LSU frat members taunt Kent State Massacre

[dekeguy]

I figured that my post would elicit some comments refusing to consider my point of view, so let's look at it point by point.

Originally Posted by dekeguy

Perhaps we might review the bidding here. In 1970 tensions at Kent State were high and building.
-This is simply a matter of generally accepted fact reported by every source I have found.

The night before the Kent State riot a mob burned down the ROTC building.
-Again, a matter of fact. It did happen.

On the day of the riot a howling mob of 2000 advanced on a handfull of National Guard personnel pelting them with potentially lethal bricks, rocks, and bottles.
-There was a riot. Most estimates place it at plus or minus 2000 participants. The mob did pelt the guardsmen with bricks, rocks, and bottles. I presume we can take it that we all know the potential of being struck in the face with a brick or rock or bottle?

The guardsmen fell back but were blocked by a chainlink fence through which they could not retreat.
-If you disagree, fine. There is always room for interpretation. I based my comment on published articles, overhead photos, and conversations with people who were actually there.

When threatened by imminent violent contact with an angry mob and with no place to go to get out of the way the guardsmen fired.
-Even if we grant that there might have been an escape path, which is open to discussion, the guardsmen were threatened by violent contact with an angry mob. Consider the bricks, rocks, and bottles.

As is obvious from the number of hits vs. the number of rounds fired most shots were over the heads of the rioters in an attempt to break up this very real and proximate danger to the guardsmen.
-One must consider the number of rounds fired against the number of actual hits. If the guardsmen had intended to fire for effect into the mob there would have been dozens of casualties. Thank God this did not happen.

The Kent State community bears great responsibility for what happened. One cannot participate in potentially lethal actions and not expect a response from those on the receiving end of those actions.
-Seems pretty obvious to me.

Particularly when the guardsmen were acting as the in loco police authority and the mob was involved in riot.
-The Guard, called out by the governor, was acting not as soldiers but exercising police powers of riot control and suppression.

The unpopularity of the Viet Nam War does not confer a license for riot and murderous actions on the mob.
-I stand by this comment. There is a great deal of difference between peaceful assembly and riot.

Viewed in this light Kent State is hardly in a position to howl in protest over the comments referring to the riot by which they were the authors of their own calamity.
-This is admittedly a tough minded statement but viewed in a broader context it likewise stands as written. If one throws a riot one cannot reasonably claim victimhood when things work out very badly. The root cause of the tragic incident was the action of the mob in rioting.

As to the sign itself, I am of two minds. It does not exactly follow the traditions of Southern Hospitality to a visiting team but on the other hand, on an undergraduate mindset level it points out the probable result of taking on a top rated SEC team. Granted that it may not be in the best of taste, but I don't know any DEKEs who carry around a copy of Emily Post.
Whether or not

-I'll grant that the sign was in poor taste but not much more than that. My concern is that we have become so PC as to have lost sight of the simple fact that the real world is a tough place.

[amIblue?]

Originally Posted by dekeguy

I figured that my post would elicit some comments refusing to consider my point of view, so let's look at it point by point.


-I'll grant that the sign was in poor taste but not much more than that. My concern is that we have become so PC as to have lost sight of the simple fact that the real world is a tough place.

Do you feel all better now?

[dekeguy]

Originally Posted by amIblue?

Do you feel all better now?

Oh, so much better. Thank you granny.

[amIblue?]

Originally Posted by dekeguy

Oh, so much better. Thank you granny.

That's great! Your chapter at LSU was still out if line, but at least you got it all out.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by dekeguy

I'll grant that the sign was in poor taste but not much more than that. My concern is that we have become so PC as to have lost sight of the simple fact that the real world is a tough place.

The reaction here is, as is per usual with non-PC activities carried out on college campuses, completely over the top. Sure, the chapter apologized, but it's not likely they did so out of remorse, but rather because they felt it would be easier if they did so than to stand by their remarks.

That said, should a public school be in the business of punishing students and organizations for the content of their speech? Where's that line between wanton violations of these students' constitutional right to say stupid/offensive things vs. the school's powers regarding student conduct?

Our organizations tend to approach schools who are punishing or threatening to punish our constituent groups for offensive speech or behavior in a manner which seems to suggest the schools actually have such power.

I'm not sure it's as clear cut as that.