Berkeley Rethinking Hands-Off Approach to Anti-Milo Rioters
“to the citizens’ detriment”
There was only one arrest on the night of the Berkeley riot despite expensive damage and violence. Now the school is wondering if they handled it right.
Campus Reform reports:
Berkeley reconsiders ‘hands-off’ approach to anti-Milo riot
The University of California, Berkeley is reconsidering the “hands-off” approach taken by campus police during the violent riot that destroyed parts of campus prior to a Milo Yiannopoulos speech.
According to the Associated Press, the protest caused more than $100,000 in damage and resulted in six injuries, but only one arrest, forcing the university to cancel the event and evacuate Yiannopoulos from campus.
Many are now wondering why campus police did not play a bigger role in stopping the rioters, including John Bakhit, a lawyer for a union that represents many of the UC system’s police officers.
“The UC ‘hands-off’ approach was to the citizens’ detriment and the officers’ detriment in this situation,” Bakhit told the AP. “The frustrating thing for the police officers is that they weren’t allowed to do their jobs.”
Republican state Assemblyman Travia Allen also criticized the tepid response, but placed the blame squarely on administrators, calling the outcome “a direct result of the permissive attitude of the university’s faculty and administration.”
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Gee, it’s just now dawning on them that maybe perhaps they might not have handled the matter all that wisely?
Fools.
What’s to rethink? They chose to allow the riot, actually encouraged it by their lack of action when it was clear the “peaceful” protest was becoming anything but peaceful. And now they’re having second thoughts?
Could their change of mind have anything to do with the possibility of losing federal funding for their child care facility .. er, university.
It was not merely lack of action. Employees were involved and the faculty and administration helped organize it with the full intent that violence was necessary.
Citizens must sue them for damages.
Well, let’s see …
The CP union is annoyed, and annoyed unions are something any administrator avoids like plague …
Something north of $100k in damage means that the school’s insurers are probaby starting to pay attention …
The state legislature, which sits on top of some of the school’s major money taps, is starting to grumble …
Yeah, they don’t have to be too sharp to realize that their game of squelching free speech on campus is getting expensive … and it’s time to start pretending that they’re interested in doing something about it.
But no need to worry, I’m sure it’s just for show.
Maybe if the criminals had burned down their school and so they all lost their jobs then they’d have thought to not let this happen.
Those who were damaged or received injuries should sue the pants off of the college. Maybe then the college will wake up.
Exactly! Every Trump supporter that was injured due to a lack of police actions to protect them should sue on those grounds. Let the UC system waste more $ by defending themselves from lawsuits.
The police are sworn to enforce the law. If the administrators told them not to enforce the law, that is an illegal order that the police should have ignored. The administrators should be prosecuted if they gave such an illegal order.
Could the coming lawsuits have anything to do with this rethinking?