Apparently, the University of Massachusetts and Amherst police are slightly perturbed after Edward Davis, former Boston Police Commissioner, released a report describing the “Blarney Blowout” fiasco as a “a collective failure by the town, the university, and the students.”
According to Amherst Police Chief Scott P. Livingstone, the police “did the right thing” in response to the “Blarney Blowout,” and “the decision to use chemical munitions and/or riot helmets…at the time, was the right decision.”
Really? The right decision?
Mr. Livingstone, I have to disagree with you. Deploying chemical munitions, which is merely another way of stating that over 600 rounds of pepper spray and sting balls were used against college students, is fundamentally and unequivocally the wrong decision. This was not a riot. This was a gathering of college students, albeit a large and chaotic one. Now, the police could have attempted to gradually deescalate the situation. But they chose to deploy riot gear and pepper spray and to give the impression that they were a paramilitary group attempting to crush a resisting force. But, according to Mr. Livingstone, the police did “the right thing.”
Did the police do the right thing in Ferguson, Missouri, when they deployed tear gas and rubber bullets against largely peaceful protesters? Did the police do the right thing in Georgia when SWAT members threw a flash bang grenade into “baby Bou Bou’s” crib, permanently disfiguring his face?
If one were to look at the “Blarney Blowout” response in a wider context, that of rapid police militarization, the situation at UMass seems more concerning. Today, police see themselves as soldiers in a never-ending war against the forces of crime. They are not out to police; they are out to punish, to demean and to humiliate. If a university can not only respond to a college gathering with excessive force, but also defend that use of excessive force without question, where do we, the young people, stand in this situation?
In the future, UMass and Amherst police could start using actual tear gas. Who knows? It seems as if the average American is complacent in this rapid militarization of the police because politicians and the media frame it under the guise of increased security or combating the elusive specter of “terrorist threats.”
So, I ask the members of UMass and Amherst police, who are you out to serve and protect?
Anthony Maddaleni is a Collegian contributor. He can be reached at [email protected].
Kyle • Sep 24, 2014 at 11:18 am
“Pepper spray” is NOT banned in warfare. Certain types of CN gas and tear gas are. UMPD and Amherst PD DO NOT possess tear gas or CN gas contrary to public belief. Pepper spray is not harmful and is nothing more than chili peppers and a few chemicals that turn it into an aerosol spray.
Eli • Sep 24, 2014 at 9:44 am
>So, I ask the members of UMass and Amherst police, who are you out to serve and protect?
Landowners. Duh.
And it’s actually pretty embarrassing that the UMass and Amherst police use the same level of force for obnoxious public drunkenness that other cities have used for race riots.
Don Patrick • Sep 23, 2014 at 9:43 pm
What we need to do as one of the first things in controlling the police is to get rid of the term Police FORCE and start calling it what it is supposed to be—A Police SERVICE. Then get rid of the surplus army gear—all of it. Then enforce all laws on all citizens including police officers. Police officer involved shootings and deaths to be investigated by a completely outside department. FBI—Homeland Security—DOJ—or set up a new investigative branch that reports to only the attorney general. No more internal affairs investigations that are influenced by the very people they are investigating. Send the corrupt police to jail and reward the good ones. That would be a start.
Adam Cameron • Sep 22, 2014 at 8:42 pm
If Scott Livingstone thinks “the premature use of chemical munitions” was a good idea, then it is his resignation I am awaiting.
The, in my opinion, heavy handed tactics used by UMPD and APD recklessly took a contained situation and dispersed it across North Amherst. What I feel are these same tactics had what I feel are the same results in 02 at the Hobart Hoedown. I think UMPD and APD either knew what would happen, and did it anyway, or were just so incompitent they expected provoking an enebriated crowd to just disperse.
Whatever the case, someone needs to take a fall. Looks like Scott Livingstone wants to be that guy.
QUIT SCOTT LIVINGSTONE!!!!
Adam Cameron • Sep 22, 2014 at 8:41 pm
If Scott Livingstone thinks “the premature use of chemical munitions” was a good idea, then it is his resignation Ibam awaiting.
The, in my opinion, heavy handed tactics used by UMPD and APD recklessly took a contained situation and dispersed it across North Amherst. What I feel are these same tactics had what I feel are the same results in 02 at the Hobart Hoedown. I think UMPD and APD either knew what would happen, and did it anyway, or were just so incompitent they expected provoking an enebriated crowd to just disperse.
Whatever the case, someone needs to take a fall. Looks like Scott Livingstone wants to be that guy.
QUIT SCOTT LIVINGSTONE!!!!
Davis • Sep 22, 2014 at 3:33 pm
I saw a lot of crazy things that day.
A lot of drunk students. A lot of stupid police officers. After they had surrounded the gathering of students, and told them to leave, people weren’t moving fast enough, so they started shooting. Even people in surrounding apartments had their WINDOWS SHOT OUT and tear gas thrown in. It was fucking insane and I nearly threw up when I saw people applauding at a town meeting the way the police handled it.
If you don’t want to cause a riot, Amherst, don’t have police show up in riot gear. Because you know what happens every time?
Ironic • Sep 22, 2014 at 12:23 pm
Pepper spray is banned from warfare because it’s a chemical weapon.
We cannot use it on ENEMY SOLDIERS IN A WAR ZONE, but we deploy it on AMERICAN CITIZENS?