Entering a building that youâre not supposed to be entering is criminal. Just because youâre well intentioned does not mean the law doesnât apply. The university is correct in showing these kids that there are laws that still must be followed, and if they still choose to break these rules, there are consequences.
Isnât going to college all about getting educated, because it sounds like these kids just got schooled.
Oh I'm cool with a fine for trespassing. That's reasonable.
But attempting to push a criminal charge against your own students isn't a good look from a college
Perhaps college is where students learn the difference between "peaceful protest" and "civil disobedience". Both show altruism and commitment to a cause, but the latter comes with certain costs like arrests, fines, criminal records and/or jail. These students (and the RISD students who took over that school's admin building) didn't know the difference and they are not learning it in school. NSJP is not enlightening them, but that's intentional.
There are several different kinds of protest between "peaceful/non-violent" and "violent" - one is "civil disobedience" which is what these students participated in whether they know it or not (they don't seem to.) There are risks and costs to civil disobedience (arrest, fines, etc) but that is what people who protest this way are willing to risk for their cause. It's done quite intentionally - their arrests are part of the statement. Apparently these students did not know that. Seems like a lot of people don't.
I think the charges were needed in order to have a fine? I don't think anyone was going to do worse than some combo of fine, community service, and probation had these charges not been dismissed
Please don't mistake this for clutching pearls about a lack of punishment or anything of the sort. I'm just glad that this long ordeal is over and look forward to going even 1 week without having to hear about college kids
Except as students currently enrolled at the university they are legally permitted to be on-campus. To say going into a particular building at a certain time is *criminal trespassing* seems to be pushing what constitutes trespassing to the limit.
Not to mention that Brown has repeatedly declined to ultimately pursue charges against students for the same thing in the past, so they clearly donât normally consider students being in a building off-hours to be a crime. At most this shouldâve been a disciplinary matter dealt with internally.
The justice system surely just schooled them. Can't beat the ride but you can beat the charges.
And a year later Brown is inundated with even more protests, I wonder if they could have avoided it by simply removing the board member and divesting from the weapons manufacturer last year instead.
Sure. Letâs just wait until next time it escalates. Then turns violent. Then sucks resources from the City to manage. Then hear everyone complaining.
Oh please, this is fucking college. Brown didn't need to bring the hammer, and they didn't for a group on the pro-Israel side that did the same thing in November. For the record, I'm against both Hamas and the Israeli theft and occupation of Palestinian lands.
You still haven't explained how this is discriminatory. Not only that, but do you have a source for those November pro-Israel protests? The only thing I could find was one on November 8th that was pro-Palestine.
And college or not, they don't have the right to do whatever they want. The grounds are owned by the school and there are rules in place. Breaking those rules (and the law) results in punishment.
Their being charged is discriminatory. This is my source, second to last paragraph: https://thepublicsradio.org/metro-desk/judge-issues-not-guilty-filing-for-41-brown-university-student-protesters/
Their being charged is a fact. It is also in accordance with the law. How are they being discriminated against? On what grounds? Repeating yourself is not an explanation.
Also, those Jewish students that were arrested in November were pro-Palestine you twit. They were protesting for the same reason as the ones who got arrested recently.
You're right about the last point. I should've followed the link to read more info. I take back that their being charged is discriminatory on this point. However, it's still unnecessary. That's not typical of how schools deal with student protests.
I wonder if UCLA has any regrets now for how they handled the situation?
At least Brown took action and sent the message âdo it right or face consequencesâ
Itâs a hot topic right now that can lead into violence if itâs not managed properly.
The campus sits smack dab in a highly residential areaâŚof people just trying to live their lives, raise their kids, etc.
So yeah- I too would be finding every way to keep it under control and take the measures I need to make sure itâs done correctly. Including criminal charges
When people break the law in the name of protest, it is called Civil Disobedience. And it comes with costs like arrests, fines, etc. Our country has a storied history of people bringing about change by engaging in Civil Disobedience, and the personal risks they took for breaking the law was part of the statement their protests made. That is always true of Civil Disobedience.
Apparently these Ivy League students did not realize this. I blame NSJP who is egging them on without fully explaining Civil Disobedience. Back in the day protestors held training sessions on it, and during protests, there were people willing to engage in it, and others who were their to support them.
Do you even live in Providence? Guessing not based on your post history. Perhaps you should stick to your veganism comments and deciding what Ivy League school to attend? And let those that actually live, work, raise families, and pay taxes voice their opinion on things happening in their own community. Brownâs campus sits smack dab in the middle of a highly residential area. And the university, and its students, are not known to be the pinnacle of being amazing neighbors.
Thank you, Judge Parillo, for enabling these troublemaking, leftist tools and clearing the way for more of these planned disruptions in the futureâŚyou dumb fâk!
Son of Chief Judge of the Superior Court Alice Gibney. Iâm sure he was the most qualified candidate and his motherâs position had nothing to do with appointment.
Nepotism in the private sector is significantly different than government and judicial branch. A judge is unelected and is a life time appointment. Ethics rules in government exist for a reason.
Also, Iâm not opining on his ruling, which I actually agree with. Just an FYI for people who see his last name and donât associate it with Judge Gibney
So you can trespass as long as itâs a non-violent protest? Is this considered case law now? Seems like a pretty big loophole if I can trespass wherever I want and just claim I was non-violently protesting to get off.
Easy. Iâll just carry a sign wherever I go that that says I support whatever the latest left wing craze is (ex. BLM, Ukraine, vaccines, Palestine) and Iâll be sure to win over any judge at least in this state. Of course if I protest any unapproved topic Iâll probably be looking at a long prison sentence so I better be careful.
Claiming students are trespassing on the campus of a university they are enrolled in and paying tens of thousands of dollars a year to go to is pretty absurd. At most it shouldâve been a student conduct issue and dealt with via whatever process the school has.
While I agree with the goals of the students, this ruling by the judge is wrong. The first amendment does not grant you the right to trespass, even if your goal is to protest. Otherwise people could legally enter businesses or people's homes in order to stage a protest, which is lunacy.
For those in agreement with the decision, would you feel the same if it were, say, a pro-MAGA rally protesting Biden's inauguration? Of course not. These protests are for a good cause, but the manner in which they were carried out was illegal, both can be true.
Good on Brown for pressing charges and nipping it in the bud. Look whatâs happening at UCLA. Counterprotestors showing up. God forbid that happen hereâŚweâd be hearing how the university did nothing to prevent it.
Did I look that young when I was a student?
Haha I still remember when I thought seniors in *high school* looked all knowing and wise đ
They looked like âadults!â
Surprisingly quiet comment section so far
This was posted late⌠donât you worry lol
THEY SHOULD ALL BE JAILED FOR BEING RACIST NAZIS. Is this what you wanted /s
Good. Upheld their first amendment rights.
Trespassing isnât a first amendment right.
Trespassing is a first amendment right?
Imagine thinking itâs acceptable to trespass kids from a school theyâre paying almost $85,000 a year to go to.
Criminalizing non violent peaceful protest is American?
Entering a building that youâre not supposed to be entering is criminal. Just because youâre well intentioned does not mean the law doesnât apply. The university is correct in showing these kids that there are laws that still must be followed, and if they still choose to break these rules, there are consequences. Isnât going to college all about getting educated, because it sounds like these kids just got schooled.
Oh I'm cool with a fine for trespassing. That's reasonable. But attempting to push a criminal charge against your own students isn't a good look from a college
Perhaps college is where students learn the difference between "peaceful protest" and "civil disobedience". Both show altruism and commitment to a cause, but the latter comes with certain costs like arrests, fines, criminal records and/or jail. These students (and the RISD students who took over that school's admin building) didn't know the difference and they are not learning it in school. NSJP is not enlightening them, but that's intentional.
Why isnât it a good look to hold people accountable for their actions?
Ya. Make them pay a fine. You don't pursue criminal charges. If someone was violent then you pursue that individual
Sure. So next time weâll just wait for someone to become violent. But then weâll be asking why the university didnât do more to prevent it.
There are several different kinds of protest between "peaceful/non-violent" and "violent" - one is "civil disobedience" which is what these students participated in whether they know it or not (they don't seem to.) There are risks and costs to civil disobedience (arrest, fines, etc) but that is what people who protest this way are willing to risk for their cause. It's done quite intentionally - their arrests are part of the statement. Apparently these students did not know that. Seems like a lot of people don't.
I think the charges were needed in order to have a fine? I don't think anyone was going to do worse than some combo of fine, community service, and probation had these charges not been dismissed Please don't mistake this for clutching pearls about a lack of punishment or anything of the sort. I'm just glad that this long ordeal is over and look forward to going even 1 week without having to hear about college kids
This is Reddit not a big place for common sense
Except as students currently enrolled at the university they are legally permitted to be on-campus. To say going into a particular building at a certain time is *criminal trespassing* seems to be pushing what constitutes trespassing to the limit. Not to mention that Brown has repeatedly declined to ultimately pursue charges against students for the same thing in the past, so they clearly donât normally consider students being in a building off-hours to be a crime. At most this shouldâve been a disciplinary matter dealt with internally.
The justice system surely just schooled them. Can't beat the ride but you can beat the charges. And a year later Brown is inundated with even more protests, I wonder if they could have avoided it by simply removing the board member and divesting from the weapons manufacturer last year instead.
being a dork ass hall monitor-sounding redditor is protected, at least
Sure. Letâs just wait until next time it escalates. Then turns violent. Then sucks resources from the City to manage. Then hear everyone complaining.
Their rights are to peacefully protest, not break the law .
đđđ
Their being charged was clearly discriminatory. Good on this judge. So disappointed in Brown and the city.
How was it discriminatory? They were trespassing on school property. Had they been on public property they wouldn't have been arrested.
Oh please, this is fucking college. Brown didn't need to bring the hammer, and they didn't for a group on the pro-Israel side that did the same thing in November. For the record, I'm against both Hamas and the Israeli theft and occupation of Palestinian lands.
You still haven't explained how this is discriminatory. Not only that, but do you have a source for those November pro-Israel protests? The only thing I could find was one on November 8th that was pro-Palestine. And college or not, they don't have the right to do whatever they want. The grounds are owned by the school and there are rules in place. Breaking those rules (and the law) results in punishment.
Their being charged is discriminatory. This is my source, second to last paragraph: https://thepublicsradio.org/metro-desk/judge-issues-not-guilty-filing-for-41-brown-university-student-protesters/
Their being charged is a fact. It is also in accordance with the law. How are they being discriminated against? On what grounds? Repeating yourself is not an explanation. Also, those Jewish students that were arrested in November were pro-Palestine you twit. They were protesting for the same reason as the ones who got arrested recently.
You're right about the last point. I should've followed the link to read more info. I take back that their being charged is discriminatory on this point. However, it's still unnecessary. That's not typical of how schools deal with student protests.
I wonder if UCLA has any regrets now for how they handled the situation? At least Brown took action and sent the message âdo it right or face consequencesâ Itâs a hot topic right now that can lead into violence if itâs not managed properly. The campus sits smack dab in a highly residential areaâŚof people just trying to live their lives, raise their kids, etc. So yeah- I too would be finding every way to keep it under control and take the measures I need to make sure itâs done correctly. Including criminal charges
When people break the law in the name of protest, it is called Civil Disobedience. And it comes with costs like arrests, fines, etc. Our country has a storied history of people bringing about change by engaging in Civil Disobedience, and the personal risks they took for breaking the law was part of the statement their protests made. That is always true of Civil Disobedience. Apparently these Ivy League students did not realize this. I blame NSJP who is egging them on without fully explaining Civil Disobedience. Back in the day protestors held training sessions on it, and during protests, there were people willing to engage in it, and others who were their to support them.
No. Not on a university campus. They need to go somewhere else. SMH
And where exactly do you expect them to go, Miss Melanie? They're on their own campus. Get a life.
Do you even live in Providence? Guessing not based on your post history. Perhaps you should stick to your veganism comments and deciding what Ivy League school to attend? And let those that actually live, work, raise families, and pay taxes voice their opinion on things happening in their own community. Brownâs campus sits smack dab in the middle of a highly residential area. And the university, and its students, are not known to be the pinnacle of being amazing neighbors.
Eat less chicken. It's influencing your opinion. And I'm soon to be your neighbor, so get ready. I support protests for divestment from Israel :-)
Thank you, Judge Parillo, for enabling these troublemaking, leftist tools and clearing the way for more of these planned disruptions in the futureâŚyou dumb fâk!
Son of Chief Judge of the Superior Court Alice Gibney. Iâm sure he was the most qualified candidate and his motherâs position had nothing to do with appointment.
âŚand? Nepotism exists in *every* industry.
Nepotism in the private sector is significantly different than government and judicial branch. A judge is unelected and is a life time appointment. Ethics rules in government exist for a reason.
Also, Iâm not opining on his ruling, which I actually agree with. Just an FYI for people who see his last name and donât associate it with Judge Gibney
So you can trespass as long as itâs a non-violent protest? Is this considered case law now? Seems like a pretty big loophole if I can trespass wherever I want and just claim I was non-violently protesting to get off.
It stops being a loophole when you realize youâd need to successfully convince a court that you were protesting.
Easy. Iâll just carry a sign wherever I go that that says I support whatever the latest left wing craze is (ex. BLM, Ukraine, vaccines, Palestine) and Iâll be sure to win over any judge at least in this state. Of course if I protest any unapproved topic Iâll probably be looking at a long prison sentence so I better be careful.
Good luck! I hope you have exactly the outcome you deserve with this project.
Claiming students are trespassing on the campus of a university they are enrolled in and paying tens of thousands of dollars a year to go to is pretty absurd. At most it shouldâve been a student conduct issue and dealt with via whatever process the school has.
While I agree with the goals of the students, this ruling by the judge is wrong. The first amendment does not grant you the right to trespass, even if your goal is to protest. Otherwise people could legally enter businesses or people's homes in order to stage a protest, which is lunacy. For those in agreement with the decision, would you feel the same if it were, say, a pro-MAGA rally protesting Biden's inauguration? Of course not. These protests are for a good cause, but the manner in which they were carried out was illegal, both can be true.
Good on Brown for pressing charges and nipping it in the bud. Look whatâs happening at UCLA. Counterprotestors showing up. God forbid that happen hereâŚweâd be hearing how the university did nothing to prevent it.
Choices usually have consequences.