Saturday, October 18, 2014

I'll See Your Blarney Blowout & Raise You

 Keene State College this afternoon (Seth Meyer photo)

Looks like police in bucolic Keene, New Hampshire didn't read the $160,000 Davis Report deconstructing police response to the March 14 Blarney Blowout.

And by the looks of photos posted to social media the drunken angry crowds do not appear quite as large as those faced by Amherst and UMass police that ignoble day.

 Blarney Blowout March 2012

When alcohol fueled college aged youth start throwing beer bottles and cans -- some of them full -- police simply have to act.  And if they are not wearing riot gear there's a much greater chance of the officer being injured.

 Blarney Blowout March 2013

It really is a chicken and egg kind of thing.  If rowdy youth listened to heavily outnumbered police and dispersed rather than dangerously escalating things via thrown objects, tear gas would not fill the air.

Blarney Blowout March 8, 2014


Anonymous said...

Word gets around... the Davis report simply gives students everywhere permission to challenge the police. Pathetic. Richard Marsh

Walter Graff said...

I was at the fest. Heard the cops sirens but saw nothing with students, nor riot gear. It was on the fringe of the event and not in downtown.

Anonymous said...

Nothing to report, Larry goes to Blarney. Proud employed Phillips st alumni. Keep living your life larry. Amherst blows.

Anonymous said...

The Boston Globe said both tear gas and pepper spray was used. What was most upsetting were the photos of kids with blood running down their faces after being hit with full cans of beer. One girl was shown in a second photo, chugging more alcohol with the blood still running down the side of her head.

Anonymous said...

They need Calvin Terrel up there to teach them how not to be warriors, or is that the other way around.

Anonymous said...

Did you read the report in the Globe. It attracted students from UMASS and surrounding universities.

Anonymous said...

There is a lot more here than flippant or knee-jerk responses can summarize.

It's like dismissing the entire anti-war/civil-rights movement as a "bunch of dirty hippies."

There is an angst and a rage that is being suppressed and when that happens, it only means that it will become more tumultuous when it ever does get organized.

Larry Kelley said...

Yeah, the old "angst and a rage" routine.

Methinks it's more the alcohol.

Anonymous said...

Its a "one up" game fueled by the MSM, social media and weak leadership. I see your blarney and I'll raise you one harvest.

Stay away from this hell-hole come early March.

Anonymous said...

Leadership? UMASS has leadership? Where is that exactly?

Anonymous said...

Stay away from this hell-hole come early March.

And this weekend...

prof r m said...

"When alcohol fueled college aged youth start throwing beer bottles and cans -- some of them full -- police simply have to act."

Funny to read this, I remember a Sunderland farm party in 80s where there were 100's of party goers, 3 kegs showing up every half hour, bottles, cans, dope, you name it. Lots of what most folks call fun.

The police came, tried to break it up, some students threw some bottles....the police got pissed and then the police left. The party went on and raged all night. Wicked New England Fall Majah Rajah.

Remember this one, was it in the news, talked about for weeks/years? No....because the police just left - so the night was peaceful. They were outnumbered and did not want to start a war (echem). Some wise police there in Sunderland back then, knew how to achieve the end result vs. just being right and hurting folks to prove they are peaceful.

Anonymous said...

As someone who was at both Blarney and pumpkin fest this weekend the police response at Keene was 100% necessary. Unlike blarney, where students were much more contained, the scene at Keene was insane. Also, Larry, you're an old troll and need to get a real job.

Larry Kelley said...

You do get around.

Dr. Ed said...

The Davis Report no more gave students the right to challenge the police than the President's Commission on Campus Unrest gave their parents the right to challenge the National Guard!

Remember that it was President NIXON who put together that commission, and memory is that about a third of the people on it were either Active or Retired Military Officers at least at what would now be the "O-7 Pay Grade" (i.e. Army Brigideer General or equivalent).

Folks, Richard Nixon didn't think much of the "dirty hippies" and these were career military men who had served under President's Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson (and if not retired) Nixon -- all "hawkish" POTUSs -- they and the rest had been selected by Nixon as well.

Remember too that it wasn't just the 4 dead at Kent State but a few more at (then-All-Black) Jackson State where the cops basically shot the shite out of an occupied dorm (that then fronted on a city street).

the city & state police started shooting is open to dispute, but the fact that they did, amongst other things killing a completely-innocent high school student is a historical fact. There were empty shell casings and holes in the dorm -- we have pictures of the shot-up dorm.

Say what you want about Davis, the PCoCU were respected "establishment" people -- "squares" I believe the term of the era was. And they said pretty much what Davis did -- they actually WENT FURTHER THAN DAVIS DID! Yes, students should comply with legitimate (and comprehensible) orders of the cops and/or soldiers. However, both then and now, legitimate/coherent orders were commingled with ones that were neither.

One must be ABLE to comply with the order of a police officer, >>>*AND*<<< is not something that is perceived as being inherently dangerous -- regardless of if it is or not.

For example, I like to think that any officer -- of any rank -- who ordered people to lie down in the travel lane of I-91 would be summarily removed of command by his/her/its fellow officers who would immediately countermand the order. Probably saying something along the lines of "Don't F****** do that, your gonna get F******* killed -- We've arrested him, and we're saying don't F****** do it!"

Officers -- answer honestly to yourselves -- if the scene commander did something that outrageous, you'd have him/her/it in the back of a cruiser damn fast, wouldn't you? I don't quite know how you'd justify it, nor if there is an applicable protocol, nor do I want to -- but this is not North Korea and you are Americans,products of the Western Christian Liberal Enlightenment.

You would not force people into the path of a 50 ton truck traveling a mile-a-minute (and we both know they both weigh more and are going faster than that). Even though some of you don't much like me, you wouldn't even do it to me -- it's called "integrity."

Notwithstanding this, I wouldn't comply with such an order. It would be suicidal and I'm not.

MY POINT: Officers have to make damn sure it is both possible and safe for people to comply iwth their orders BEFORE they issue them.

Anonymous said...

Part 2 of 3

A point Davis makes is that a large snowbank (I don't know -- I wasn't there) precluded large numbers of people from quickly going in the direction the APD wanted them to go. "Bottleneck" I believe is what they called it -- a narrow treacherous passage or something.

Davis implies -- and I'll state -- that's when everything went to hell. Once it is clearly impossible to comply with the officer'/s orders, the whole thing cascades and all compliance is lost.

And then when various cops start contradicting each other... That was a big issue in the 1960's -- and the thing to remember is that once you are harmed (even yelled at) fir doing what you *honestly believed* the other cop wanted you do do, you're not going to trust *any* of them, and that means voluntary compliance is out the window.

That means that your hooligans and criminals become your peer leaders -- the troublemakers have lambs to take to the slaughter.

Remember that if all the cops aren't saying the *same* thing, none of them are really saying *anythi8ng.* Those of you who are parents are familiar (I presume) with the Mommy/Daddy approach -- a child asks both parents and takes the answer the child likes best. That's only 2 different answers -- with 60 cops and if I remember how to calculate probability. that's 60! possible combinations of answers -- a number with 14 consecutive zeros to the *left* of the decimal point.

That's what I mean by if the cops aren't ALL saying the EXACT same things, they all are really saying absolutely NOTHING. They just become noise.

Yes, I would do my level best to get myself and my friends to safety (just like I did at "Fry Mumia" -- complying with police orders if possible, defying them if need be -- but only concerned about the well-being of the people I was responsible for and getting them to safety -- and doing whatever was necessary to accomplish that end.

But that's me, and people like me are unique. Enku, you know that.

What you are more going to have -- and I suspect did have -- was predators leading lambs to slaughter. Troublemakers stirring up trouble, *intentionally* putting innocent (naive) kids into harm's way.

Ever notice how the schmucks trowing the bottles are 4-5 rows back where you can't get at them? I don't know how much of it is thought out and how much they are natural predators but that's not accidental. They are trying to incite things.

And I'll bet there were at least a dozen rapes that day. Girls in wet, muddy clothing, girls who can't go home and who don;t realize that the boy's motives are predatory and not protective, throw in intoxication and more alcohol (and perhaps other things) provided -- not a good situation.

Think like a scared (and drunk) 18-19 year old girl. Lots of big men (cops and students) -- many of whom outweigh you by upwards of 100 lbs (which is all some of those girls weigh) -- girls don't want to be in the middle of that any more than we'd want to be in the middle of a pro footbal game -- if you are that much smaller than combatants, you will get hurt, and the young ladies know that.

(This is pointed out in _My name is Charlotee Simmons_ -- and any parent of a daughter needs to read that book.)

The cops are "driving" students and you have run away from them. Maybe you've had pepperballs shot at you -- in any case, you fear the police and you've fled from them. You are in a place where you are safe from that -- indoors, somewhere -- except now a guy (or guys) are taking off your clothes.

You don't want that -- and you definitely don't want what come next -- but what can you do? Go back out into the clanger that you've fled from? Call the police who *are* the danger that you've fled from -- and expect them to INSTANTLY switch form considering you a perp to a victim? (How the hell are they supposed to know -- and in all honesty, could/would they?)

Dr. Ed Part 3 said...

Part 3 of 3
If you still have your cell phone, and if it still works (or if you had an adviser like me who told you to have a second cheap/small cell phone hidden in your underwear and to go into the bathroom to use it) you can call your friends, but they can't get to you, even if you call your parents, unless they (a) live in Amherst and (b) know some cops personally, they aren't going to be able to do anything quick enough to stop you from being raped. (You might be able to be in the bathroom, alone, for 3-5 minutes, if you keep your head, but that's IT -- no one is going to help you.

If you're a good actor, you can pretend to have a psycho boyfriend, or a father in the Mafia, or that you have AIDS or something particularly vile & nasty, but if you've got the presence of mind to do this, you wouldn't have wound up being the only girl in a room full of guys in the first place.

In Maine, the first offense of pulling a false fire alarm is (or was) only a $200 fine, and I told my RAs that I'd rather give them $200 than have one of them being raped on my conscience -- I never told them to do it and said I wasn't, only that I would go with them to court (if charges were pressed) and I;d give them the money for the fine. And I was a firefighter at the time.

I don't know if that is a good idea in Amherst, places like Puffton don't even have a fire alarm to pull -- but in the middle of a riot? AFD would have to roll, I guess, but you find a half-naked drunk girl babbling about how scared she is -- yet she is not drunk enough for an ETPH transport?

But she'd already have dialed 911 -- she's fled the cops & FFs -- and the perps are playing to her fears of them. The perps are also reminding her that she's 18/19 and drunk and telling her she will be in trouble if UMass finds out about that, and that she also will be in trouble if UM finds out she was (wherever she is) and reminding her of the email from Enku warning dire consequences and the rest.

And she believes them -- I can not and will not give details but these predators are very convincing. And UMass does threaten dire consequences...

So you are 18-19 years old, you are young and more scared than you have ever been before. Reality is that you're going to be raped, and if you are lucky by only one guy, but reality also is that you likely aren't going to be lucky.

And while you might try to avoid pregnancy and limp into Death Services on Monday morning, you aren't going to say anything about it being rape. Not with UMass promising to kick out lots of kids and Larry screaming for them to do it.

You aren't going to say anything...

Now bear in mind that I have presented this as the perps being total strangers and the victims not having *any* sexual feelings toward them. Reality is that it usually is a guy/guys whom they kinda liked, kinda were interested in, might even have been thinking about having sex with. Maybe even then -- but
not "going as far" as he did, or not having the type of sex they did, and maybe only with him and not his roommate(s) too. Or maybe not at the same time.

It's definitely rape, it'd definitely forcible rape, what makes it messy if that she has feelings for the perp. And she's really messed up.

I can h0nestly say that I have NO knowledge of ANT rapes occurring during the BBO -- I would not have written the above if I did. But my guess is that things like this happened that afternoon & evening, and this is why I have so many problems with the current approach.

Give the kids something to do, give them a chance to meet potential bedmates (if not spouses -- people still DO fall in love in college and get married upon graduation) -- and do it in a manner so there is some adult supervision.

Have an under-adult-supervision 18 year old drinking age....

Dr. Ed said...

I'm also hearing reports of lawsuits being planned against the MASSACHUSETTS State Police -- yes, I thought Keene was in New Hampshire as well.

Sovereign Immunity ends at the state line -- I believe those troopers can be sued in Massachusetts as private citizens -- MA Federal courts don't look at NH law -- this could get interesting...

Anonymous said...

Ed, I don't read your novels on here. Can you stick to a comment? If you can't get your point across in less than 100 words you lose the reader.

Dr. Ed said...

OK. Shut up, Read the Davis Report, and Do What He Says.