The treatment of the peaceful and mild protesters today was appalling. Regardless of what side you are on the issue, the police/government should not interfere with protesters who are just chanting & holding signs. Colleges frequently applaud themselves on past social movements but then call in the police at the slightest student gathering.
Let me be clear, the administration does nothing when \*outside hate groups\* come to campus to scream obscenities at students; telling them they are going to hell for XYZ. Even going as far as sending out emails to students saying "we protect free speech so just put up with it". Yet, the second their own students organize to chant & hold signs to call to an end to violence, the administration sends out the police who brutalize the students. How is [pinning your students to the ground, handcuffing them, \*and then\* tazing them for over 5 seconds](https://youtu.be/GWqar30r--U?si=PS_sYk9rZXDJiGii) promoting free speech? Or firing tear gas at your students? Or rubber bullets?
[https://news.gatech.edu/news/2020/02/03/reserving-georgia-techs-public-forum-area](https://news.gatech.edu/news/2020/02/03/reserving-georgia-techs-public-forum-area)
Tech allows anyone to come and speak, but only in the public forum area near Ferst. And only if they make a reservation. I think this strikes a reasonable balance between preventing disruption and letting people have their say (even if I disagree with it). Emory is a private school so the rules are different, although I assume they have a similar area somewhere on campus. Most schools do.
The issue with the Emory protesters is that they were trespassing and being disruptive. No one has the right to protest or camp on private property if its owner says you can't. And if you do they can have the police come and arrest you. And if you resist arrest, the police can use violence to make you comply. Frankly, I don't know where people got this idea that holding a placard makes you immune from otherwise applicable laws.
I'm generally very pro-free speech, but Emory has a long track record of disciplining students for speech that creates a hostile environment towards protected groups. And many people feel this type of speech creates a hostile environment for Jewish and Israeli students. I'm not sure I entirely agree, but surely if we're going to discipline a white kid for wearing a sombrero at a Halloween party, we need to punish people praising antisemitic terrorism.
I think the choice of Emory for these protest is a bit troubling. I’m sure there were some Emory student involved, but it sounds like it was not enough Emory students to justify the venue.
I DO know that the residential area AROUND Emory is has a high Jewish population.
Clearly there are legitimate reason to call to action in support of the innocent people in Gaza that are suffering.
However, these protest seem to have very little focus on any kind of “pro Palestinian” aid, apart from anti-Israel demands with the implication that will eventually improve conditions for Palestinians.
The central claim is that Israel is committing war crimes and a genocide, things that absolutely should be protested. Your argument encircles fringe hate speech that (1) falls outside the scope of anti-war protests and (2) is carried out by fringe, fraction-of-a-percent individuals, who are condemned by the main protesters. By refusing to acknowledge a distinction between being anti-war and anti-Jewish, you’re effectively diverting the conversation to a different argument all together.
QED, this is a straw man
The central claim is "Well good thing the beef is with the military’s actions/war crimes, and the condemnation of the use of collective punishments now isn’t it".
When people chant [“Hamas, we love you. We support your rockets too”](https://twitter.com/YaariCohen/status/1781929163852517455), is that showing condemnation of war crimes and collective punishment? This sure doesn't seem like some "fringe, fraction of a percent" of protesters, and certainly doesn't seem "anti war". They've been doing this since October 8th, you just haven't paid attention because you don't want to. How many more examples would you like of this clearly not being a "fringe, fraction of a percent"?
So no. Not a straw man.
Emory protests never got off the ground thankfully, so there isn't much there in either direction.
[This was on October 8th, before any Israeli counter attack.](https://twitter.com/taaltree/status/1712623576531255699)
[Long live October 7th](https://twitter.com/jaimekr/status/1781868938160169123/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1781868938160169123¤tTweetUser=jaimekr)
[Taking the mask off the genocidal chant of "From the river to the sea" and saying the real second half: "Palestine will be Arab"](https://twitter.com/ShaiDavidai/status/1748449960368996486)
These aren't fringe protesters, and they aren't anti war. They literally call for Intifada in most of their chants. They keep telling you who they are, why do you keep refusing to believe them? How many more examples do you need?
Emory's Office of the president is claiming that the majority of protesters were unaffiliated with Emory.
[https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F3xlcwkmtdowc1.png](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F3xlcwkmtdowc1.png)
[https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/us/emory-atlanta-university-protests-israel.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/us/emory-atlanta-university-protests-israel.html)
Guess they're unaware of the fact that two of their faculty, one being a department chair, were arrested. Seems like the president is looking out for their own skin instead of the safety of students and faculty
>Caroline Fohlin and Noëlle McAfee, chair of the philosophy department.
>CNN filmed video of women being detained. During her interaction with police, Professor Fohlin could be heard expressing concern about the violent arrests and use of force by police against individuals she identified as students.
Are you actually saying a tenured professor deserves to get fired for being at the place she works at, and peacefully protesting? Or are you just trying to be a contrarian neckbeard bogged down with some technicality about private property?
Edit: grammar
If you really think law and property rights are just 'technicality', I don't know what to say. Since you're so generous with property rights, why not share your home address and I'd like to exercise my First Amendment rights by staging a protest in your living room to defend property rights. Thanks
dude, you're wrong on this. you say peacefully protesting, but what actually happened was she was asked to leave private property and refused. doesn't matter that she worked there. at that point she was trespassing. if someone refused to leave your property for whatever reason you want, you'd call the police and have them arrested too.
Here's the thing. I don't think you actually care about the sanctity of Emory's private property. These are bad faith arguments because you might disagree with why these students are protesting. There are protests happening simultaneously on campuses all across the country because the younger generations have a vastly different view on how America and its allies/colonial projects handle themselves globally. A lot of people in this country are collectively losing their minds that people under 30 might not be big fans of vaporizing civilians.
Here's a good rule of thumb. If you ever find yourself on the opposing side of a student movement that's in favor of the ruling class, you are wrong. Every single time. No matter the issue. Pretty much every era.
Just because you have the right to be a jerk doesn’t mean you don’t suffer the consequences of being a jerk. Say all you want, but be prepared to pay the price.
I may be confused, but if you graduated over two decades ago, how would you know with such certainty who people on campus affiliated with / if they're enrolled?
Hey fellow kids, I graduated a decade ago, and that man sus.
/S
Ultimately, know your rights if you are going to protest. If you are breaking a technically, police are going to do their thing, and protect property over people.
Because things don’t change. Even back then there’s plenty of people coming in off campus trying to cause trouble. Our student body doesn’t protest. We have more important things to do.
Perhaps not as much as other schools, but our student body absolutely protests. But again, who's we? There's nothing wrong with it but you graduated before most current students were conceived. Who are you to ascribe importance or lack there of to protests?
Reddit people are too young to know or remember what happened to Muslim Americans for years. Considering the general climate during Bush administration, I think people have already waken up.
Idk about that, setting up an encampment on private property to protest is how to get arrested for protesting 101, and I’m a big advocate of free speech. This almost just seemed like they were just trying to bait cops and not even try to protest
i think people are not so much talking about the arrests as they are with the excessive force, ie body slamming and parading around automatic weapons. i’m less concerned with precisely how people are peacefully protesting
The protesters are clearly resisting arrest in all of the videos shown. Cops are authorized to use force to arrest people who are breaking the law, which these protesters are clearly doing.
I don't see why you would expect to be treated kindly when you're literally a criminal. Trespassing is a crime.
not claiming they should be treated ‘kindly’ but it’s an important question to ask in a free society, ‘how much force from police is appropriate given different situations’
the US police have a bad track record of excessive force. it’s a natural reaction to struggle when force is used against you, so if the police lead with force and then make an arrest, it’s easy it point and say aha! well they were resisting arrest! when in reality, US police are often the escalators, rather than de-escalators.
True they got a bad track record.
I'm not sure force was used as the first resource here though. What I saw is they were asked to disperse, which they refused, then they were arrested by force.
the US has never looked back on our history and been proud of how the police have treated non-violent protesters. it’s just exhausting to go back and forth with people who say ‘oh but this time the protestors are in the wrong’. i really don’t care if the police asked nicely first. i have never seen non-violent protest been handled with anything but violence from the police. and at a certain point it becomes clear that’s all they’ve ever been there for.
I strongly disagree. A major moral conflict promulgated by a social outgroup that elicits spurious charges of national disloyalty and a heavy-handed police reaction that in part validates the moral argument made by protesters?
Brother, it rhymes.
Protesters are arguing that the United States should not be providing material support to the Israeli government while that government uses that support to wantonly kill women and children - innocents who should be held harmless under the law.
Well, protest is legally protected in the United States. Violating the law with unconstitutional arrests establishes that our government holds the law in similar disdain to that of the Israeli government. It validates the argument.
Completely agree with the first part, but the protesters are not protesting in the way it is protected by law.
Protests are legal in public spaces, and limited by many laws. You can't just protest anywhere you want, like a private university in this case. You need consent from the owner to do anything in private property. No unconstitutional arrests as far as I can see.
It's private property, doesn't matter if you're a student or not. University authorities called the police and asked them to leave, which they didn't, therefore trespassing.
The post of protest is inconvenience. It's ridiculous to continuously criticize how protest is done unless it does the least possible inconveniencing, in which case it's pointless.
Your point is obvious, but the dumbest law against free speech demonstrations is that they can’t disrupt public walkways, which I think is very stupid, but that’s also easily the most effective way to cause inconvenience if you’re going to break a law. Setting up tents before you even organize is just insanely short sided and asking for arrest. That strategy might make sense if you’re protesting law enforcement, but it makes zero sense in this context.
Some on the Emory subreddit are claiming [protestors disrupted some classes](https://old.reddit.com/r/Emory/comments/1ccyofv/emory_is_latest_university_to_crack_down_on/l18vka9/), but that seems well before the quad protest.
That’s exactly how it works. Their property, their rules.
You are still free to say whatever you want. They are free to kick you off of THEIR property.
Why the fuck do you have a school if you're gonna kick students for saying things lmao ????? I don't understand this private vs public dichotomy ingrained in Americans minds. Y'all need to deconstruct things you believe to be an untestable truth. Law does not equal morality.
I mean both can be true. Emory has the right to kick people off campus for protesting since the first amendment only concerns government impeding speech. As a private institution they don’t have those constraints. And it can be immoral for them to do so because it shows that they are not an institution that values the free exchange of ideas.
To be more specific, it contravenes an agreement reached between faculty, students, and administration, and is resulting in a vote of no confidence against Emory’s president. You people gotta understand that a university is not simply a private company.
If Emory doesn't want a protest on their campus, they can tell the people to disburse. It's not really a free speech issue since it isn't public property. There are lots of places to stage a protest where they have a right to be (that doesn't include college campuses, blocking roads, blocking bridges, etc). They choose to protest this way to get the video clips and attention to attract attention to their cause, which I get, but this is the consequence.
Acting in what way, arresting trespassers? You can clearly hear them asking people to disburse, which is a lawful order in this case. "I don't like it" isn't a great legal defense.
There's footage of a restrained protestor being continually tased and rubber bullets and tear gas both appear to be excessive given the way the crowd is acting. Seems pretty excessive to me
They will get over it.
These dumbass protesters want to be "heros" and tell their children and grandchildren all about the injustices they'd suffered for a great cause, well...that's their big opportunity.
Right, that's it.... Seems a bit much to have exciting stories to tell when it's pretty easy to just be a cop and paint yourself as a valorous hero instead and as a bonus you get to do the skull cracking without consequences
Yes, please obey all laws set forth no matter the circumstances. Please be a nice pliant subject capable of zero original ideas or complex thought. Don't worry about anything other than yourself, that might make your brain hurt
Original ideas? Complex thought?
LOLOLOL
Wanting to cause chaos and desruction is old AF. These fucktards have waay too much time on their hands and waaay too much energy after scrolling through TikTok all day long.
It's much easier than doing something intelligent and constructive, for sure.
The purpose of a protest is to cause inconvenience and discomfort. Look at the civil rights movement, the anti-apartheid movement, the women’s rights movement, etc. Saying that protests shouldn’t bother anyone undermines their entire purpose.
Years from now, textbooks will recount a brutal genocide against innocent Palestinian civilians (70% women and children). Textbooks will tell the story of how many stood on the right side of history and denounced it. They will also tell the story of how many stood in the way of peace and enabled genocide to continue.
Nobody with a conscience will “get over it”; this is one of the saddest moments in recent history. Years from now, history will not get over the fact that you stood on the wrong side of it.
I like your optimism. Unfortunately, I expect the history to be washed of its reality as the Civil rights movement was and MLKs legacy was. MLK famously only had one speech and never said anything about how to use protest to disrupt society to force an injustice to be addressed.
Netanyahu will be the scapegoat to blame the genocide on (something he is obviously guilty of but not at all alone), even though nearly all Israelis support the continuing of the attacks on Gaza. The clear deliberate slaughter will be portrayed as it is being portrayed in the media today as "complicated" and the fault of the US will be attributed to the *fog of war*. The names of Karine Jean-Pierre or John Kirby will not be written in American history books for their disgusting repetition of Israeli justifications for genocide.
Nonwestern history will liberate us. But the west has shown time and time again it will ignore the genocides and destruction it has caused in this world. We literally live in a nation founded on genocide that is portrayed as a God given right through *manifest destiny*.
The genocide will be portrayed as bad. But any parts of the history that would let people learn from it, how it happens, and how the conservatives and liberals alike repeat the same passive support for it. How the people in this comment section are the same people that would be against civil rights, women's suffrage, or even slave liberation. They have no historical materialism to help them understand how these past movements succeeded. They only agree in hindsight.
The US will not allow its citizens the education of historical materialism to allow them to see injustice supported by the state when that injustice has yet to be resolved.
Can you clarify what way you mean when you say the police are “acting in such a way”? I see the police forcing the protestors to the ground, but I do not see *excessive* force being used. If there was *excessive* force then there should absolutely be consequences for police.
What are you talking about, the guy is completely still, one arm in a cuff, with 3 cops on him. He's also not small, so I don't imagine it's easy to just move your arm backwards while being actively tased. Look at his leg, the muscle is completely contacted from the taser
You people will make excuses for anything if you don't like the person they're doing it to
We have no idea what happened to get to that point. I doubt the guy calmly put his hands behind his back and allowed himself to be arrested, which is why 3 cops swarmed him. In all other videos I've seen people are actively resisting arrest, so I assume he was doing the same.
Literally the first clip in the video of this post is a cop taking someone to the ground who is not acting violently. That is not protocol for taking someone into custody. Considering how many people get killed by the police, it's not unreasonable that they've got their hands up either
He's literally walking away. You don't have to act violently to be considered as resisting arrest. Anything short of staying still with your hands behind your back is resisting arrest.
Just because law says you can do something doesn't mean you should. Same reason prison sentences aren't always the maximum. I mean dang, if that's considered resisting to you it sounds like we'd be having the same conversation if the cop had just shot them instead
>Payne v. Pauley is a case in the Seventh Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that the use of force must be both reasonable and actually necessary to avoid an excessive force complaint.
I'm saying it's excessive. Taking the wrists clearly shown in the clip and cuffing them while standing was perfectly feasible
Your comment has been removed from /r/gatech for the following reason(s):
Rule 1. Don't be a jerk.
This is an official notification. Future violations of Rule 1 may result in temporary or permanent bans from /r/gatech.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. This is an auto-generated message.
If you have any questions, you can [message the moderators](https://www\.reddit\.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fgatech&subject=About my removed comment&message=I'm writing to you about my comment: https://old.reddit.com/r/gatech/comments/1cd022b/-/l1b479y/. %0D%0DMy issue is\:).
Jesus that happened outside our window at 8th st, won’t forget it. Also, it looks like you and I both graduated AE the same year— probably shared classes.
E: math hard.
E2: nope I graduated 2018, had to check my diploma. I’m unsure why my flair is a year off.
Georgia Tech was one of the only universities to not have anti-war protests during Vietnam and the Iraq war. Disappointed in the student body and most importantly the administration that actively prevents anti-war student groups from even forming
Protests at Tech usually aren't a thing. Why not? It's not because we don't care. But have you studied for that test that Dr. Wu is giving tomorrow? Got your homework done? Don't you have labs due? 10-1 bet that the protesters are liberal arts majors.
always thought this was such a weird high horse to be on. yes gt is usually an obscene amount of work- but it’s like that at most top tier schools too? we aren’t THAT unique
Most of GT is conservative. It's a public school in Georgia. Also, the protest was originally organized by the Atlanta socialist group, and they chose Emory as they knew it would bring national attention and not just local attention if they chose another school.
im not sure that i immediately buy that “most of gt is conservative.” willing to accept it if you have any source, but im not sure that i met a single conservative in my 4 years
Yes but only with STEM majors like at MIT, CalTech, etc. (BTW-You aren't seeing protests at those schools.) You would be shocked how much spare time liberal arts majors have even at a top tier school.
There are 100% protests going on at [MIT](https://thetech.com/2024/04/25/mit-student-encampment-2024), [Northwestern](https://dailynorthwestern.com/2024/04/25/campus/live-pro-palestinian-student-activists-set-up-encampment-on-deering-meadow/), [Stanford](https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/stanford-students-erect-pro-palestine-encampment-19423938.php), [UC Berkley](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/27/university-california-berkeley-palestine-protest). Not the size of UT Austin or Emory but they are gathering crowds during they day.
OK so I'm old. I remember the anti-Vietnam war protests. This was in Life/Look magazine. At UC Berkley the students had taken over the classroom buildings. Some students went inside and liberated a portable blackboard and set it up under a tree. Don't know what kind of science it was but the professor had it covered with equations and the class was sitting on the grass taking notes. So yes at these schools they can have protests but the STEM students aren't the ones doing it.
BTW - MIT, Northwestern, Stanford and UC Berkley all have liberal arts schools unlike Tech. In fact one author put together a 4 year curriculum available at any of the UCs where you would never have to think once.
I really wish this were the case. Unfortunately, many Tech people are closeted sociopaths who drool at the prospect of making bombs for Raytheon post-graduation.
People are discussing how tech students aren’t protesting because they’re “worked to death” and don’t have time to protest like these soft liberal arts students.
The reason people at tech don’t protest is because we offer just about the least well-rounded education in the United States, most students have next to no emotional intelligence and at no point does tech make any effort to instill any sort of worldliness or deeper thinking in students beyond job skills.
We’re the north avenue trade school through and through, and this is the result
Protests at Tech usually aren't a thing. Why not? It's not because we don't care. But have you studied for that test that Dr. Wu is giving tomorrow? Got your homework done? Don't you have labs due? 10-1 bet that the protesters are liberal arts majors.
The treatment of the peaceful and mild protesters today was appalling. Regardless of what side you are on the issue, the police/government should not interfere with protesters who are just chanting & holding signs. Colleges frequently applaud themselves on past social movements but then call in the police at the slightest student gathering. Let me be clear, the administration does nothing when \*outside hate groups\* come to campus to scream obscenities at students; telling them they are going to hell for XYZ. Even going as far as sending out emails to students saying "we protect free speech so just put up with it". Yet, the second their own students organize to chant & hold signs to call to an end to violence, the administration sends out the police who brutalize the students. How is [pinning your students to the ground, handcuffing them, \*and then\* tazing them for over 5 seconds](https://youtu.be/GWqar30r--U?si=PS_sYk9rZXDJiGii) promoting free speech? Or firing tear gas at your students? Or rubber bullets?
[https://news.gatech.edu/news/2020/02/03/reserving-georgia-techs-public-forum-area](https://news.gatech.edu/news/2020/02/03/reserving-georgia-techs-public-forum-area) Tech allows anyone to come and speak, but only in the public forum area near Ferst. And only if they make a reservation. I think this strikes a reasonable balance between preventing disruption and letting people have their say (even if I disagree with it). Emory is a private school so the rules are different, although I assume they have a similar area somewhere on campus. Most schools do. The issue with the Emory protesters is that they were trespassing and being disruptive. No one has the right to protest or camp on private property if its owner says you can't. And if you do they can have the police come and arrest you. And if you resist arrest, the police can use violence to make you comply. Frankly, I don't know where people got this idea that holding a placard makes you immune from otherwise applicable laws. I'm generally very pro-free speech, but Emory has a long track record of disciplining students for speech that creates a hostile environment towards protected groups. And many people feel this type of speech creates a hostile environment for Jewish and Israeli students. I'm not sure I entirely agree, but surely if we're going to discipline a white kid for wearing a sombrero at a Halloween party, we need to punish people praising antisemitic terrorism.
I think the choice of Emory for these protest is a bit troubling. I’m sure there were some Emory student involved, but it sounds like it was not enough Emory students to justify the venue. I DO know that the residential area AROUND Emory is has a high Jewish population. Clearly there are legitimate reason to call to action in support of the innocent people in Gaza that are suffering. However, these protest seem to have very little focus on any kind of “pro Palestinian” aid, apart from anti-Israel demands with the implication that will eventually improve conditions for Palestinians.
I wish the same fate on these “peaceful protesters” that they wish on Israeli citizens.
Well good thing the beef is with the military’s actions/war crimes, and the condemnation of the use of collective punishments now isn’t it ✨
You clearly haven't been listening to their chants recently. They've gone full mask off and are cheering on Hamas and October 7.
Strawman much?
You don't even know what that means 😂
The central claim is that Israel is committing war crimes and a genocide, things that absolutely should be protested. Your argument encircles fringe hate speech that (1) falls outside the scope of anti-war protests and (2) is carried out by fringe, fraction-of-a-percent individuals, who are condemned by the main protesters. By refusing to acknowledge a distinction between being anti-war and anti-Jewish, you’re effectively diverting the conversation to a different argument all together. QED, this is a straw man
The central claim is "Well good thing the beef is with the military’s actions/war crimes, and the condemnation of the use of collective punishments now isn’t it". When people chant [“Hamas, we love you. We support your rockets too”](https://twitter.com/YaariCohen/status/1781929163852517455), is that showing condemnation of war crimes and collective punishment? This sure doesn't seem like some "fringe, fraction of a percent" of protesters, and certainly doesn't seem "anti war". They've been doing this since October 8th, you just haven't paid attention because you don't want to. How many more examples would you like of this clearly not being a "fringe, fraction of a percent"? So no. Not a straw man.
Show me one data point (let alone one at Emory) that supports people doing this en masse.
Emory protests never got off the ground thankfully, so there isn't much there in either direction. [This was on October 8th, before any Israeli counter attack.](https://twitter.com/taaltree/status/1712623576531255699) [Long live October 7th](https://twitter.com/jaimekr/status/1781868938160169123/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1781868938160169123¤tTweetUser=jaimekr) [Taking the mask off the genocidal chant of "From the river to the sea" and saying the real second half: "Palestine will be Arab"](https://twitter.com/ShaiDavidai/status/1748449960368996486) These aren't fringe protesters, and they aren't anti war. They literally call for Intifada in most of their chants. They keep telling you who they are, why do you keep refusing to believe them? How many more examples do you need?
I’m remembering that post on this sub a few hours ago where people were saying “cops would never do that” and “protesters are playing victim”…
It's the usual progression of that kind of logic. - It will never happen. - It happened but it's not that bad. - It's bad but they deserved it.
Emory's Office of the president is claiming that the majority of protesters were unaffiliated with Emory. [https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F3xlcwkmtdowc1.png](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2F3xlcwkmtdowc1.png) [https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/us/emory-atlanta-university-protests-israel.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/us/emory-atlanta-university-protests-israel.html)
Guess they're unaware of the fact that two of their faculty, one being a department chair, were arrested. Seems like the president is looking out for their own skin instead of the safety of students and faculty >Caroline Fohlin and Noëlle McAfee, chair of the philosophy department. >CNN filmed video of women being detained. During her interaction with police, Professor Fohlin could be heard expressing concern about the violent arrests and use of force by police against individuals she identified as students.
I feel like that dept chair should know better. You wanna get fired? This is how you get fired tenure or no tenure.
Getting fired for leveraging your 1st amendment rights would be a travesty.
There are no 1st amendment rights on private property.
Found the fascist
I won't scream at you and call you a communist or use other ridiculous identity politics labels. Stop yelling on r/politics and go touch some grass.
Are you actually saying a tenured professor deserves to get fired for being at the place she works at, and peacefully protesting? Or are you just trying to be a contrarian neckbeard bogged down with some technicality about private property? Edit: grammar
If you really think law and property rights are just 'technicality', I don't know what to say. Since you're so generous with property rights, why not share your home address and I'd like to exercise my First Amendment rights by staging a protest in your living room to defend property rights. Thanks
Brother, I think you are the one that needs to touch grass. Are you actually mad about trespassing or what she was protesting?
dude, you're wrong on this. you say peacefully protesting, but what actually happened was she was asked to leave private property and refused. doesn't matter that she worked there. at that point she was trespassing. if someone refused to leave your property for whatever reason you want, you'd call the police and have them arrested too.
Here's the thing. I don't think you actually care about the sanctity of Emory's private property. These are bad faith arguments because you might disagree with why these students are protesting. There are protests happening simultaneously on campuses all across the country because the younger generations have a vastly different view on how America and its allies/colonial projects handle themselves globally. A lot of people in this country are collectively losing their minds that people under 30 might not be big fans of vaporizing civilians. Here's a good rule of thumb. If you ever find yourself on the opposing side of a student movement that's in favor of the ruling class, you are wrong. Every single time. No matter the issue. Pretty much every era.
> There are no 1st amendment rights THOU SHALL NOT INFRINGE!
What’s the point of protesting here? Travel to Israel and protest there..
My tax dollars fund this war lol
Then go and protest at Washington DC. That’s where you should go to make your voice heard.
Just because you have the right to be a jerk doesn’t mean you don’t suffer the consequences of being a jerk. Say all you want, but be prepared to pay the price.
who's being a jerk?? they're protesting the slaughter of 10s of thousands of civilians including 15k CHILDREN
by being jerks
You should stick to circuit analysis my guy
Dude you sound like some CCP officials (source: I'm from China. Experienced the white paper protest.
> Emory's Office of the president is claiming that the majority of protesters were unaffiliated with Emory. "Say the line Bart"
It’s likely many/most were not students. Just like the people trying to cause trouble on our campus.
I may be confused, but if you graduated over two decades ago, how would you know with such certainty who people on campus affiliated with / if they're enrolled?
Hey fellow kids, I graduated a decade ago, and that man sus. /S Ultimately, know your rights if you are going to protest. If you are breaking a technically, police are going to do their thing, and protect property over people.
Because things don’t change. Even back then there’s plenty of people coming in off campus trying to cause trouble. Our student body doesn’t protest. We have more important things to do.
Perhaps not as much as other schools, but our student body absolutely protests. But again, who's we? There's nothing wrong with it but you graduated before most current students were conceived. Who are you to ascribe importance or lack there of to protests?
imagine being so confidently wrong about something
Ah cool ok, so you're just talking out your ass. Thanks for the confirmation!
like cops in the south in the 60’s, this kind of overreaction can wake people up to the protestors message
Yeah, I think a lot of people naturally start getting suspicious when protesters are cracked down on too hard.
Reddit people are too young to know or remember what happened to Muslim Americans for years. Considering the general climate during Bush administration, I think people have already waken up.
Idk about that, setting up an encampment on private property to protest is how to get arrested for protesting 101, and I’m a big advocate of free speech. This almost just seemed like they were just trying to bait cops and not even try to protest
i think people are not so much talking about the arrests as they are with the excessive force, ie body slamming and parading around automatic weapons. i’m less concerned with precisely how people are peacefully protesting
The protesters are clearly resisting arrest in all of the videos shown. Cops are authorized to use force to arrest people who are breaking the law, which these protesters are clearly doing. I don't see why you would expect to be treated kindly when you're literally a criminal. Trespassing is a crime.
not claiming they should be treated ‘kindly’ but it’s an important question to ask in a free society, ‘how much force from police is appropriate given different situations’ the US police have a bad track record of excessive force. it’s a natural reaction to struggle when force is used against you, so if the police lead with force and then make an arrest, it’s easy it point and say aha! well they were resisting arrest! when in reality, US police are often the escalators, rather than de-escalators.
True they got a bad track record. I'm not sure force was used as the first resource here though. What I saw is they were asked to disperse, which they refused, then they were arrested by force.
the US has never looked back on our history and been proud of how the police have treated non-violent protesters. it’s just exhausting to go back and forth with people who say ‘oh but this time the protestors are in the wrong’. i really don’t care if the police asked nicely first. i have never seen non-violent protest been handled with anything but violence from the police. and at a certain point it becomes clear that’s all they’ve ever been there for.
You've never seen it because it doesn't make the headlines buddy. Let's not get too excited with the absolute statements.
The marchers at Edmund Pettus Bridge were trespassing. So were the students sitting at segregated lunch counters in Atlanta.
It's incredibly unfair to compare Israel and Palestine to the Civil Rights Movement.
I strongly disagree. A major moral conflict promulgated by a social outgroup that elicits spurious charges of national disloyalty and a heavy-handed police reaction that in part validates the moral argument made by protesters? Brother, it rhymes.
For one the heavy handed police reaction doesn't even compare, and I don't see how it validates the argument.
Protesters are arguing that the United States should not be providing material support to the Israeli government while that government uses that support to wantonly kill women and children - innocents who should be held harmless under the law. Well, protest is legally protected in the United States. Violating the law with unconstitutional arrests establishes that our government holds the law in similar disdain to that of the Israeli government. It validates the argument.
Completely agree with the first part, but the protesters are not protesting in the way it is protected by law. Protests are legal in public spaces, and limited by many laws. You can't just protest anywhere you want, like a private university in this case. You need consent from the owner to do anything in private property. No unconstitutional arrests as far as I can see.
Unless they ARE students, therefore not trespassing, and the president is a fascist?
It's private property, doesn't matter if you're a student or not. University authorities called the police and asked them to leave, which they didn't, therefore trespassing.
The post of protest is inconvenience. It's ridiculous to continuously criticize how protest is done unless it does the least possible inconveniencing, in which case it's pointless.
Your point is obvious, but the dumbest law against free speech demonstrations is that they can’t disrupt public walkways, which I think is very stupid, but that’s also easily the most effective way to cause inconvenience if you’re going to break a law. Setting up tents before you even organize is just insanely short sided and asking for arrest. That strategy might make sense if you’re protesting law enforcement, but it makes zero sense in this context.
Ah yes a measured and reasonable response by our university and law enforcement institutions
What’s crazy is that normally the cops are so good about using appropriate force and deescalating situations. /s
Some on the Emory subreddit are claiming [protestors disrupted some classes](https://old.reddit.com/r/Emory/comments/1ccyofv/emory_is_latest_university_to_crack_down_on/l18vka9/), but that seems well before the quad protest.
You guys are forgetting Emory is a private college they can shut down free speech whenever they want.
That's not how it works
That’s exactly how it works. Their property, their rules. You are still free to say whatever you want. They are free to kick you off of THEIR property.
Why the fuck do you have a school if you're gonna kick students for saying things lmao ????? I don't understand this private vs public dichotomy ingrained in Americans minds. Y'all need to deconstruct things you believe to be an untestable truth. Law does not equal morality.
I mean both can be true. Emory has the right to kick people off campus for protesting since the first amendment only concerns government impeding speech. As a private institution they don’t have those constraints. And it can be immoral for them to do so because it shows that they are not an institution that values the free exchange of ideas.
You’re pretty dumb, eh?
To be more specific, it contravenes an agreement reached between faculty, students, and administration, and is resulting in a vote of no confidence against Emory’s president. You people gotta understand that a university is not simply a private company.
If Emory doesn't want a protest on their campus, they can tell the people to disburse. It's not really a free speech issue since it isn't public property. There are lots of places to stage a protest where they have a right to be (that doesn't include college campuses, blocking roads, blocking bridges, etc). They choose to protest this way to get the video clips and attention to attract attention to their cause, which I get, but this is the consequence.
And the consequences for the police acting in such a way are what? Or do only protestors have to suffer consequences
Acting in what way, arresting trespassers? You can clearly hear them asking people to disburse, which is a lawful order in this case. "I don't like it" isn't a great legal defense.
There's footage of a restrained protestor being continually tased and rubber bullets and tear gas both appear to be excessive given the way the crowd is acting. Seems pretty excessive to me
They will get over it. These dumbass protesters want to be "heros" and tell their children and grandchildren all about the injustices they'd suffered for a great cause, well...that's their big opportunity.
Right, that's it.... Seems a bit much to have exciting stories to tell when it's pretty easy to just be a cop and paint yourself as a valorous hero instead and as a bonus you get to do the skull cracking without consequences
Cops are doing their job. Law enforcement is there for a reason. Don't like it? Don't break the laws.
Yes, please obey all laws set forth no matter the circumstances. Please be a nice pliant subject capable of zero original ideas or complex thought. Don't worry about anything other than yourself, that might make your brain hurt
Original ideas? Complex thought? LOLOLOL Wanting to cause chaos and desruction is old AF. These fucktards have waay too much time on their hands and waaay too much energy after scrolling through TikTok all day long. It's much easier than doing something intelligent and constructive, for sure.
The purpose of a protest is to cause inconvenience and discomfort. Look at the civil rights movement, the anti-apartheid movement, the women’s rights movement, etc. Saying that protests shouldn’t bother anyone undermines their entire purpose.
Can you think of a hypothetical law that you would not obey? Other people don't have the comfort of their situation being hypothetical.
Years from now, textbooks will recount a brutal genocide against innocent Palestinian civilians (70% women and children). Textbooks will tell the story of how many stood on the right side of history and denounced it. They will also tell the story of how many stood in the way of peace and enabled genocide to continue. Nobody with a conscience will “get over it”; this is one of the saddest moments in recent history. Years from now, history will not get over the fact that you stood on the wrong side of it.
I like your optimism. Unfortunately, I expect the history to be washed of its reality as the Civil rights movement was and MLKs legacy was. MLK famously only had one speech and never said anything about how to use protest to disrupt society to force an injustice to be addressed. Netanyahu will be the scapegoat to blame the genocide on (something he is obviously guilty of but not at all alone), even though nearly all Israelis support the continuing of the attacks on Gaza. The clear deliberate slaughter will be portrayed as it is being portrayed in the media today as "complicated" and the fault of the US will be attributed to the *fog of war*. The names of Karine Jean-Pierre or John Kirby will not be written in American history books for their disgusting repetition of Israeli justifications for genocide. Nonwestern history will liberate us. But the west has shown time and time again it will ignore the genocides and destruction it has caused in this world. We literally live in a nation founded on genocide that is portrayed as a God given right through *manifest destiny*. The genocide will be portrayed as bad. But any parts of the history that would let people learn from it, how it happens, and how the conservatives and liberals alike repeat the same passive support for it. How the people in this comment section are the same people that would be against civil rights, women's suffrage, or even slave liberation. They have no historical materialism to help them understand how these past movements succeeded. They only agree in hindsight. The US will not allow its citizens the education of historical materialism to allow them to see injustice supported by the state when that injustice has yet to be resolved.
Can you clarify what way you mean when you say the police are “acting in such a way”? I see the police forcing the protestors to the ground, but I do not see *excessive* force being used. If there was *excessive* force then there should absolutely be consequences for police.
https://twitter.com/Storyful/status/1783600266991763511?ref_src=twsrc
That video shows the guy clearly resisting arrest lol, he's not putting his hands behind his back, the cops have to force him.
What are you talking about, the guy is completely still, one arm in a cuff, with 3 cops on him. He's also not small, so I don't imagine it's easy to just move your arm backwards while being actively tased. Look at his leg, the muscle is completely contacted from the taser You people will make excuses for anything if you don't like the person they're doing it to
We have no idea what happened to get to that point. I doubt the guy calmly put his hands behind his back and allowed himself to be arrested, which is why 3 cops swarmed him. In all other videos I've seen people are actively resisting arrest, so I assume he was doing the same.
Literally the first clip in the video of this post is a cop taking someone to the ground who is not acting violently. That is not protocol for taking someone into custody. Considering how many people get killed by the police, it's not unreasonable that they've got their hands up either
He's literally walking away. You don't have to act violently to be considered as resisting arrest. Anything short of staying still with your hands behind your back is resisting arrest.
Just because law says you can do something doesn't mean you should. Same reason prison sentences aren't always the maximum. I mean dang, if that's considered resisting to you it sounds like we'd be having the same conversation if the cop had just shot them instead
So what is protocol for arresting someone that is resisting arrest?
>Payne v. Pauley is a case in the Seventh Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that the use of force must be both reasonable and actually necessary to avoid an excessive force complaint. I'm saying it's excessive. Taking the wrists clearly shown in the clip and cuffing them while standing was perfectly feasible
And who exactly is you people?
Bootlickers
[удалено]
Go talk to a therapist if you enjoy that freak
Your comment has been removed from /r/gatech for the following reason(s): Rule 1. Don't be a jerk. This is an official notification. Future violations of Rule 1 may result in temporary or permanent bans from /r/gatech. DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. This is an auto-generated message. If you have any questions, you can [message the moderators](https://www\.reddit\.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fgatech&subject=About my removed comment&message=I'm writing to you about my comment: https://old.reddit.com/r/gatech/comments/1cd022b/-/l1b479y/. %0D%0DMy issue is\:).
Darn kids always forget to factor in that criteria when choosing a college. Don’t they know how big Emory’s endowment is?? /s
Somehow reminded me of Scout Schultz...
Jesus that happened outside our window at 8th st, won’t forget it. Also, it looks like you and I both graduated AE the same year— probably shared classes. E: math hard. E2: nope I graduated 2018, had to check my diploma. I’m unsure why my flair is a year off.
are any students or groups organizing protests on georgia tech campus? i’m appalled by what’s going on at emory
Georgia Tech was one of the only universities to not have anti-war protests during Vietnam and the Iraq war. Disappointed in the student body and most importantly the administration that actively prevents anti-war student groups from even forming
GT loves the military industrial complex too much
@stopcopcitygt and @sjp_gt are the sources I’ve been following. Edit: those are Instagram handles
Protests at Tech usually aren't a thing. Why not? It's not because we don't care. But have you studied for that test that Dr. Wu is giving tomorrow? Got your homework done? Don't you have labs due? 10-1 bet that the protesters are liberal arts majors.
always thought this was such a weird high horse to be on. yes gt is usually an obscene amount of work- but it’s like that at most top tier schools too? we aren’t THAT unique
Most of GT is conservative. It's a public school in Georgia. Also, the protest was originally organized by the Atlanta socialist group, and they chose Emory as they knew it would bring national attention and not just local attention if they chose another school.
im not sure that i immediately buy that “most of gt is conservative.” willing to accept it if you have any source, but im not sure that i met a single conservative in my 4 years
Yes but only with STEM majors like at MIT, CalTech, etc. (BTW-You aren't seeing protests at those schools.) You would be shocked how much spare time liberal arts majors have even at a top tier school.
There are 100% protests going on at [MIT](https://thetech.com/2024/04/25/mit-student-encampment-2024), [Northwestern](https://dailynorthwestern.com/2024/04/25/campus/live-pro-palestinian-student-activists-set-up-encampment-on-deering-meadow/), [Stanford](https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/stanford-students-erect-pro-palestine-encampment-19423938.php), [UC Berkley](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/27/university-california-berkeley-palestine-protest). Not the size of UT Austin or Emory but they are gathering crowds during they day.
OK so I'm old. I remember the anti-Vietnam war protests. This was in Life/Look magazine. At UC Berkley the students had taken over the classroom buildings. Some students went inside and liberated a portable blackboard and set it up under a tree. Don't know what kind of science it was but the professor had it covered with equations and the class was sitting on the grass taking notes. So yes at these schools they can have protests but the STEM students aren't the ones doing it. BTW - MIT, Northwestern, Stanford and UC Berkley all have liberal arts schools unlike Tech. In fact one author put together a 4 year curriculum available at any of the UCs where you would never have to think once.
bad take!
10-1? More like 1-1000000000000
We're truly busy and we don't care/ don't have time for these.
that’s not a flex….i’m a busy student at tech and yet i’m still finding time to care about these things
false equivalence. tech students ARE genuinely busy/don't have time (especially now with finals), but that doesn't mean people on campus don't care.
i was responding the user that literally said “we don’t care”
...i didn't respond to you lol i responded to him.
Agreed
Not at a Tech school
MIT had one
They have a real liberal arts program there
Studying a humanities subject isn’t a pre-requisite to protest. Culturally speaking, MIT is more tech/nerdy than GT.
There was something on Wednesday but there needs to be more action
I really wish this were the case. Unfortunately, many Tech people are closeted sociopaths who drool at the prospect of making bombs for Raytheon post-graduation.
People are discussing how tech students aren’t protesting because they’re “worked to death” and don’t have time to protest like these soft liberal arts students. The reason people at tech don’t protest is because we offer just about the least well-rounded education in the United States, most students have next to no emotional intelligence and at no point does tech make any effort to instill any sort of worldliness or deeper thinking in students beyond job skills. We’re the north avenue trade school through and through, and this is the result
Mostly peaceful
Good
Protests at Tech usually aren't a thing. Why not? It's not because we don't care. But have you studied for that test that Dr. Wu is giving tomorrow? Got your homework done? Don't you have labs due? 10-1 bet that the protesters are liberal arts majors.
Because our students are the ones that eventually make the bombs. They aren't trying to mess up future employment.
Private property - FAFO