PDA

View Full Version : Kent St



olevetonahill
5/4/2007, 05:27 PM
37 yrs ago today . discuss

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 05:28 PM
I'm not saying they deserved to be shot, all I'm saying is I have no sympathy for them.

Paperclip
5/4/2007, 05:28 PM
Four dead in Ohio.

sooneron
5/4/2007, 05:32 PM
I'm not saying they deserved to be shot, all I'm saying is I have no sympathy for them.
You're right, peacefully protesting a war (protected under the constitution) should give any weekend warrior a good reason to kill unarmed people.
Of course, this is from the guy that thinks we should turn rifles on Mexicans crossing the river.

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 05:36 PM
You're right, peacefully protesting a war (protected under the constitution) should give any weekend warrior a good reason to kill unarmed people.
Of course, this is from the guy that thinks we should turn rifles on Mexicans crossing the river.
You got it.

sooneron
5/4/2007, 05:37 PM
I just love little chickenhawks

royalfan5
5/4/2007, 05:39 PM
The James Mitchner book on Kent State is very good.

CUinNC
5/4/2007, 05:39 PM
OleVet - check your PM

I got nuthin' I can post here on KS...nobody won....

sooneron
5/4/2007, 05:40 PM
The James Mitchner book on Kent State is very good.
Yes it is.

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 05:40 PM
I just love little chickenhawks
I didn't say I thought it was right, I said I had no sympathy. And they were hardly peaceful protesters just sitting around singing peace songs and holding hands...they were directly confrontational and at times turned violent by throwing rocks, glass bottles, and other projectiles at police.

The real tragedy is that at least one student who was not a protester got shot. I do have sympathy for that individual, she was just trying to go to class.

sooneron
5/4/2007, 05:42 PM
When someone pushes, people generally push back.

olevetonahill
5/4/2007, 05:43 PM
The protests back then were far from peaceful

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 05:43 PM
When someone pushes, people generally push back.
I'm not sure who you are suggesting did the initial "pushing", but yes...the National Guard definitely pushed back.

sooneron
5/4/2007, 05:48 PM
I'm not sure who you are suggesting did the initial "pushing", but yes...the National Guard definitely pushed back.
After pushing first.

You know what, midget? You're right a bottle or a rock might kill someone with a helmet on- they were correct in the use of deadly force.

olevetonahill
5/4/2007, 05:55 PM
OleVet - check your PM

I got nuthin' I can post here on KS...nobody won....
No peem yet
And I agree America lost in that deal . I was fresh back from the Boonies when I heard , I got ****ed about the whole deal .

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 05:57 PM
After pushing first.

You know what, midget? You're right a bottle or a rock might kill someone with a helmet on- they were correct in the use of deadly force.

Wow, you REALLY need to read up on your history. The violence first started the previous night when some kind of mini-riot took place among some locals and students at a bar. There were cars pushed over, windows broken, etc. and the police were called out. By the time they got there the students took this show of authority as some kind of threat to themselves (even though, keep in mind, they were part of the large group of rioters destroying property).

By the time the national guard had been called out it had turned into a full blown student demonstration AND the Kent State ROTC building had been set on fire. All of this was before the National Guard even got there and the initial violence took place well before the initial police response.

So you put the rock and bottle throwing into the context of setting a damned university building on fire AND the riots the previous night that precipitated all of this and what happened is obviously the result.

You know what? When you're in college, there was a riot the previous night, and you are in a larger group of people responsible for both when the freakin' national guard is called out then it's time to damned well go home and give it a rest for a day.

CUinNC
5/4/2007, 05:59 PM
No peem yet
And I agree America lost in that deal . I was fresh back from the Boonies when I heard , I got ****ed about the whole deal .

Package coming....let me know if not there by end of next week

Dang PM was registering on my end.....where is the Man when you need them? (Mod's)

:pop:

sooneron
5/4/2007, 06:00 PM
You know what? When you're in college, there was a riot the previous night, and you are in a larger group of people responsible for both when the freakin' national guard is called out then it's time to damned well go home and give it a rest for a day.
Uh, OK, this all seems kosher now...


While on the practice field, several members of Troop G, which would within minutes fire the fatal volley, knelt and aimed their weapons at the students in the parking lot. Gen. Canterbury concluded that the crowd had been dispersed and ordered the Guard to march back to the commons area. Some members of Troop G then huddled briefly.

After reassembling on the field, the Guardsmen seemed to begin to retreat as they marched back up the hill, retracing their previous steps. Members of Troop G, while advancing up the hill, continued to glance back to the parking lot, where the most militant and vocal students were located. The students assumed the confrontation was over. Many students began to walk to their next classes.

As the guard reached the crest of the Blanket Hill, near the Pagoda of Taylor Hall, about a dozen members of Troop G simultaneously turned around 180 degrees, aimed and fired their weapons into the crowd in the Prentice Hall parking lot. The 1975 civil trials proved that there was a verbal command to fire.

A total of 67 shots were fired in 13 seconds. Four students: Allison Krause, Jeffrey Miller, Sandra Scheuer and William Schroeder were killed. Nine students were wounded: Joseph Lewis, John Cleary, Thomas Grace, Robbie Stamps, Donald Scott MacKenzie, Alan Canfora, Douglas Wrentmore, James Russell and Dean Kahler. Of the wounded, one was permanently paralyzed, and several were seriously maimed. All were full-time students.

Yeah, they really fired during the confrontation. Maybe you need to bone up on the history.

sooneron
5/4/2007, 06:02 PM
And the ROTC "building" was an abandoned barracks that was scheduled for demolition.

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 06:03 PM
Uh, OK, this all seems kosher now...



Yeah, they really fired during the confrontation. Maybe you need to bone up on the history.

Nothing you posted conflicts with a single thing I said. I never tried to suggest they didn't deliberately fire at students nor was I trying to forgive their behavior. It was absolutely wrong and I'm taking issue with your initial description of these protesters as "peaceful" which is absolutely 100% false. They definitely share a portion of the blame for what happened.

sooneron
5/4/2007, 06:05 PM
So you're saying that every protester took part in the civil disobedience from the previous nights/days?

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 06:06 PM
And the ROTC "building" was an abandoned barracks that was scheduled for demolition.
Well, I'll be sure to remember that the next time I want to protest US foreign policy that it's not a big deal to go and set fire to an unused building on campus. :rolleyes:

Furthermore, the hostility toward the military is abundantly clear. Would you have the same feeling if I protested 9/11 by burning down an Islamic student center on campus?

olevetonahill
5/4/2007, 06:06 PM
Package coming....let me know if not there by end of next week

Dang PM was registering on my end.....where is the Man when you need them? (Mod's)

:pop:
Oh you meant from the other day , Yea I got that peem .

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 06:08 PM
So you're saying that every protester took part in the civil disobedience from the previous nights/days?
No, but you're dealing with the crowd as a singular entity. The riots had been going on since the night before so how the hell is the police suppose to distinguish individuals who were part of the initial violence and the arson from those who aren't within the larger mob? When you're a cop or guardsman that is confronted with a mob that has been going at it since the previous night you can't exactly start trying to filter people right there on the spot.

CUinNC
5/4/2007, 06:09 PM
Nobody will win this.....it's a good thing to discuss & dissect, but the reasons are lost....

Pardon the age thing Sic 'Em, but you, or anyone else won't come out on top of this...JMHO...the times were indeed a' changin'...

this was a dark time in the period...BUT, it is good to talk through it...a lot of people were able to step back & re-examine themselves & what had happened, as well as where they were in themselves......

I'm off the pulpit now...

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 06:12 PM
Nobody will win this.....it's a good thing to discuss & dissect, but the reasons are lost....

Pardon the age thing Sic 'Em, but you, or anyone else won't come out on top of this...JMHO...the times were indeed a' changin'...

Pardon me, but I think that's a load of crap. There were plenty of people from that generation who didn't set buildings on fire, throw dangerous projectiles at police, or advocate treason.

So, I'm not sure what age has to do with it other than to point out "you weren't there." Well, It's going to make history a hell of a lot easier to know that the only people who can speak with any authority are people who were actually AT the event or lived during the time.

sooneron
5/4/2007, 06:12 PM
No, but you're dealing with the crowd as a singular entity. The riots had been going on since the night before so how the hell is the police suppose to distinguish individuals who were part of the initial violence and the arson from those who aren't within the larger mob? When you're a cop or guardsman that is confronted with a mob that has been going at it since the previous night you can't exactly start trying to filter people right there on the spot.
Actually, the **** started to hit the fan on the 1st in the evening. Orders or not, if I am a guardsmen, I wouldn't fire upon unarmed civilians. Big deal, I'm a weekend warrior- kick me out.

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 06:14 PM
Actually, the **** started to hit the fan on the 1st in the evening. Orders or not, if I am a guardsmen, I wouldn't fire upon unarmed civilians. Big deal, I'm a weekend warrior- kick me out.

Again, I don't disagree with that. I'm merely pointing out the protesters were far from "peaceful" and definitely provoked what happened.

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 06:16 PM
Look, if I walk into a bar and I find the biggest baddest SOB in the place and start mouthing off to him then I am partly responsible for what happens when he beats the **** out of me. Did I pose any real danger to him and does that mean that it was perfectly fine for him to do that? Of course not, but you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who didn't attach a significant portion of the blame on me.

That's why I have no sympathy for them. I don't have sympathy for people who purposely put themselves into that kind of situation.

CUinNC
5/4/2007, 06:24 PM
Pardon me, but I think that's a load of crap. There were plenty of people from that generation who didn't set buildings on fire, throw dangerous projectiles at police, or advocate treason.

So, I'm not sure what age has to do with it other than to point out "you weren't there." Well, It's going to make history a hell of a lot easier to know that the only people who can speak with any authority are people who were actually AT the event or lived during the time.

I'm not dissing your comments at all - they are good, but it was different...

Everyone took a stance - and there were only 2 sides - and as it went along, the gas got poured on the fire...not like today, when only the politco's and press form the issues..

I'm not calling you out because of the age...but just wanted to point to the difference in today's approach vs. the rage that was there...

It's different today..

Like I said, nobody won......I'm done & will not joust on this one....sorry.

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 06:26 PM
I'm not dissing your comments at all - they are good, but it was different...

Everyone took a stance - and there were only 2 sides - and as it went along, the gas got poured on the fire...not like today, when only the politco's and press form the issues..

I'm not calling you out because of the age...but just wanted to point to the difference in today's approach vs. the rage that was there...

It's different today..

Like I said, nobody won......I'm done & will not joust on this one....sorry.

Oh, I have plenty of damned rage over Vietnam. ;)

olevetonahill
5/4/2007, 07:42 PM
Oh hell no you dont
Do not leave my thread hanging like a Chad on a Fla Ballot . ;)
Age of aqarious . Hell I ,.lost my spell ck thingy ? :confused:

olevetonahill
5/4/2007, 07:43 PM
Oh, I have plenty of damned rage over Vietnam. ;)
You Damn sure aint gotta clue about that one .

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 08:26 PM
You Damn sure aint gotta clue about that one .
Is it worse than the alternative of not giving a ****?

olevetonahill
5/4/2007, 08:44 PM
Is it worse than the alternative of not giving a ****?
After 21 yrs of Not sayin anything about being there . I really Dont give a **** if , Yall give a **** or not
I got MY 1st welcome home from a crazy assed vet in 92
Out side the VA mental health clinic in Tulsa

Jerk
5/4/2007, 09:02 PM
Actually, the **** started to hit the fan on the 1st in the evening. Orders or not, if I am a guardsmen, I wouldn't fire upon unarmed civilians. Big deal, I'm a weekend warrior- kick me out.
It might be harder to say that if you were actually there and in their shoes. I'm not saying the call to fire on the 'protestors' was right, but I find it odd that 35 years later we still have people saying that the protest was 'peaceful' when it was far from it. It just goes to show that those who wrote the history on this event have done so from a rather one-sided POV. If you gather into a large crowd, surround a small group of soldiers and start assaulting them, bad things can happen. Mob mentality takes over. This is how lynchings occur. Maybe the guardsmen were scared sh*tless. Or maybe they just used it as an excuse to blow away some pro-commie hippies. Who knows. I'm not so quick to judge.

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 09:19 PM
After 21 yrs of Not sayin anything about being there . I really Dont give a **** if , Yall give a **** or not
I got MY 1st welcome home from a crazy assed vet in 92
Out side the VA mental health clinic in Tulsa

Aye, that's understandable. I do give a big **** though. I'm obviously not in the military myself, but I still don't exactly think too highly of it and I suppose that's because I come from such a strong military family but it does **** me the hell off. My uncle was treated in much the same way, he got spit on and called a war criminal in the airport terminal at LAX.

BajaOklahoma
5/4/2007, 09:57 PM
I remember the horror of Kent State.
I remember hearing about the riots (I wasn't there) the night before the shooting. I remember the film (too long ago to be video) and the stupid things the kids did when confronted by people with guns.
I also seem to remember some question about an order to fire - that actually was thought (at one point) to have come from the students.

olevetonahill
5/4/2007, 10:06 PM
I remember the horror of Kent State.
I remember hearing about the riots (I wasn't there) the night before the shooting. I remember the film (too long ago to be video) and the stupid things the kids did when confronted by people with guns.
I also seem to remember some question about an order to fire - that actually was thought (at one point) to have come from the students.
I think with tapes and stuff theve pretty muched proved there was an Order to fire. As a freash back vet, No way in hell could I shoot any of those kids .:eek:

picasso
5/4/2007, 10:18 PM
I'm glad I missed the 60's. I'm a conservative but I was a pot smoking artist in college.
I've often thought that I would have gone and fought like my Marine father did in Korea but my buddy thinks I'da been doing acid and painting concert posters.:D

olevetonahill
5/4/2007, 10:25 PM
I'm glad I missed the 60's. I'm a conservative but I was a pot smoking artist in college.
I've often thought that I would have gone and fought like my Marine father did in Korea but my buddy thinks I'da been doing acid and painting concert posters.:D
Pic , Im glad i lived thru em ;)

Paperclip
5/4/2007, 11:04 PM
I really expected more Neil Young in this thread.

SicEmBaylor
5/4/2007, 11:07 PM
I really expected more Neil Young in this thread.
I hope he remembers that the southern man don't need him around anyhow.

sooneron
5/5/2007, 12:51 AM
It might be harder to say that if you were actually there and in their shoes. I'm not saying the call to fire on the 'protestors' was right, but I find it odd that 35 years later we still have people saying that the protest was 'peaceful' when it was far from it. It just goes to show that those who wrote the history on this event have done so from a rather one-sided POV. If you gather into a large crowd, surround a small group of soldiers and start assaulting them, bad things can happen. Mob mentality takes over. This is how lynchings occur. Maybe the guardsmen were scared sh*tless. Or maybe they just used it as an excuse to blow away some pro-commie hippies. Who knows. I'm not so quick to judge.

I will admit that i was probably off on the peaceful part (there were a lot of people there that were peaceful- the nasty crap is what sells papers) One of the wounded was a friend of my Mom. I have heard some firsthand accounts of what happened. I'm sure a lot of people have through interviews etc.- It was a poor inaccurate attempt to make a point. I really don't think the guardsmen were all that skeered as they had guns and lot of them, plus they had the higer ground, just like Obi Wan.

yermom
5/5/2007, 01:09 AM
Look, if I walk into a bar and I find the biggest baddest SOB in the place and start mouthing off to him then I am partly responsible for what happens when he beats the **** out of me. Did I pose any real danger to him and does that mean that it was perfectly fine for him to do that? Of course not, but you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who didn't attach a significant portion of the blame on me.

That's why I have no sympathy for them. I don't have sympathy for people who purposely put themselves into that kind of situation.

if that account is true, it's more like you taunted/threatened the SOB and he did nothing, then as you walked away he decides to kick your ***

and the 60's were a different time, i mean the Civil Rights movement was based on media coverage for the violence in the South, they recruited white kids to generate more sympathy

college kids today could give a **** about anything for the most part, i guess the chance to be drafted at 18 makes you a bit more mature

(i was not alive in the 60's either, but i have had a lot of exposure to the history)

Octavian
5/5/2007, 01:11 AM
Kent St. was a watershed moment.



Luckily for us....we now have "free speech zones" so that kind of thing won't happen again.



http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/820/zone1tp6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

yermom
5/5/2007, 01:18 AM
Four dead in Ohio.

that was the first thing i heard of when i saw the thread too

i always thought "For What It's Worth" was about Kent St. too, but apparently it was recorded before it happened, almost foreshadowing

sooneron
5/5/2007, 01:21 AM
that was the first thing i heard of when i saw the thread too

i always thought "For What It's Worth" was about Kent St. too, but apparently it was recorded before it happened, almost foreshadowing
Did you ever hear the candyskins version of FWIW? They use the percussion and hooo from Sympathy For The Devil as ambience and beat.

picasso
5/5/2007, 01:21 AM
"he's the harry headed gent, who ran amuck in Kent..."

47straight
5/5/2007, 01:28 AM
How do you guys feel about the recurring theme of a small subset of protestors making things violent, with the largest reprecussions only to fall later on the peaceful protestors? The same thing played out in LA on May 1.

Would the peaceful protestors be better served by self-policing the violent out of their ranks, or controlling them when they start to get rowdy? Or does the ensuing beat-down validate their cause and gather more publicity, ultimately being good for the cause?

sooneron
5/5/2007, 01:36 AM
How do you guys feel about the recurring theme of a small subset of protestors making things violent, with the largest reprecussions only to fall later on the peaceful protestors? The same thing played out in LA on May 1.

Would the peaceful protestors be better served by self-policing the violent out of their ranks, or controlling them when they start to get rowdy? Or does the ensuing beat-down validate their cause and gather more publicity, ultimately being good for the cause?
I'm sure there were some pulling the Mr Mackie "This is bad Mmkay?" But when mob mentality takes over, the voices of reason usually don't make enough noise until after the fact. People were really ****ed at that point- you had Watts and Chicago and top it off with Nixon sending forces into Cambodia- powderkeg of anger

picasso
5/5/2007, 01:50 AM
those who live by dissent seem to dislike hearing it thrown back at 'em.

just sayin.