need to have one message that you are trying to get across, not 12, and especially not contradictory messages. You need to do things that get people to sympathize with you, not alienate them by making their lives harder, especially when they are not the cause of your problem. And you need to be non-disruptive and non-destructive. Everything else just interferes with the message and turns people off from it. —IDoNotExist

2010-03-14 22:46:25   OK, I watched the video on Aggie TV and I thought the protesters made an ass of themselves to be honest. Before I go any further, I would like to state that their reason for anger and frustration is 110% justified and something needs to be done. But all those protesters managed to do is make total tools of themselves and piss off the rest of the student body. A lot of people were in class and these people forced them out with fire alarms. This protests was anything but peaceful. (Well with exceptions of that dude trying to give that cop a flower...Thought that was kinda cool) These assholes, held up an intersection and buses and tried to hold down a freeway. They terrorized a town trying to FORCE people to do what they want. Do you guys see the hypocrisy here? Also the Aggie reporter was so biased and stupid. She kept saying how brutal the police were and how the protesters were being peaceful and breaking NO laws. I watched the video and counted 8 laws the protesters broke. But there was a few protesters who went on (Right after the reporter made her remarks BTW) to say things along the lines of: "I understand why the police are trying to stop us. We are breaking the law, but we have to do what we have to do and they have to do what they have to do. But the ends justify the means". God bless those protesters who said that. Although I dont agree with their means, at least they are in reality. Then to over exaggerate the injuries at the end was pathetic. You had some bruises. Watch videos of protests from the 60's and compare injuries. Oh and stop wearing Che Guevara t-shirts. The dude was a murderer and a war criminal. If you want to promote peace, wear Ghandi and Martin Luther King. (Two personal heroes of mine)

So here is what was accomplished:

Laws broken Town terrorized Students caused pain and anguish to those who have nothing to do with the problem at hand Problems still stand.

I just wish this wasnt so misguided. I personally wouldve liked to have us all lined up Russell shoulder to shoulder. Gaining support from those who surround us, rather then harassing the citizens of Davis and making their life difficult. The businesses here have been good to us, we should return the favor, not cause them harm. —Dozer