[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Rokenn: Penning peaceful demonstrators is what I except from repressive regimes in other parts of the world. Not here in the US. If the demonstrators break the law then arrest them, otherwise leave it be.

That sounds good on paper, Rokenn, but is not nearly so easy to do in reality.

A mob of 300+ people could easily "take on a life of its own". There are many documented cases of mobs starting off demonstrating peacefully, only to become more bold and agressive as their numbers grow. Very soon, they are a force that is entirely too large for the police to adequately handle.

I attended N.C. State University in 1983-84, the year after they won the NCAA National Tournament. Our first game the following year was against the very same Houston Cougars we had defeated for the national title. Once again, N.C. State was given no chance to win.....and once again they pulled off the upset.

I was part of the mob that went out in the streets to celebrate. We literally shut down Hillsborough Avenue - a major 4-lane highway that runs by the campus and is one of the primary business arteries for Raleigh. No traffic could even approach the 8-10 blocks we had poured on to. The police allowed us to celebrate for a short while, then told everybody to move the party onto the campus grounds so they could re-open the road. We did, but there were probably 2000 students out there. If we had told the police to back off, there wouldn't have been much they could've done about. Sure, they can bring in "riot squads", but you're talking several hours of manpower and lots of collateral damage.

A crowd of 300 Bush protestors could easily do the same thing. They could swarm the road and bring the entire motorcade to a screeching halt...presenting a very real threat to the President's safety. Supporters are allowed to line the road because it can be assumed that they will not try to stop the motorcade and present a hazard to the president.

If you check, I believe you will find this practice of a "designated place of protest" has been in effect since the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan in 1980. I can assure you the policy was in place during Clinton's administration, just as I believe it was for the two administrations before him.

Attalus makes a very valid point.....Freedom of Speech is not the same as a freedom to create a potentially dangerous environment.

BTW, if you think a crowd of 300 couldn't accomplish the same thing the crowd of 2000 did, I offer yet another example from my year at N.C. State. A friend who lived in one of the dorms told me one day that he had joined a crowd of students from the neighboring dorms the night before and started running across the campus. The crowd was about 300 strong. They ran from one end of campus to the other. (Why? Because college kids do crazy things sometimes. ) On their way back, they ran onto the other 4-lane highway that bordered the campus.

Cars were forced to either slow down or stop as a crowd of 300 college kids came jogging down the freeway un-announced (although he said they DID stop for the traffic lights [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] ) As I said, a mob sometimes becomes an "entity" unto itself....one that can quickly get out of control if it isn't handled properly.

Hunter, it isn't a matter of the First Amendment only granting Freedom of Inoffensive Speech. The protestors were allowed to hold their demonstration and speak their mind. They could easily have contacted local TV stations to get an "on air" interview to voice thier complaints publicly - and reach a much larger audience. Also, if this guy was an independent who just wanted a chance to George Bush how he felt in person, he could always picket in front of the White House. I know they have dramatically increased the security around the gates since the "shooting incident" a year or so ago, but I'm sure he could contact the P.R. people and set-up a time and place for his peaceful protest.