Homepage with forums
Facebook page page

Nonviolent protesters have been occupying Wall Street since September 2011. This is a page to document the Occupy Davis movement, which is being held in solidarity with the Wall Street protesters, as other cities are doing. There are now events in roughly 2,500 cities (See Occupy Davis spread to UC Davis. The number of people participating in Occupy UC Davis exploded as a result of the November 18, 2011 UC Davis Police Response to Occupy UC Davis. Sacramento also has its own group which started its occupation of Caesar Chavez Park on October 6, 2011. Continued support is welcome, encouraged and needed in order to continue.

The physical occupation of Davis began Saturday, October 15 at 10:30 AM during the Farmers' Market when a small group of people pitched tents around the old oak tree on the deck structure of Central Park. As more people joined the movement, the group moved to the far northwest corner of the park. In response to warnings from the police, the group moved back near the original location. In the midst of the most recent political pressure, Occupy Davis is scheduled to move yet again.

Somewhat inexplicably, Occupy Davis has either been a target for local white supremacists, or are being accused of racism (an accusation increasingly common at the national level, due in part to claims of extreme inequity in the racial makeup of the larger protests such as Occupy Wall Street, which is only 1.6% black). People are passing by and yelling "white power." Protesters are also sometimes pelted with coins and told to take showers, possibly due to one of a few negative stereotypes that exist; some critics see the movement as being made up of purely wealthy white youth attempting to freeload, whereas others view the movement as a bunch of poor, "dirty hippies."

At one of its General Assemblies, Occupy Davis voted to ask the City Council to support Assembly Joint Resolution 22, which opposes the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on corporate money in political campaigns. The Council agreed on a 5-0 vote on February 21, 2012 to support the resolution, joining Santa Cruz and Berkeley, among other cities. (See also Take Back Our Democracy).

Shut Down Monsanto peaceful assembly

We will be protesting at the Calgene campus of Monsanto (which is in Davis, CA) March 16th & 17th. We are expecting 500-1,000 people over the two days, many of which are planning to stay overnight Friday the 16th.

We've been working hard on the logistics, but a little extra in monetary donations would help. We are planning on giving them places to sleep, simple food to eat, Porta-Potties, clean water to drink. Let's Shut Down Monsanto! You can help us at

March in March - March 5th protest at CA Capitol

March 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th & 7th Occupy Davis and Occupy UC Davis held a joint action and tent-in in the Quad, near the MU Building. We prepared to receive the 99 Mile Marchers, who were walking from the Bay Area to Sacramento. We put up ~60 tents and people were still asking if there were more tents. The 99 marchers came into the quad about 8:30pm Sunday, shouting "We! Are! the 99%! We! Are! the 99%!". Pretty cool to see. We all hugged them and then fed them. Afterward, people talked until they were ready to sleep. Most of us retired to our tents about 10pm. Three Porta-Potties were provided on the edge of the Quad. A little more than 100 people were present on March 4th Sunday night.

On March 5th, the day of the protest at the CA Capitol, the 99 Mile Marchers and many people from UC Davis Occupy and Davis Occupy went to protest at the capitol as well. We were there all day. There were 1,000s of people there and about 300 people went into the Capitol building, into the rotunda, to have a General Assembly. We voted to raise taxes on the rich. Some people stayed after the dispersal order. 68 people were arresting the rotunda for trespass. I have heard recently this was the second highest arrest number in the history of protests at the CA capitol. The most ever arrested was during the Miner's Strike in the 1800s.

The protest at the capitol was about cuts to public education. One of the chants was "No Cuts! No Fees! Education must be Free!". Some people were protesting for a Millionaire's Tax.

The Tent-In take-down occurred March 6th & 7th, in preparation for a clean space on March 16th & 17th. These are the dates for the next protest action.

Occupy Davis to Hold Weekly Daytime Occupations of Central Park

On February 11 the Occupy Davis General Assembly approved a proposal resume daytime occupation of Central Park on Saturdays from 11 am to 5 pm, starting on February 18. Activities will include tabling, banner-making, a tent-in and connecting with fellow human beings. There is no consensus yet regarding overnight occupation, but it will be discussed at the February 18 General Assembly, which begins at 3 pm.

Occupy Davis Warned to Get Out or Face Citations

On Nov. 30, the Davis Police Department issued an official notice of citations to the protesters. Although similar warnings have been given in the past, the charges have been broadened to make compliance very difficult if not impossible to achieve. Previous warnings had been centered around waste, fire, and environmental concerns. When the occupiers made strong efforts to meet code , the city realized it must apply more pressure to evacuate the protesters.

A general assembly was held that night. Among those attending was Stephen Souza who told occupiers, "the city wants you out of the park." He suggested alternatives such as daily vigils at a nearby church, an idea which most of those in attendance found unacceptable. Souza went on to claim that all five city council members, along with the city manager were against the occupiers' current methods. Souza seemed to believe that he is representing the will of the townspeople. If you disagree with the city council or the police, the occupiers would love for you to contact them and let them know how you feel! Occupy Davis needs support from the larger Davis community if it is to survive much longer.

A work party is planned for December 2nd. The public is encouraged to help the occupiers move their site yet again in order to comply with the city's newest demands. Occupy UC Davis has also asked Davisites to contact one or more of the city council members to show your support of the occupation and explain what it is you think they are trying to accomplish by continuing to occupy the park.

Update: Occupy Davis announced on Dec. 7 that they would cease the 24/7 Occupation of Central Park, exactly two months after meeting to discuss the movement for the first time. It's unknown how much the police warning played into the decision to vacate. They sent out a note today discussing how the movement will proceed:

Our tents and structures are coming down this morning. This does not mean that our movement is ending or that we will stop having actions, rather that our movement will now be proceeding in a new way. At Monday's camp meeting it was decided that our goals can best be served by regrouping and refocusing on more targeted political actions. 24/7 occupation has been a valuable tactic for us so far, and an immensely successful strategy for the wider occupy movement, but now we intend to set aside continuous occupation for the time being, so that we can gather ourselves and strengthen our movement.

  • As of the early evening of Dec. 7, the tents were still up... maybe they meant the morning of the 8th?
    • Today (Dec. 8th) the tents are nearly all gone, revealing much dead grass...

What is Occupy About?

In response to critics of Occupy Wall Street, who remark about the movement's lack of a clear and unified message. Prof. Cornel West replied by saying:

"It’s impossible to translate the issue of the greed of Wall Street into one demand, or two demands. We’re talking about a democratic’re talking about raising political consciousness so it spills over all parts of the country, so people can begin to see what’s going on through a set of different lens, and then you begin to highlight what the more detailed demands would be. Because in the end we’re really talking about what Martin [Luther] King would call a revolution: A transfer of power from oligarchs to everyday people of all colors. And that is a step by step process."

Or, for a detailed discussion of what the protests are about, see this excellent piece, Occupy Wall Street is not difficult to understand. (Try to ignore the insulting bits, which are mainly directed at political pundits who still claim not to "get it").

As the China Daily puts it, "...the message from the protesters is quite clear. They are against corporate greed and influence in American politics, economy and life. These protesters, who call themselves 'The 99 Percent', are angry about the huge amount of wealth collected by the top 1 percent of the population." Have a look through to get an idea of the hardship that a lot of people are experiencing all over the United States right now.

For the first couple of weeks, there was a media blackout that ignored the protests. Then once the media started paying attention, much of what has been broadcast has portrayed them as radical hippies, as you would expect the U.S. corporate media to do when it is threatened. However, international media coverage has been more thorough and, in general, more sympathetic to the protesters' cause.


  • A General Assembly for Occupy UCDavis is planned for Monday 12pm on the quad
  • In solidarity with Occupy Cal’s Call for a Strike and Day of Action, Occupy Davis is hosting a "Day of Education & Action." The action will start on the UC Davis Quad at 2:30 pm on Tuesday, November 15. The following are possible topics:
    • History of Nonviolent Student Movements
    • Political Significance of Student and Other Nonviolent Social Movements
    • Nonviolent action strategies
    • Police Oppression on university campuses
    • Legal Rights of nonviolent protesters
    • Effect of private industry funding on public universities
  • "Bank Transfer Day" - Saturday - November 5th
    • What better way to punish greedy and corrupt banks that have taken tax payer money than to move your money to a not-for-profit credit union or to a small local bank where you can get better service and better deals. Remember that you can move your money at any time. You can open up a new account at a new financial institution and then move your money after the new account has been established. There is nothing wrong with opening up multiple bank accounts at different institutions and trying them out. If one place gives you certain deals you can keep both accounts and keep the benefits of both.
    • Even though banks claim to have repaid their TARP money, banks continue to get loans from the government at very low rates. Essentially, the banks are still taking money from the tax payers and paying virtually no interest to the tax payers in return. Banks are taking tons of virtually interest free cash from the government in the form of loans and they aren't even calling it a rescue or bailout. They call it "loans." Without money from the government these banks should have collapsed due to their own terrible financial decisions such as predatory lending. These corrupt banking corporations don't deserve to be rescued from bankruptcy at a time when average people are unemployed and have financial problems of their own.
  • General Strike in Oakland - Wednesday - November 2nd
  • There was a Public Forum on Austerity on Tuesday, Oct 25th in Central Park at 5:30pm. It included:
    • Talks by Prof. Noha Radwan, Prof. Nathan Brown, and Prof. Joshua Clover
    • A know-your-rights training, followed by free dinner
    • Preparation for the Oct 27th UC Davis Day of Action UC Davis Day of Action], Thursday, Oct 27th - MU Patio - Rally at Noon
  • A number of General Assemblies have been held, including one on October 7 to discuss the goals of the occupation, and help get things organized, one on October 12, one on October 19, and one on October 22. Round-the-clock occupation of Central Park began Saturday, October 15 at 10:30 AM (during the Farmers' Market. From the Facebook page:

Over 100 participants at the Wednesday General Assembly of Occupy Davis voted unanimously in favor of a round-the-clock occupation of Central Park, to begin with the movement's next General Assembly scheduled Saturday, October 15, at 10:30 am in central park. For the indefinite duration of this occupation protesters will erect tents temporarily during the day to symbolize a reclamation and occupation of this space, and will hold a fire watch vigil in shifts throughout the night. Planned activities include presentations of music and art, teach-ins, non-violence trainings, craft-ins, knit-ins and marches.

Possible Concrete Actions in Support of the Occupy Movement

  • Move your money to a credit union.
  • 11 (actually 14) simple ways to support the occupy movement without sleeping in a park.
  • Shop green and locally; see Green and Local Gift Ideas
  • Support Move to Amend, an organization dedicated to overturning the ruling that gave corporations the Supreme Court ruling status of persons.
    • This is horribly fallacious. Citizens United v. FEC did not grant corporations personhood. Corporate personhood has existed as a legal fiction since at least the 1830s. The underlying concept, that a corporation functionally acted as a person in creating contracts and undergoing obligations, was codified by 1819, if not before (Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819)). In the context of political speech, corporate protection dates at least to NAACP v. Button, 371 U. S. 415 (1963). Moreover, the First Amendment doesn't just apply to persons. Rather, it states that "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech." Not "an individual's freedom of speech." Not "a person's freedom of speech." Probably more relevant is the decision in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), where the Supreme Court held that spending money on political elections constitutes speech. That issue is probably what they really want to target. The fact that this Move to Amend organization claims in the very first sentence of the statement on its webpage that Citizens United ruled that corporations are persons shows that they either haven't read the damn case or they're being deliberately deceptive. I'm in favor of reform in the area of campaign finance. But I don't support, and you shouldn't support, a group that proves its ignorance of the issue it's addressing in its opening statement. —TomGarberson

From a Davis occupy activist on why Citizens United was seen by so many to be so egregious.

What is horribly fallacious is this: that an inanimate object or name could be granted the rights of a human being. Asserting this necessarily dilutes and destroys the actual rights of human beings over time. Indeed, corporate “personhood” did not originate with the Supreme Court ruling of Citizens United vs FEC. However, Justice Kennedy did mention and strengthen that link. For example, in the Opinion of Court, Justice Kennedy said, "The Court has thus rejected the argument that political speech of corporations or other associations should be treated differently under the First Amendment simply because such associations are not “natural persons.”  Id., at 776; see id., at 780, n. 16. Cf. id., at 828 (Rehnquist, J., dissenting)."

The legal fiction of "fictitious person” or “juridical person” did not even originate in 1830. The first instance of Persona Ficta, comes from an obscure canon law ruling circa 1251 C.E. in Rome. Persona Ficta, literally “false person". The original purpose was to allow the Brothers of Francis and the Poor Sisters of Claire to remain propertyless while still domiciled in an unowned enclosure. That awkward solution yielded separate monasteries that “owned” the Brothers and Sisters. This is essentially the origin of feudalism in the 13th century. Concomitant slavery in a system of Lords and serfs also resulted, due to the use of Persona Ficta to form indemnified principalities. 

The legal practice of Persona Ficta quickly spread to other monasteries throughout Europe in the 13th and 14th centuries, due to it's unique ability to allow priests to claim poverty while enjoying good food, clothing, and lodgings. Obligation to the local populate ceased, since the priests were indemnified and the monastery could not be excommunicated for unjust behavior; the monastery had no soul. Universities incorporated as well. Subsequently in the 16th and 17th centuries Principalities and later Kingdoms incorporated, enjoying legal indemnity from their subjects. Soon after, banks and ship charters incorporated, for the same reasons. The Dutch East India Company is a familiar 17th century example. 

It is interesting to note that the United States made royal titles specifically illegal in the constitution. Thomas Jefferson was highly suspicious of the corrosive influence of corporations and said “I hope we shall crush in it’s birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.” Corporate charters were initially so controversial that each formation would be debated in the House of Representatives. De-chartering corporations often occurred. Essentially, the newly formed United States was a sudden island of human rights, although only for some. But it was an island in a sea of corporate rights, injustice, and absolute feudalism throughout the world. Notably the issue of slavery and plantation, with it’s bent toward feudalism, remained a stain that would inexorably spread. Even as slavery was made illegal in the late 19th century, the grip of incorporated power reclaimed it’s hold on all the citizens of the United States. Freedom of the people from feudal incorporated powers was the original intent of the framers of the constitution. -Josh Jones 


Getting the word out on a 5th Street light pole! The encampment initially formed right beside this old oak tree. A large community tent houses several smaller tents. A large stockpile of donated goods sits on a table directly opposite the entrance. Other tents circle the main area.

Media Coverage of Occupy Davis


A new group has formed to protest the Occupy Davis movement. They call themselves Occupy Occupy Davis. Their official Facebook page claims they are "sick and tired of looking at a bunch of dirty hippies in central park..." The group uses the Republican Party elephant as their logo. They are scheduled to protest the original protesters on Nov. 23 from 5 PM to 6 PM. Judging from the tone of their Facebook page, they are likely to yell out brainless rightwing quips such as "go get a job" or "if you don't like it, move." This will be heartless and paradoxical, of course, because many of the original protesters would love to get a job and/or move.

Relevant Links

Other Area Protests

 This page is in need of a Photo.To add an image to this page, click "Edit" then click the images button.



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

2011-10-05 14:53:32   With a little more work (e.g., nailing down a date/time would be good — Davis Patch suggests 6 or 7 pm in Central Park on Friday) this could be the Featured Page... —CovertProfessor

2011-10-05 16:36:37   This is indeed the time to sit up and get abreast of this movement. Alternative media is essential. Just one point now, I was trying to find a comment I read about trying to co-opt the movenent toward a Democratic Party corporate direction. —BruceHansen

2011-10-05 18:22:44   Why Occupy Davis? What did Davis do? —MikeyCrews

  • Perhaps nothing relevant to what the protesters are protesting about (though I may be overlooking something). It is a national movement, in solidarity with the Occupy Wall Street protests (rather than, say, traveling to NYC). See links above for more details. —CovertProfessor

2011-10-05 18:48:22   MikeyCrews - It is not about "Occupying Davis" - nothing against Davis, love this place. If you read more about the movement it will start to make sense. It is in solidarity with those occupying wall street for the above stated reasons. That is why I have suggested we camp out in the car park between all the big banks - Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Union Bank and hold them responsible for this mess we are in. It's happening in 420 cities now according to Lets use this momentum to create positive change!!! P.S. Thanks for the edits. I typed it up nice the first time but then the webpage expired and I lost everything and got frustrated. Persistence and a bit of community helps :) —ConsciousConsumer

This is a great idea. —Angel.York

2011-10-05 19:22:46   Do you think we'd be more powerful if we joined the Occupy Sacramento efforts? I know and love Davis, but I feel that our numbers would be more noticeable in Sacramento than in Davis. —ChristyMarsden

2011-10-05 19:25:46   [Also - according to the OccupySacramento facebook page, the first event is October 6 at 11am, Ceser Chavez park. They're going to do another one October 15th] —ChristyMarsden

2011-10-05 19:35:25   I think it has the potential to be sustained for much longer if we have people who can take shifts, especially with the buzz that can be created around campus and downtown. By all means get active in both. I want every university to be buzzing with discusssion right now. Democrats and Republicans are failing us and the back and forth, corporate endorsed, pendulum that is "democracy" in this country needs a dose of active participation. —ConsciousConsumer

2011-10-05 20:44:36   Hi ChristyMarsden, Occupy Sacramento isn't only on those two days — it's actually from the 6th at 9 am until the 15th at 11:30 pm. People are physically occupying the park for the duration of that time. It would be cool to go for a couple nights there and also participate in occupying Central Park here in Davis. We'll need a lot of volunteers and supplies, so please come to the First Meeting of General Assembly on October 7th at 6pm in Central Park to talk about our goals, what we need, to assign roles (i.e. press secretary), and to discuss the general plan of our occupation of the park (i.e. length of stay, etc.). Yay Democracy! :) —NTNMorgan

2011-10-05 21:10:04   hmm - aren't the corporations you would be protesting the very same ones that provide the computer and connectivity and transportation you would use to rail against them? I see no real actions to fight corporatocracy other than to go protest (not even obvious things like "don't buy xxx")

  • Then you are clearly making your judgments before you even read the page, because they clearly are trying to encourage people to move their money from large banks to credit unions and smaller banks. They will also likely support buy nothing day which encourages people to ignore the media holiday black friday. To address your first logically flawed point, they are not protesting technology, they are protesting the growing wealth gap. Having only a few options to connect to the internet because of corporate monopolies only illustrates the need for protest like these. And many people here bike around, and there aren't many bike companies in the top 1%, mostly oil, financial and chemical. ~~~

Why not do something fruitful like volunteer to help someone in need or clean up the environment. FWIW, someone will always be in the top 1 percent even if it isn't the current "crowd" —RichardL

  • justifying your apathy by saying that we still consume corporate products is like denouncing campaigners against world hunger for continuing to eat. - CC
  • Saying there will always be one percent is a truism, but that says nothing about the proportion of the nations wealth the one percent owns which is the issue you are conveniently ignoring. ~~~~

2011-10-05 21:21:47   I don't want to flood the wiki with links, but this is noteworthy

2011-10-05 21:21:51 Beautiful poem on occupying Davis Love can be a great motivation for occupation —NTNMorgan

2011-10-05 22:04:41   RichardL - You seem to be missing the point... I suggest looking more in depth at some of the links provided. They explain it in a lot more detail. —ConsciousConsumer

To CC: I did look at the links, that's why I wrote "I see no real actions..." they weren't in the links, or in the FAQs which is obviously where they ought to be. —RichardL

I don't see this movement as anti-corporate in the sense that you seem to mean it, i.e., I don't think people are looking to have the corporations dismantled. Rather, they are angry about the influence of corporations in the political process, and the resulting tax policies and other policies that favor corporations over people. They also think that the corporations responsible for the economic crash should be brought to justice. —CovertProfessor

It was anti-big business sentiments like this that kept the unemployment rate high under FDR's failed New Deal policies. —thellama

  • So you are comparing an era with little globalization to the era of globalization and you find that productive? Corporations then and now are not even comparable. Trying to do that is a red herring to the real debate at hand, a contrived escape. ~~~~

2011-10-06 00:03:03   I just got an email from Brave New Films (They were responsible for Outfoxed, Iraq For Sale, Rethink Afghanistan, Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Prices as well as many other campaigns) Pretty cool

2011-10-06 01:32:17   I suspect that "camping out" in the parking lots of downtown Davis, or even on campus, will do little but get in everyone's way and annoy people that might otherwise support the cause. Furthermore, employees of local branches of big banks have no clout whatsoever—if you want those in charge to take notice, take it to corporate headquarters.

In fact there's really nothing you can do in Davis that will accomplish much in this respect. If you really want to get things done, take it to Sacramento—march on the capitol! Yes, revolution takes work. You can't change the system by hanging out on the quad and chanting clever slogans. —BarnabasTruman

  • "You can't change the system by hanging out on the quad and chanting clever slogans." - We shall see after this pepper spray incident. The movement is growing and I believe Katehi will resign - CC

2011-10-06 09:33:41   I totally understand the desire to focus on Sacramento or other big cities where occupy movements can have an impact—but I wouldn't underestimate the value of an Occupy Davis. Increasing the number of cities (big and small) that have movements or hold meetings will make it harder to argue that Occupy is just a bunch of radical hippies. :)

It will also reach people who probably wouldn't otherwise participate. —bethjoyce

2011-10-06 10:40:35   I'm rusty on the legality of saying something from freeway bridges. —BruceHansen

2011-10-06 11:27:36   So does this movement really think that the rich are getting rich at the poor's expense? Isn't the American dream of many immigrants to be able to come here and achieve anything they want, even wealth? The successful aren't keeping the poor from becoming wealthy too are they? Why hate on those who have achieved success and gained wealth because of it? —thellama

2011-10-06 12:28:38   I think most people don't mind if the rich get richer while the poor get modestly richer, but what's happened in the past decade is the rich getting much richer while everyone else has been losing wealth. Presumably this is because the rich are exercising excess influence in Washington to cement only their own position in society while being subsidized by the whole of society. I haven't personally read much about the movement but I think this is the general gist. —AndrewPotter

I recommend scrolling through these "15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America". —CovertProfessor

2011-10-06 18:22:52   Tomorrow night, Oct 7, is Kol Nidrei, the beginning of Yom Kippur, the holiest 26 hours of the Jewish year. Most of us Davis Jews will either be in synagogue or at home focused on prayer and repentance (with fasting). So, sorry, but we will be unable to participate in tomorrow night's protest. —Chamoudah

2011-10-06 19:54:10   Tomorrow night, 6pm at the farmers market is just the general assembly where we will be discussing what this is all about, and what might be needed to sustain the movement in terms of supplies, finances, food, etc. So even if you miss it still come to the day of action which is planned for the 27th if I'm not mistaken.

I would like to say that this should be a discussion for everyone (left, right, in between, any colour, any gender, any class, any age, any background etc) to get involved and participate in the political process and discuss what is happening and what we would like to Not 10 or 20 years from now, after we have paid off their debts, and continue to pay corporate subsidies, and military contractors with our tax dollars. No more taxation without representation. This is obviously just one perspective, but at least I recognize that there are multiple perspectives and am open enough to hear everyones ideas and suggestions for a bright future. I think we now know that neo-liberal economics does not work and continues to not work... In my opinion... feel free to challenge that with logic, evidence and research, because that is what I am basing it off of.

The goal of development should be agency - the creation and promotion of people's choices and capabilities. Not a competition to see who can have the greatest GDP or who can own the most possessions. Look outside the bubble that is the United States and see what kind of effect we have on those in the global community (because believe it or not, we live in a globalised world where our actions have a domino effect) through the WTO, IMF, World Bank, countless large corporations and our influence on the UN security council.

Finally, I don't want anyone to get defensive and feel like I'm coming to take their wealth so as a final thought, I'll just post this video of Tim Wise talking about Guilt and Responsibility, because it can apply to a lot of stuff in life...

2011-10-07 16:12:50   "The Most Important Thing In The World Right Now" - Naomi Klein's speech at Occupy Wall St... Intense, made me want to cry. -

2011-10-08 00:01:06   I joined the thing a bit late, but I ended up leaving because I couldn't keep a straight face. The person who was speaking when I got there was barely audible, and the few dozen people who attended formed a standing circle around him while totally ignoring the somewhat interested bystanders who walked by, most of whom would have had no idea what was going on due to the general lack of signs outside the circle. And for some reason (maybe to avoid violating a noise ordinance), the attendees would all just wiggle their arms in the air instead of clapping whenever they heard a good point. I understand that this was an organizational discussion more than an official protest, but still, there was such a lack of rebellious rallying energy that the whole thing seemed useless even though I agreed with the intent. Sorry; I wish I could be more positive about the meeting. —ScottMeehleib

2011-10-08 06:41:28   Scott - It's not ready for prime time public consumption yet. What you saw was the first, organizational meeting of the group intended for members of the group itself, not a demonstration meant for public consumption. The people assembled there were not giving speeches or getting anyone riled up, or trying to get the public/passersby involved, but were discussing the boring but essential logistics and organization of the movement, and gaining the consensus of everyone there as to how things would be conducted. In fact, because matters were being voted on, and rules of order and procedure were in place, stopping everything to educate members of the public would have slowed things down and prevented important decisions from being made. Things like "logistics" and park permits aren't super-exciting, I totally agree, but neither is the foundation of a good house. The good stuff comes later. Because this is a new kind of protest, not your typical stand and shout, it takes more time to collectively establish the new norms that people should follow and get everyone on the same page. —EdwardNiemand

  • OK, Edward. Thanks for your explanation. I'll try to be more optimistic about this way of doing things. -SM

2011-10-09 09:26:05   Corporate greed sounds like big stuff for Davis. Now occupying Ally properties, I can get behind that. —shraken

  • To be fair, it actually is a big deal for Davis. Considering these international companies that many ironically love with nationalistic pride refuse to pay their taxes which directly causes the problems with our budget. It causes cuts to our schools, then these very same companies come to the universities and pretend to be white knights riding in, but force the university into one sided contracts that allow them to reap the benefits of any research derived from their financial contributions. If you want an example look at UC Davis's arrangement with Chevron. ~~~

Are there plans for a boycott? If so please document. —SueHjerpe

  • A boycott of what? If you're thinking of banks, there are many fine credit unions — which are consumer financial cooperatives — that have offices in Davis. Many of us are urging our friends and co-workers to close their accounts at national banks and move your money! —DougWalter
    • I asked because of the posting on Davis Wiki pages for local businesses of the banks that they use. There was no explanation of why that was relevant, but the comment referred to Occupy Davis. —SueHjerpe
      • I would urge everyone to think about the ramifications of every purchase you make, always - your dollar is your vote. But yes, move your money to a credit union asap. — CC
      • It looked as though the unidentified person posting to 3 local restaurant pages wanted people to boycott those businesses because of the banks that they used. I don't think that is a good idea. Perhaps with further information I would understand. —SueHjerpe

2011-10-11 16:19:01   I am not a fan of the current "Occupy Davis" poster for tomorrow's General Assembly, shown on the fb page. While I understand the symbolism of the raised fist, I think it will turn away those who might otherwise be sympathetic. —CovertProfessor

2011-10-11 18:00:15   I agree with CovertProfessor I thought the penny farthing logo was pretty clever and should be made into t-shirts for fundrasing. This is a great article if you get a chance -

  • Yes — here's Jon Stewart on a similar note. —cp
  • I'm one of those people made uncomfortable with the clenched fist. The issue of money and politics is so important to me that I try to suppress that reaction for the time being. —SueHjerpe
    • Glad to see that there is a globe instead of a fist for the poster for the third GA. :-) "Occupy Together — Change the World" is a good message. —cp

2011-10-11 21:21:55   is occupy Davis interesting in learning information about the water rate hikes? —StevenDaubert

2011-10-12 08:19:04   If the other occupation movements are any indication, Occupy Davis will hear anything important you feel the need to share. —EdwardNiemand

2011-10-13 12:11:07   The participants on Octobr 12 appeared to be hard core. I went by the tree with the platform around it. They had to contend with the live music in the park. I suppose to make sure everyone could hear what was said they got into a kind of call and response where when someone said something a bunch of people repeated it. I didn't have the fortitude to stay long. —BruceHansen

2011-10-14 01:02:50   That's how they're doing it in New York because the NYPD said they can't use bullhorns. I wonder if the Davis folks are doing it to be cool or because the Davis PD actually told them the same thing. —AndrewPotter

2011-10-13 20:38:54   why don't you leftist liberals investigate the liberal democrats in congress and the current president of this country and you will find they are the people that are responsible for the problems this country is having economically...Clinton's attorney general janet reno threated the banks if they did not loan money to people who were not good risks...people who were sure to default on such a loan.....obama puts people in high positions in government that are from the corporate world,doing the very thing that you want to protest againts....General Electric for example....Then obama funds a big "green" company that goes bankrupt after taking huge sums of taxpayer money...obama is the cause of most of our problems...investigate him. —jerrydavis

•Wow, why so angry? I don't see anything particularly "leftist" in this, I see more "populist". Why are so many people so fast to denounce this movement and make it partisan?-dm

•The points mentioned are worthy of consideration. The "leftist liberals" doesn't jive with the slogan "We are the 99%" however. It can be noted that this movement is different than the tea party. —BruceHansen

  • First of all calling anyone in the US government leftist is laughable (besides maybe a handful of congressmen). If you are under the delusion that Obama is a leftist you are detached from reality and need to turn off fox news. Are you really going to ignore the wars in the middle east, deregulation and tax cuts for the rich as potential problems for the economic crisis? Seriously? ~~~~

2011-10-14 02:11:11   Agreed. Some ego's out there are getting hurt. People who don't understand it seem to be trying really hard to put it in a box. Just be part of the discussion. Be open to new ideas, there's no right or wrong, just different perspectives. Some of the democrats may be trying to take this movement under their wing. That doesn't really mean diddly. Just do more research, read into more of the links above. Look outside of the US for some objective media, the media in this country is a part of the 1%. —ConsciousConsumer Yo ConsiousConsumer talk to whatever group was making pre protest plans and ask them if they want more info about the water rates!

  • HeyDaubert I only just saw your post. Get on the forum discussion at and they would be willing to discuss it with you. Info always helps. - CC

2011-10-14 10:04:39   I just listened to Forum on KQED 89.3. It covered banking and consumer choices in service and providers. listen here SueHjerpe

2011-10-14 17:33:47   Could there be another way to do this, petitions? Living in the park 24 hours a day in the beginning of fall makes me think the 1% again gets the last laugh, or do something just different to make so many wrongs a right. —Theangrydiner

  • I think the biggest success so far is getting the media to cover the movement and eventually its issues. I don't think petitions are visual enough. —SueHjerpe

2011-10-15 16:41:32   So I'm a little unclear on the goals of the Davis and national movements, other than to generally protest the financial system. Can someone enlighten me? —IDoNotExist

  • There is a lot of info right on this page, on the top of the page, in the above comments, and in the links. One place to start is the video of Keith Olbermann reading the Statement Released By The Wall Street Protesters, linked to above. —CovertProfessor
  • Thanks, CP. But what I mean is, beyond protesting things that are wrong (which the statement in the video does, and what the protests are doing (from what I've heard), what solutions are being proposed? (i.e. Beyond saying "We're really mad about these things!", it would help to hear "...and here is how we propose to change things so that the things we're mad about don't happen any more!" —IDoNotExist
    • Is it really that hard to figure out? Fix the election laws so that politicians don't end up in corporations' back pockets. Stop the tax breaks to corporations. Stop letting corporations get away with wreaking havoc on the environment. Restore balance to the tax laws so that multi-millionaires pay a reasonable tax rate and so that most of the nation's money isn't ending up in the pockets of the 1%. Prosecute the banks accused of wrongfully foreclosing on homeowners. Pass a real stimulus package that builds infrastructure and invests in research and development while creating jobs. Reinvest in education so that students don't graduate with insane amounts of debt. I'm surely leaving things out, but the bottom line is: be a government for all the people, not a government for the few and not a government for the corporations. —CovertProfessor
    • One thing I *like* about this movement is that it seems like it recognizes that solving the disparity between the rich and the poor is a complex issue and isn't staking out some unreasonable demands on how to get to a solution. What they're doing is raising awareness of the problem, hopefully creating pressure on politicians to do something productive. —AndrewPotter
      • Covert: I think there are lots of things that could be done, some of which you stated. But what I'm asking isn't what can be done, or whether I'm aware of any possible solutions. I've been aware of the problems and potential solutions for a very long time. What I'm asking is whether the movement has adopted any of those solutions, or other possible ones, as goals that they will actively promote. Protesting raises awareness. But demanding specific solutions results in change. —IDoNotExist
        • These are all solutions that I have heard many protesters propose, and they seem to follow directly from the things that the protesters are protesting. —CovertProfessor

2011-10-15 19:46:05   Hope you guys are more respectful of local business than the wall street protesters are being. Not sure what occupying in Davis will do specifically but peaceful assembly is an important right so kudos on exercising it. —OliviaY

  • First the businesses around wall street aren't 'local' in the since of small. Many are corporate chains. Second, how do you know that street protesters are not being respectful in NYC? Have you been there and spoke with people or are you getting your information from charged news stories? You realize that news in our country is more entertainment then fact right? You realize they try to create controversy because that is more interesting then plain facts? ~~~~

2011-10-15 20:45:50   One thing I would like to see happen is for us to get rid of the tipping system in the United States and force corporations to pay real living wages and stop forcing customers to pay the difference. It has gotten worse over time - I'm seeing more and more people working for tips alone and I shouldn't feel the guilt and obligation to help them out like I do. The corporation should be paying those wages. Just look at the wiki of tipping around the world to get a sense of how stupid it is here in the States... I just wish our government (and many citizens) would stop being so arrogant and learn from the successes and failures of other countries around the world. I honestly think a parliamentary system would do better than what we have. Our current system has allowed the 2 major parties to consolidate their power, because people are afraid to vote for a 3rd party for fear of allowing the republicans to win (e.g. Ralph Nader "stole" votes from Al Gore in 2000). Just look at this to see how far apart our politicians are compared to the rest of the world

  • No thanks. —oy
    • You're against corporations paying living wages? Can you make some possible suggestions on how to improve the system then? This movement is all about discussion. I've lived in Australia on exchange and while working casual hours at a coffee shop, I received $21 an hour, X 1.3 on Saturdays and X 1.5 on Sundays. That is the norm over there, and the only place where people tip are fancy cocktail bars or something. Voting is mandatory, which you could argue is a good and a bad thing. But at least more than 56.8% of the voting age population contributes to decisions in who runs the show. I'm not suggesting that we just get rid of tips overnight, but it is just another thing in this country that has come into being without people questioning "hey, why do we do things this way". - CC
      • That's two separate issues. 1 - tipping and wages. There's seven states, including California, that require servers to be paid at least minimum wage, regardless of tip. 2 - Minimum vs living wages. Merging them together makes it a much harder sell. -ES
        • I didn't say anything about minimum wage (but on that note, what percentage of the U.S. population receives minimum wage?) and $21 isn't the minimum in Australia (I think it is around $18 for a casual adult). Businesses just don't always offer the lowest wages possible like they do here. I'm not trying to "sell" anything, just elicit some discussion and possible suggestions. Any ideas ES? - CC
          • That was my point, that you didn't :P You said "tipping system in the United States and force corporations to pay real living wages and stop forcing customers to pay the difference" I believe my idea was that that's two separate issues. 1 - tipping and wages. There's seven states, including California, that require servers to be paid at least minimum wage, regardless of tip. It's the other states that allow people to be paid below minimum wage, as long as they get enough tips to make up the difference. Before focusing on 2 - minimum vs living wages, address the first issue in the other states? Get everyone paid at least minimum wage? Seems like good target goal if you feel strongly on the tipping issue. -ES
          • Also, there's "3.6 million workers with wages at or below the minimum [making up] 4.9 percent of all hourly-paid workers." according to 'Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2009'. U.S. Department of Labor. Accessed September 8, 2010.
            • Ok, I see what you're saying. Good point. What do you think the minimum wage should be? - CC
              • I don't know, and don't feel qualified to throw numbers into the air. I know that the current federal minimum wage is $7.25, and that California's minimum wage is $8.00. In regards to your interest in tipping and wages, perhaps the current seven states with laws about tipping/minimum wage should push for expansion, either a federal law or having the other states enact similar, whatever. Getting everyone paid the federal minimum seems to me to be the first step in addressing this issue, before trying to figure out what the minimum "should" be. -ES
                • You don't need to be qualified to throw numbers in the air, it's an opinion. I'm gonna go ahead and say the federal minimum should be raised to $10 and even then it should be structured so that if you've been working at a place for a certain amount of time you should be guaranteed some form of job security or benefits as an incentive and reward. There's no harm in thinking beyond the first step, in fact I think more people could benefit from being concerned with future generations and future steps. - CC
      • You can't compare one single aspect of how another nation operates to ours and go "Hey must be better!" Australians also pay more in taxes AND have a higher cost for many goods than we pay here. It is an entirely different system. You can prefer that one and if you do, nothing stopping you from staying there. It would be a boon to them since, according to a select group of Aussie's I know, the young are leaving in droves because the government there is SO oppressive. On a totally unrelated to living wage tangent, Australia also has started to regulate what cup size women can have who work in the porn industry. And mandatory voting? I love that people who are too lazy to care don't have a say in how I live my life. I don't imagine Snooki votes and a country where she does? Again I say: No Thanks.
        • So would you like me to compare every aspect then? Still no suggestions hey... - CC
          • Okay, I'm a permanent resident of Australia and I have no idea what you are talking about when you say that the government is oppressive and the young are leaving in droves. This sounds like hyperbole to me. Although the country is minimalist in terms of social safety nets, the government there is much more effective than that in the U.S. in terms of social welfare benefits and I have not seen the "oppression" to which you allude. Regulation by government can be a very healthy aspect for society if it regulates corporations in favor of people (which it often does). I am here in the US because I want to make positive changes, despite the fact that it is much easier to live in Australia (because the higher taxes give more benefits to people who need it and the higher wages more than account for the expense of goods, which is one reason that Australia is less stratified than the U.S.). I don't know anything about porn in Australia so I cannot comment on that, but mandatory voting can actually be very positive. At least people can say they choose their government representatives, where as in the U.S. roughly half of the citizens choose their government. It is not safe to assume that people generally do not know the representative/party for whom they vote. Of course there are those who make ignorant decisions, but mandatory voting gets more people involved in politics and allows them to utilize their political voices. There are those who make ignorant decisions when voting in the U.S., too, despite the fact that voting is not mandatory. I do not want to get into a battle of Australia vs. the U.S.; they both have merits and terrible disappointments (especially since Australia is following in the neo-liberal footsteps of the U.S.), but I just wanted to say, don't knock it until you've lived there. -NtnM
            • Yes I especially love how Australia censors the internet to such an extent that Google and Yahoo had to say "enough" putting it in leagues with China and Iran for having some of the most restrictive filters around. Awesome! Mandatory voting will not get more Americans involved in politics, that is yet another fantasy. It will simply be a drudgery that most people will perform to get it "out of the way" and will make totally ignorant decisions. Hell, a large number of voters who DO vote do it for stupid reasons. Among them "he's cuter" or "he seemed more honest" or worst of all: voting along party lines without knowing a damn thing about the candidate. You can't force a mind and you can't hold a gun to someone's head and force them to be free. It's a completely absurd idea. NO THANK YOU.—oy
              • Haha, that is ridiculous. Provide your sources please. You appear to be the only one living in fantasy land. Especially if you think that the U.S. doesn't censor it's population (I can guarantee they censor more than Aus does). Still no solutions either... We don't care if you are a self-conscious libertarian that thinks your suggestions will get shut down (which is what you are doing BTW). Provide some positive solutions instead of repeating what you don't want. - CC
                • and I especially like the line " Censorship of video games and Internet sites hosted in Australia are considered to be the strictest in the western world. " And I didn't say shut down, I said shouted down and told to die which has happened often. Oh and the US doesn't have the strictest censorship but they do rank top 3 for mining data on citizens. Love government! —oy
                  • The first link is from 2007 - He is no longer PM and that stuff never went through - Also, I am not completely against censorship when it has to do with suicidal content, extreme violence, child abuse, sexually explicit materials etc, particularly when it is on tv early in the day. That seems to be the vast majority of what is censored in Australia. Find me something controversial. If you want to be a part of the discussion, then please be constructive. I would really love to hear your ideas for a better U.S.A. I understand general libertarian stuff, smaller federal government, more states power. Are you proposing free market capitalism be allowed to operate unregulated? I really want to understand where you are coming from and how you would like things to work. Sell it to me and I might come around. - CC

* Leaving Australia. This data piece is from '04, but it shows the start of the trend throughout the 90's: However, found data from immigration up through '08: Both of you should note that arrivals/departures are both going up. What's more relevant imo, is WHERE these people are coming from and going to. A lot of my family moved to Australia throughout the 70's and 80's as refugees. Anyway, the factsheet states "In 2009–10, 42 570 Australia-born people departed permanently. This figure includes the Australia-born children of former settlers. Overwhelmingly, the Australia-born are emigrating to the United Kingdom, the United States or to New Zealand. In 2009–10, 46.3 per cent of Australian-born emigrants went to one of these three countries." I'd guess the netflow to those countries is outwards, and the flow inwards is more diversified. But I don't care enough to find the data, just thought a few numbers to chew on might help. Or muddle. -ES

2011-10-15 I have to agree with BarnabasTruman on this: it does no good whatsoever to protest in this town. You need to have protests at the right locations, like corporate headquarters or state governments. You want to show how annoyed and mad you are? Show it directly to the people doing it to you. You really need to get some carpools together or bike to Sac and go to the state government to protest things. It doesn't do a darned thing to make a stink in this town because those people aren't here to know.

I was in the park for most of the day today and what did I see? Folks sitting around in a circle talking for hours. Sometimes someone was playing a musical instrument. If I hadn't known what to look out for given the signs in the park (plus one random dude asking me where they were when the circle was down to a small number and less obvious), I wouldn't have thought, "hey, those are protesters" there. I hate to say it, but big deal? I've seen more noisy protests at freaking Mrak Hall (which, btw, is also a waste of time to protest at for state budget cuts. Nobody who works there can do anything about the situation either). I didn't see news vans, I saw one bike cop rolling on by. Who was affected by this? Who proved a point? I guess all of y'all who went felt better, but otherwise I just don't think protests here are effective. You want to AFFECT the people who can make the changes, and this protest so far isn't doing it. Sorry, but it's not. —JenniferRutherford

2011-10-15 22:16:50   As Doug Walter mentions, one great step is banking with a credit union. We have quite a few choices here in town. Just like the Davis Food Co-op, YOU OWN IT! I highly recommend the Yolo Federal Credit Union. People who live in our community make up the board of directors. If you have one, you can also move your mortgage to a credit union. Of course, that can be easier said than done, depending on your credit rating in the current economy. "" —RhondaGruska

There is, and will only ever be, one DougWalter. —JerseyCity

So true, so true! Editing done.

2011-10-16 11:11:53   In response to JenniferRutherford, the whole point of a peaceful protest is to be just that - peaceful. If you want yelling and marching and news vans, there's a greater chance that things can get out of control and make the whole movement look bad. I work in a bank downtown and have been walking around worrying about what could happen if things get out of control. I completely support this movement, but I also like knowing that when I go to work Monday morning, I'm not going to have to worry about a potentially dangerous situation. Also in response to CovertProfessor, yes, it was that hard to figure out. Outside of this page the ONLY place I've been able to find what the movement wanted was on Keith Olbermann. If this movement wants to be really successful, they're gong to have to be more straightforward with the solutions they're offering. We're not all professors, covert or otherwise. —CCarlson

  • I apologize for saying that it was obvious if it wasn't. It's true that I've followed the protests quite a bit, so perhaps that is why these things seem obvious to me. In that case, then, I hope my characterization of goals was helpful. Of course, that's just my take on things. —CovertProfessor
    • You really don't have to be a professor to read the links provided on this page and click on links within those pages. This is a "leaderless" movement, all you need to do is look at some of the comments people are making on the Occupy Wall St website and understand that the problems within this country are vast and cannot be summarized in a soundbite or neat little paragraph. Maybe start watching and reading alternative media - democracynow is a good place to start. - CC

2011-10-18 10:35:56

2011-10-18 23:14:56   Yet another area Wall St has messed up. The Food Bubble: How Wall Street Starved Millions and Got Away With It

2011-10-20 09:42:26   There was about a dozen or so people camping out in the park last night. One of the protestors told me that they are hoping to stay for a full month. I'm glad that the Davis PD hasn't given them any problems yet. —ScottMeehleib

2011-10-31 - Since it is our federal and state government that creates, oversees, and implements tax policy (the redistribution of wealth) and regulation over businesses of all sizes, why isn't it "Occupy Pennsylvania Avenue" or "Occupy the Capitol"? Isn't this where the change has to start? I don't think Wall Street gives a rats rear that it is being occupied or protested. Just something to consider. - Calzephyr

  • I agree with you that there needs to be political change, but I see the two things as going hand-in-hand: the Wall Street corporations have engaged in shady and illegal practices that need to be prosecuted, with new laws and policies to rein in their behaviors and their influence on our political system. People are protesting in D.C., too, not just Wall Street; in part, people are just protesting in the places they live (in solidarity with each other), and in part the name "Occupy Wall Street" is to signify (and remind us!) that it was Wall Street's practices that got us into this economic mess in the first place. (And yes, the politicians did not handle that situation well. They gave them money because the banks were "too big to fail" — no strings attached). —CovertProfessor

2011-11-06 17:43:05   I've got one question for people who are protesting: Who specifically do you want to follow what course of action? —MasonMurray

2011-11-07 09:43:29   I would say that the Occupy movements had their first solid success with Bank Transfer Day. It has been estimated that over 650,000 customers chose to leave behind big banks in favor of non-profit credit unions in the days leading up to the Nov. 5th deadline. Bank of America backed off of its previous plan to have a $5 monthly charge for debit card use, which was one of the cited reasons for the bank protest to begin with. I would challenge the Occupy movement to continue to look for practical solutions like this. A lot of awareness has already been drummed up, and now new ideas for solutions need to emerge quickly in order to keep the ball rolling. Otherwise, the group runs the risk of looking like a never-ending sleepover in favor of a redistribution of wealth that won't come about simply through awareness. —ScottMeehleib

  • You might be interested in 11 (actually 14) simple ways to support the occupy movement without sleeping in a park. #12 and #14 in particular seem like concrete actions of the sort you're looking forward, although they're not as good as Bank Transfer Day. Personally, I'd like to see the Occupy movements take up the banner of getting people registered to vote and then actually getting out the vote. There is all of this energy, and one constructive place to put it is to 1) let the U.S. know that their voices will be heard on election day, and 2) actually show up to have your say! —CovertProfessor
    • I think it would be great if a massive amount of people got behind #12 in particular. Getting people registered to vote is also a good idea. -SM

2011-11-08 10:31:29   I have dropped in and chatted with Davis Occupiers a couple of times over the past week or so. I was impressed with their dedication to "keeping it together." By which several said they meant maintaining the camp site and keeping everybody fed and dry on cold, rainy nights. Also, they expressed satisfaction with their success in communicating with Davis police officers with whom they have had good relations. One said it was good to see a prowl car roll by at 3am, "just to make sure we're safe out here." Also, they appreciated the response from city maintenance workers who turned off sprinklers, which had come on automatically during late night hours. But, though I suggested conversational topics along the lines of politics and economic injustice, the Occupiers expressed little awareness of or interest in discussing them. As conditions worsen, perhaps the Occupy message will come into clearer focus —RaoulDuke

2011-11-14 00:11:55   The Occupy movement did not do anything to stop Bank of America from adding fees. Banks let them think they've won but in actuality are just adding new charges in other places. Just something to keep in mind. —OliviaY

  • As far as I was concerned, the $5/month fee was not the main reason to switch away from the big banks to the local banks or credit unions — the $5 fee was just the tip of the iceberg, a very visible indicator of all of the other ways in which the big banks act reprehensibly. So, anyone who thinks that BoA getting rid of the $5 a month fee means that the protesters won is missing the big picture, even without the ramping up of other fees. —CovertProfessor

2011-11-14 20:37:24   I've been occupying in New York, Oakland, and Portland Oregon. This is the BEST OCCUPY LOCATION IN DAVIS HANDS DOWN!!! —KCSlater

2011-11-14 23:14:15   The action tomorrow should be interesting! I just read the counter protest thing also... hilarious. We should have a mock 1% protest and join them. haha Check out the new story of stuff video called "the story of broke" it's great!!!

Did this really happen? UCD + students + pepper spray? Can someone who was there speak to this? When did this occur? Updated: Additional info


  • Yes, this actually happened. Students last night set up tents in the Quad. They were gently reminded by some police officers that sleeping there was against the law and they should probably go home. This morning they were asked again to leave and refused, so the police showed up in force to hopefully keep anyone from being injured. As you can see in the video a row of students sat in front of the cruiser as I understand it to prevent them from leaving with students that had been arrested. Further, (and again, this is 2nd hand knowledge) the police warned students that if they didn't move they would be pepper sprayed. In short, if you got sprayed it was because you chose to. The police gave you every opportunity to just leave. —MM
    • RIGHT, the police were PROTECTING the students. Those dang tents sure can be dangerous. P.S. They were not blocking a police cruiser from leaving. Maybe if you were there you wouldn't misrepresent the situation.
      • That's the difference I guess. Some people think pepper spraying peaceful protestors is acceptable. Others, not so much. Sjoe
        • W...WHAT? Who said anything about either of those things? The laws are there to protect EVERYONE ELSE from the PEOPLE BREAKING THEM. It's private property, without permission the right to assembly doesn't apply to campus any more than it does to your neighbor's kitchen. So yes, I think that laws preventing unauthorized camping on public property are good. Tent cities are unsightly, and obstruct maintenance. You want to protest that's fine. Do it on public property with a permit like everyone else.—MM
          • Creating something "unsightly" warrants being sprayed in the face like a bug? And you say "the police showed up in force to hopefully keep anyone from being injured." I saw people sitting quietly on the ground. So, exactly who were they protecting from injury? The only ones causing injury were the police themselves. —CovertProfessor
            • MM I really question your choice of words. When people break the law, police have the authority to arrest them if their crimes justify arrest. In this case, the "crime" was basically a very mild form of trespassing. I find the current attitude of law enforcement that the pretense of non-violent protesters can and should be resolved by torturing the protesters until they comply. Pepper spraying peaceful protesters for being "unsightly" is highly objectionable to me, and I think or at least hope most Americans would share my view. —rfrazier
            • The Ancient Order of Walkers has asked me to remind you of the existence of legal precedent suggesting that use of pepper spray against peaceful protesters committing trespassing is excessive force, and that this should "be clear to a reasonable officer."
              • It comes down to something very simple. When a police officer walks up and says "Go home, you are not allowed to gather here right now. If you don't, I've got this can of mace," and you say "No thanks, I'd rather keep my seat," you lose all my sympathy. But if I could direct you to how this began, all I did is answer a simple question to the best of my ability with the facts I had at hand. If there is anything FACTUALLY UNTRUE about what I said, I'd be more than happy to hear it, just know you're not going to change my opinion just as I don't expect to change yours. —MM
                • At the time this occurred, the tents had already been dismantled. The students were not blocking access of any type to any police cruiser. The students were told to leave the campus, which they had every right to be on at the time as students. They sat, quietly, arms interlinked in front of the police. The can of pepper spray was brought out, with very little warning, and waved around as a warning for all of 5 seconds prior to being used. It is excessive force, extremely questionable legally, and is completely and utterly disgusting to me. — Wes-P
                  • As I said at least three times, the information I had was not first hand, and it was what I had to work with. I would have been there if I could, but I have to work to keep food on the table. Going on mid-week camping trips is not a luxury I can afford. —MM
                • MM, would these protestors have had your sympathy if the police had, after warning them repeatedly to disperse, walked up and shot them all in the head? I hope your answer is yes. Clearly the police had no intention of doing this, and didn't, but my point is that violating a police order, or even breaking the law, doesn't in itself justify any arbitrary amount of force. The burden is on law enforcement to explain why that particular level of force was necessary in that particular situation. - KenjiYamada
                  • If anyone said "You need to leave or I shoot you in the head" and you chose to stay? No, you would not have my sympathy. I don't care who pulled the trigger. Chosing to be shot in the head is suicidally stupid. There may be a question of whether or not the person had the right to make you move, but you don't try to make that distinction while there's a gun to your head. —MM
                    • In such a situation, the only choice that matters (from a legal or ethical standpoint) is the choice made by the person with a finger on the trigger. —BarnabasTruman
                      • Okay, so you're ethically right and you have the law on your side! You're still just as dead, and you chose that outcome. Why should assisted suicide be worthy of sympathy? —MM

2011-11-19 06:33:36   The standard is pretty simple— an activity is either compliant with the law or it is not. If the group is compliant great. If not, then those entrusted to enforce the law are compelled to do so, no matter what the appearance (pepper spraying sitting protestors) — otherwise we are on the slippery slope of deciding what laws to enforce in our society. Agree that this effort loses my sympathy entirely when the law is broken— please do it within the framework of our laws. My perspective anyhow.— thx. —RichardL

  • to be very frank, that seems like an extremely myopic view to me. I speed while driving very regularly. Should I be pepper sprayed until I agree to stop? If a citizen is jaywalking, should he be pepper sprayed until he agrees to stop? The idea that any violation of the law justifies any and all force is repugnant to me. The police and their supervisors have a duty to act in the public interest while enforcing the law. I don't think anything close to a majority of Davisites would agree that pepperspraying members of a peaceful protest movement is in the public interest. When law enforcement acts this way, I become very concerned. The thought process that "if I don't torture this student, he might still be sitting here tomorrow, harming no one but in defiance of my will, OK I guess I'll torture him" is utterly repulsive. —rfrazier
  • The idea that the job of the police is to punish is repugnant to the foundation of our justice system. Are you suggesting that the police and the police alone should serve as judge, jury, and executioner? Let the police arrest, and let the courts decide on punishment. —BarnabasTruman
  • And since you bring up "either compliant with the law or not," I will point out that attacking peaceful protesters with chemical weapons is NOT compliant with the law, regardless of what uniform the attacker is wearing. Does that mean that the man with the pepper spray should himself be pepper sprayed? Of course not. —BarnabasTruman
    • Yes, actually. That's exactly what that means. Hold that man down and mace him. He'll probably never do it again. —MM
      • But hold on - torturing people as punishment for crime isn't part of our code of laws - so I guess we'll have to mace everyone who maces the officer, and then mace everyone who maces them, and so on. Sooooo...if we followed your plan, we'd end up with an entire city of maced people. MM, I think we may have found a flaw in your otherwise brilliant strategy for dealing with non-violent protestors. Maybe we should consider just NOT macing them and instead try ticketing and arresting people for breaking the law, and only using violence, such as mace or batons when officer safety or public safety is at risk. Allowing cops to torture people for non-violent non-compliance with the requests is madness and sets and extremely dangerous precedent. —rfrazier
        • Actually, the officer was undoubtedly already maced during his training. I just found this out the other night, and that satisfies my call for him to experience it first hand. And yes, the person who maced him was most likely maced themselves. ION: I'm an Anarchist, not a Fascist, but if we're going to have the rules they must be enforced uniformly. Saying that it is OK for protestors to camp in the quad means it's OK for everyone to camp there. Anything less is brazenly claiming these people are better than everyone else. Further, at no point did I say that I supported the actions of the police in this situation. All I have done is condemn the actions of the protestors. —MM
        • A protester may do what he or she believes in and have an expectation of the consequences; you choose to condemn; and the police can not do their job properly and trash UC Davis. —BruceHansen
          • EXACTLY. Finally someone who agrees with me. I don't know so much about the police "trashing UCD," it doesn't look any worse than it did a few years ago (aside from the tents...) —MM
        • I'm not about to follow rules, just because they are the rules. Why should I? When clearly those rules don't apply equally to those with influence and power. As an anarchist how do you feel about the oxymoronic concepts of "free speech zones" and "protesting permits"? Because to me they are absolutely ridiculous and go against everything this country claims to be. This corrupt system is human created and can be just as easily dismantled. This is why I would choose to be non-compliant just as Gandhi was in aparthied South Africa and Colonial India. At the end of the day we all have to live on this earth so why do we bicker about whether or not the "rules" say someone is "allowed" to pepper spray someone in the face if they are in the way, just walk around them and carry on with your life. - ConsciousConsumer
          • I'm going to try and respond in order, because I'm tired and it probably won't flow without that structure. You should follow the rules if you don't want to accept the consequences, and if you chose not to follow them you shouldn't complain loudly that there were consequences for your actions. That's life. As an anarchist, I oppose many, many laws, those included. However, if I choose to protest at some point, I will probably get said permits because I would rather not see my protest broken up part way through. I also oppose how strictly fire arms are banned from school campuses, but no one ever seems to take me seriously on that1. "why do we bicker about whether or not the "rules" say someone is "allowed" to pepper spray someone"? Me? I don't care if they're allowed to or not. I'm having trouble summarizing my standpoint, so I'll just say this: An adult takes responsibility for their actions while a child tries to place the blame on someone else, and I don't see how choosing to be maced is worthy of sympathy. I've never heard of anyone going down to the police academy saying "oh those poor dears" during mace training. And finally, why the police shouldn't "just walk around them," I'm also pretty sure that's the exact opposite of their job description. Correct me if I am wrong here, but isn't their job to... I don't know... enforce the laws equally and without discrimination? —MM
            • Of course there should be consequences for actions, and of course if you break the law, you can expect to be punished for it. Nobody is arguing this point, so I'm not sure why you keep acting like there's a disagreement about this topic. If the police had arrested or ticketed the protesters, nobody would have a problem with it - that's part of protesting and civil disobedience. Sometimes being arrested to indicate how seriously you take a cause is the point. The issue here is that cops thought it was OK to torture students with pepper spray when the students did something they didn't like. This action wasn't necessary to protect themselves, it wasn't necessary to protect anyone else, and using torture to "punish" people is antithetical to our system of law enforcement. You have no sympathy for them. I get that. I don't get why you have no empathy for the students, and I further don't get why you keep claiming to be an anarchist when you seem so anxious to grovel at the feet of anyone you perceive as an authority. As an "anarchist" I suppose you can absolve yourself of any responsibility for what happens in our society. As an American, I'm afraid I don't have the luxury. I have to care that police officers acting in my name are breaking the law, and that my fellow citizens are having their rights suppressed through torture as a result. —rfrazier

2011-12-07 19:41:55   we can oppose something without making davis unpleasant by having tents in the central park. please remove those. I am 100% positive that this movement is great and it will have results but I don't like seeing tents every freaking day when I'm driving home. —mahmoudrezanaemeh

  • YEAH! How DARE they make you see TENTS for five whole seconds when driving along 5th Street?!? The nerve of those people...

* YEAH its awesome when you see that people who are camping there are actually homeless and they don't even care what the 99% is

That's quite a few assumptions all rolled into one little reply.

$$ YEAH Can't wait to vote next year for some more hope and change and yes we can and yes will and yes we did, and then take a walk through a city park and smell the pepper spray. Right on Obamanomics, you go baby!

  • Obamanomics is just a continuation of the neo-liberal agenda that has been perpetuated since Reagan. The United States would do well to get away from the two-party "vote for the lesser of 2 evils" model that is in place, since both parties are currently funded by the exact same interest groups. Just look at Jack Abramoff and others and how much inluence unelected lobbyists have over our politicians nowadays. - ConsciousConsumer

2011-12-13 15:18:07   This bank sounds outrageous - charging recurring daily overdraft fees which shouldn't have been charged in he first place. How are the banks in Davis? —BruceHansen

"2011-12-23 19:17:03"   "What if the decision to evict or not had been made by referendum? Voters could have determined whether to continue the long overdue public debates over inequality, injustice and capitalism that were launched and sustained above all by the Occupy encampments..."


1. Personally, I still wouldn't bring a gun on campus, it's just the principle of the thing.