Kent State - 35 years ago today...


PDA






Preacherman
May 4, 2005, 07:26 PM
For those old enough to remember, 35 years ago today, National Guardsmen opened fire on demonstrators at Kent State University in Ohio.

See http://speccoll.library.kent.edu/4may70/index.html for a series of articles on the events.

I don't feel much sympathy for the longhairs, but I do feel sympathy for the USA, so deeply divided back then - and things don't seem to have improved much, do they?

If you enjoyed reading about "Kent State - 35 years ago today..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
CZ-100
May 4, 2005, 07:40 PM
Tin soldiers and Nixon's comin'.
We're finally on our own.
This summer I hear the drummin'.
Four dead in Ohio.

JohnBT
May 4, 2005, 10:11 PM
http://dept.kent.edu/sociology/lewis/LEWIHEN.htm

"The closest student was Jeffrey Miller, who was shot in the mouth while standing in an access road leading into the Prentice Hall parking lot, a distance of approximately 270 feet from the Guard."

Read that again...the closest student killed was 270 feet away.

"The Guard then began retracing their steps from the practice football field back up Blanket Hill. As they arrived at the top of the hill, twenty-eight of the more than seventy Guardsmen turned suddenly and fired their rifles and pistols. Many guardsmen fired into the air or the ground. However, a small portion fired directly into the crowd. Altogether between 61 and 67 shots were fired in a 13 second period.

HOW MANY DEATHS AND INJURIES OCCURRED?

Four Kent State students died as a result of the firing by the Guard. The closest student was Jeffrey Miller, who was shot in the mouth while standing in an access road leading into the Prentice Hall parking lot, a distance of approximately 270 feet from the Guard. Allison Krause was in the Prentice Hall parking lot; she was 330 feet from the Guardsmen and was shot in the left side of her body. William Schroeder was 390 feet from the Guard in the Prentice Hall parking lot when he was shot in the left side of his back. Sandra Scheuer was also about 390 feet from the Guard in the Prentice Hall parking lot when a bullet pierced the left front side of her neck."


The four students who were unarmed and murdered were:

Allison Krause
Age: 19
Date of Birth: April 23, 1951
Pittsburgh, PA
Freshman, Honors College
Chest wound

Jeffrey Glen Miller
Age: 20
Date of Birth: March 28, 1950
Plainview, Long Island (NY)
Sophomore, Psychology
Head wound

Sandra Lee Scheuer
Age: 20
Date of Birth: August 11, 1949
Youngstown, OH
Junior, Speech & Hearing Therapy
Neck wound

William Knox Schroeder
Age: 19
Date of Birth: July 20, 1950
Lorain, OH
Sophomore, Psychology
Chest wound
________________________

Nine others were wounded.

________________________

The State of Ohio settled with a payment of $675,000 to the wounded students and the parents of the students who had been killed...in 1979...NINE YEARS AFTER THE KILLINGS.

_______________________

sm
May 4, 2005, 10:16 PM
In '70 I was a Soph in HS.
I remember , oh how I remember.

Tory
May 4, 2005, 11:08 PM
1 month from graduating high school.

I've had ammo for every gun I own at all times since the '68 Chicago Police Riot. Kent confirmed the logic of that decision.

Bemidjiblade
May 4, 2005, 11:16 PM
I don't know how much I believe the reports on that one.

My mom and her best friend were ER nurses in the area at the time. The overflow reached the hospital they were working at.

So, someone who had inside scoop information on the wounded tells me that the cops identify several members as professional provocateurs from out of state. They tell me that the people were so filthy that the ER doctors were unable to determine their race until they were washed down. And I'm from that area. Kent/Akron/Cleveland is the only place I ever hear the other side. Bricks were torn down from the new building under construction and thrown at the national guardsmen. The lib media covered it exactly the way that they cover garbage in Israel today: Innocent bystanders trying to stone armed soldiers to death were shot in a tragic imballance of balistic force.

My family was there. My sister was a Kent State student herself. We're sorry people died, but the general consensus in Akron, OH is that they died because they were lawless, rioting, idiots.

confed sailor
May 4, 2005, 11:25 PM
now im only 22 but if my memory serves me right, didnt the rioters burn down the ROTC department buliding? werent they completely out of control?

they should count themselves lucky that most of the national guardsmen were kind enough to aim high.

though i prefer Col Joshua Chamberlain's solution "give them the cold steel", a little light prodding from a bayonet would have cooled their jets, if not m80 ball works wonders in attitude adjustment.

jefnvk
May 4, 2005, 11:29 PM
now im only 22 but if my memory serves me right, didnt the rioters burn down the ROTC department buliding? werent they completely out of control?

That is what I was taught in HS history, that the rioters were burning at least the ROTC center, and destroying other things.

Now death they probably didn't deserve, but I am not going to say that they were blameless in this.

Just out of curiosity, how many riots has Kent State had since?

Tory
May 4, 2005, 11:29 PM
"The lib media covered it exactly the way that they cover garbage in Israel today: Innocent bystanders trying to stone armed soldiers to death were shot in a tragic imballance [sic] of balistic [sic] force."

Nonsense. Go back and:

1. READ the distances;

2. Look at the photos CONFIRMING the locations of those killed and wounded;

3. Note that there was NO-one, agent provocateurs or otherwise, anywhere NEAR the guardsmen when they opened fire;

4. The ROTC building in question had been torched nearly 24 hours BEFORE the shootings; and

5. Grasp the concept that people in the area had to rationalize the killing by blaming the victims so as not to deal with correctly allocating blame. :scrutiny:

jefnvk
May 4, 2005, 11:53 PM
OK, how about this. What level of force is appropriate to stop a riot? If the building had been burnt 24 hours before the shooting, that means they put up with it for at least a day. Some people are simply going to riot until there is nothing left to destroy. That cannot happen. Some people are going to resist violently you trying to stop them.

How many people would be complaining if an officer shot a guy while trying to kill someone? Probably not many. At least to me, torching a building is a signal that you are willing to kill someone, even if unintentionally. What if the next building was a dorm?


Probably the big problem I see here is the guards not targeting the ringleaders, and firing blindly.

EDIT: I went back and read. Not only did they set fire, they vandalized the fire fighter's equipment, keeping them from putting out the fire.

Furthermore, while the nearest person to die may have been nearly 100 yards, the closest hit was only 20. Plenty close enough to do damage with rocks, that seemingly they were throwing.

Another EDIT: Please don't take this to mean that I advocate shooting all protestors. It did seem that in this case, it would probably have not been resolved peacefully in any way. You can't force someone to do something without someone getting hurt. Too bad in this case, it seems that others died for some idiot's mistake.

confed sailor
May 4, 2005, 11:56 PM
bingo jef, you nailed it square

MikeIsaj
May 5, 2005, 12:15 AM
In the aftermath several of the guardsman were charged. I am not sure if they were civilly charged or court martialed. What I remember is that they were defended with a precedent that established that enough steady harrassing pressure could push a reasonable man too far and be a defense for violent reaction. The precedent was set in the case against the British soldiers after the Boston Massacre. Their lawyer was John Adams.

What should also be remembered is that after the Kent State incident, riots on campuses across the country came to a screeching halt, and protests became much more civil. Some of the loud mouth, in your face protestors today should take note.

Atticus
May 5, 2005, 12:16 AM
but I do feel sympathy for the USA, so deeply divided back then - and things don't seem to have improved much, do they?

I have to disagree with that statement PM. Imagine the LA riots nationwide.
That was the way it was then. It's a cakewalk now compared to then. It's hard to put those times in perspective now.
I was a boy then, and lived in a small college town of 40,000 people. I remember tear gas in the air- heavily armed guardsmen/police on the street- total curfews after dark- the largest buildings in town being burned to the ground. There wasn't a window left unbroken downtown. My father's business was firebombed three times. He and his employees slept there for weeks armed to the teeth. They were given the OK by local authorities to shoot. My best friend's father was ambushed and shot at a stoplight, simply becuse he was driving a marked city vehicle.
My interest in guns, and the importance of self defense, was forged by fire at that time.

Do a google on "1968 riots"- interesting reading.

Brian Williams
May 5, 2005, 01:08 AM
I was a freshman in high school in Mid state Ohio way back then and I thought what idiots they were for rioting.

Standing Wolf
May 5, 2005, 01:30 AM
I was a college kid at the time. I'd bought my first gun a few months earlier. I was glad I had it.

dustind
May 5, 2005, 02:45 AM
I don't feel much sympathy for the longhairs What do you mean by that? Do you mean you do not mind innocent people being murdered due to their political beliefs?

Rebar
May 5, 2005, 02:52 AM
Do you mean you do not mind innocent people being murdered due to their political beliefs?
Do you consider throwing bricks at soldiers an innocent act, or a political belief?

dustind
May 5, 2005, 02:56 AM
I was refering to the ones far away. I doubt the ones killed, between 270 and 390 feet away and shot in the back or sides.

Rebar
May 5, 2005, 03:09 AM
I was refering to the ones far away
You mean, people who were participating in a violent riot where armed soldiers were being pelted with bricks, buildings were being burned down, and other assorted anarchy was taking place, got hurt?

Sorry, they're not innocents, they placed themselves in an extremely dangerous situation, and suffered the consequences of their actions.

DMF
May 5, 2005, 03:49 AM
I would suggest reading this book: Kent State by James Michener (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0449202739/qid=1115275476/sr=12-28/104-3373154-6537509?v=glance&s=books)

It's one of the most objective looks at the events ever written. Michener did the thorough research he's known for, and then presented it in his typically outstanding writing style.

dustind
May 5, 2005, 04:11 AM
If I was wrong I apologise, but the sources that I have seen (including my public education) said some of the kids that where killed where just students walking to class.

I retract my previous statements due to bad information, sorry.

JohnBT
May 5, 2005, 09:01 AM
http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/ps60a.jpg

Here's a pic of...oops, wrong repressive regime. ;)

Tory
May 5, 2005, 09:15 AM
"You mean, people who were participating in a violent riot where armed soldiers were being pelted with bricks, buildings were being burned down, and other assorted anarchy was taking place, got hurt?"

No, the NON-PARTICIPANTS who were HUNDREDS of feet away, minding their own business and bothering no-body. In other words, the four people who were shot and killed.

Once again, since you've obviously missed - or chosen to ignore - that fact, not ONE of the dead was involved in a riot. Grasp the concept.

"Sorry, they're not innocents, they placed themselves in an extremely dangerous situation, and suffered the consequences of their actions."

Sorry, your obvious ignorance of the facts precludes your being taken seriously by those of us who are familiar with the shooting. :scrutiny:

Atticus
May 5, 2005, 09:21 AM
Wrong peacefull protestor as well.
Many of the protest situations were more like the Iraqi "insurgency" than the Chinese protest.

Kent state was a tragedy, but the result was not a suprise, and many people felt that "it is about time they do something". Twas probably because those folks got impatient with the "kids" burning their property, randomly sniping at them with rocks, bottles, or guns, turning and burning cars, threatening to dump lbs of LSD into the city water supplies, etc.

Those were strange days. Nobody was right and everybody was wrong (I think that was a line in a song).
The phrases 'Burn Baby Burn" and "Death to Pigs" and such, were being carried out with great enthusiam.

JohnBT
May 5, 2005, 09:51 AM
"more like the Iraqi "insurgency""

I don't remember any roadside bombs, the primary method of the Iraqi anarchists. I don't remember students with guns shooting at the police. I remember some buildings getting occupied and a few being burned, but I don't believe the fires caused any deaths.

An amusing anecdote: I remember the State Police ending the multi-day occupation of the math building at Va Tech. They ripped the back door off the building and herded the students into a tractor-trailer borrowed/rented from a moving company (Mayflower IIRC). Trouble was, they'd backed the trailer up to the building and police line didn't extend out as far as the side door on the trailer. As fast as they herded the first half of the students in... they ran through and jumped out the side door that had been opened by supporters.

Let's not forget the 2 killed at Jackson State in May, 1970 and the numerous students wounded. The state police fired 461 rounds and didn't call for ambulances until they'd gathered up the empties.

"But the ambulances were not called until after the officers picked up their shell casings, a U. S. Senate probe conducted by Senators Walter Mondale and Birch Bayh later revealed."

www.may41970.com/Jackson%20State/jackson_state_may_1970.htm

"On June 13, 1970, then President Richard Nixon, established the president's Commission on Campus Unrest. The commission held its first meeting June 25, 1970. Subsequently, it conducted thirteen days of public hearings in Jackson, Mississippi; Kent State, Ohio; Washington, DC; and Los Angeles, California. At the Jackson hearings, the administration, faculty, staff and students testified. There were no convictions and no arrests."



And then there were the really bad riots during the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in August 1968.

John

Rebar
May 5, 2005, 10:09 AM
Sorry, your obvious ignorance of the facts precludes your being taken seriously by those of us who are familiar with the shooting.
There was a riot going on, "hundreds of feet" isn't very much in such a situation, and it was on a campus, not a city street. Few people "mind their own business" in such a situation, most who don't want to participate find somewhere else to be, far away.

I'll add that the soldiers were firing in self-defense, so if there's any blame to be dished out, the brick throwers should get the lion's share.

Atticus
May 5, 2005, 10:10 AM
It was not until the war protests and race protests overlapped that the steets became more like a war zone. Unfortunately for many students, they were caught up with (intermingled) with Black Panthers, SDS types, SLA, and a host of others who did not hesitate to do violence. Some of those groups did in fact shoot at police and anyone else they considered part of "the establishment".
I have great sympathy for those who genuinely protested the war. I have little for those who simply enjoyed getting stoned and wreaking havoc on society. When my father and the fathers of my friends were "at war" with rioters, simply becuse they are "the establishment" - my perspective of the peacful protester changed pretty quickly. I saw little conection between the burning of my town and the Vietnam war. Nor did I see a connection between my friend's dad (Animal Contol Officer) and his partner being gunned down at a a small town intersection, and the murder of MLK. I doubt that the Korean shopkeepers in LA had anything againt Rodney King either.
But I guess that one's view of peacful hippie/black protesters is dependant upon perspective.

centac
May 5, 2005, 10:21 AM
How many threads have been posted here alluding those circumstances needed for firearm owners to rebel against a repressive government? :scrutiny:

Atticus
May 5, 2005, 10:31 AM
Another interesting read:


http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC/pacificapanthers.html


"April 2, 1969
District Attorney F. S. Hogan announces 12-count indictment against 21 Black Panther party members on charges of plotting to kill policemen, and bomb police stations and department stores during Easter season shopping. Eleven defendants plead not guilty and are held in $100,000 bail each over objections of defense lawyers, including William M Kunstler, who calls high bail unconstitutional. [NYT April 3, 1969, Thursday]"

Atticus
May 5, 2005, 10:41 AM
How many threads have been posted here alluding those circumstances needed for firearm owners to rebel against a repressive government?

How many threads here involve outrage at stray dogs in the yard, and fear of things that go bump in the night? Yet some folks fail to realize what the real life reaction might be to the routine occurrence of several thousand rioting young people throwing bricks, Molotov cocktails, and generally wreaking havoc on the inhabitants of a city....over a multi-year period.

JohnBT
May 5, 2005, 10:49 AM
The riots over MLK's death were in 1968. These weren't college students, at least in D.C., on a campus rampage. We could see the smoke in the distance.

The Kent State and Jackson State killings were in 1970. I still don't recall any students shooting at police or NG members.

Very little overlap, either in time, setting or participants.

John

mete
May 5, 2005, 11:01 AM
A friend of mine worked at Kent State at the time -he said the kids were looking for trouble and found it.....It became the thing to do at colleges , have a demonstration .These often ended in a riot. But the demonstrations had other effects that kids were totally clueless about. One small midwestern school had just a small demonstration and the insurance rate immediately increased to TEN TIMES what it had been.In addition schools like Harvard often got donations from people that had never been to Harvard or any other school . After a demonstration those donations stopped !!!

Atticus
May 5, 2005, 11:15 AM
Very little overlap, either in time, setting or participants.

Perhaps where you were John, but my experience says otherwise....as does American history. 1968- 1970 was a mixture of both. And groups like SDS were indeed violent.

At the age of 12 I was taught how to blow up cars by those non-violent college students.



IIRC the student riots did occur somewhere between 1967 and 1971.

http://www.dynamist.com/articles-speeches/nyt/riots.html

The Consequences of the 1960's Race Riots Come Into View


By Virginia Postrel
The New York Times, December 20, 2004

As an economic historian, Robert A. Margo has long wanted to study the 1960's. But, he says, "for the longest time people would say, 'That's too close to the present.' "

Not so anymore. The 1960's are as distant from today as the Great Depression was from the 1960's, and economic historians, including Professor Margo, of Vanderbilt University, are examining the decade's long-term effects.

Consider the wave of race riots that swept the nation's cities. From 1964 to 1971, there were more than 750 riots, killing 228 people and injuring 12,741 others. After more than 15,000 separate incidents of arson, many black urban neighborhoods were in ruins.

As soon as the riots occurred, social scientists began collecting data and analyzing the possible causes. Until recently, however, few scholars looked at the riots' long-term economic consequences.

In two recent papers, Professor Margo and his Vanderbilt colleague, William J. Collins, do just that by estimating the impact on incomes and employment and on property values.

The riots not only destroyed many homes and businesses, resulting in about $50 million in property damage in Detroit alone, but far more significantly, they also depressed inner-city incomes and property values for decades.

(The papers, "The Labor Market Effects of the 1960's Riots" and "The Economic Aftermath of the 1960's Riots: Evidence from Property Values," are available at www.vanderbilt.edu/Econ/wparchive/working03.html and www.vanderbilt.edu/Econ/wparchive/working04.html.)

The economists start with sociologists' findings on the riots' causes: whether a city had a riot was essentially unpredictable, assuming the city was outside the South (where few riots occurred) and had a substantial African-American population. The sociologists' research, Professor Margo says, suggests that "there was so much racial tension in the air in the 1960's that a riot could happen almost anywhere, anytime."

That unpredictability is bad news for sociologists looking for causes but good news for economists analyzing consequences. It creates a natural experiment, dividing otherwise similar places into those that had riots and those that did not.

In cities with major riots, the economists find that the median black family income dropped by about 9 percent from 1960 to 1970, compared with similar cities without severe riots. This impact on the labor market may have actually been more severe in the long run.

From 1960 to 1980, male employment in cities with severe riots dropped four to seven percentage points, compared with otherwise similar cities.

The impact on property values is even more striking. In cities with severe riots, Professors Collins and Margo found, the median value of black-owned homes dropped 14 percent to 20 percent, compared with cities that experienced little or no rioting, from 1960 to 1970. The median value of all central-city homes, regardless of owner, dropped 6 percent, to 10 percent.

The racial difference is not surprising, because both riot damage and the perceived risk of future riots were concentrated in predominately black neighborhoods.

Again, these numbers reflect not just immediate property damage but long-term declines. If it is more expensive or less desirable to live or work in a particular neighborhood, property prices will drop.

"This effect," the economists write, "could work through any number of the channels that feed into the net benefit stream: personal and property risk might seem higher; insurance premiums might rise; taxes for redistribution or more police and fire protection might increase, and municipal bonds may be more difficult to place; retail outlets might close; businesses and employment opportunities might relocate; friends and family might move away; burned-out buildings might be an eyesore; and so on."

In a second statistical test, Professors Collins and Margo identify two factors that separate cities with riots from those without riots: whether the local government used a city manager (which lessened the chances of a riot) and how much rain fell in April 1968, the month that Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated.

"If you have a lot of rain, people don't go out in the streets and riot," Professor Margo notes. So the same national event had different effects in cities that were otherwise similar. Here, too, the two economists find that cities without riots did significantly better economically over the long run.

Atticus
May 5, 2005, 11:30 AM
http://wolves.dsc.k12.ar.us/jrhigh/ACE/1960's/Movements/cdillon/timeline

1967

Jan 14 - Gathering of the Tribes, First Human Be-In, 20,000, S.F.

Jan 27 - US, USSR, UK sign treaty banning nuclear weapons in space

Feb - 25,000 US troops sent to Cambodian border

Feb - Beatles release Strawberry Fields Forever, Penny Lane, Michelle, Yesterday

Mar - Scientist report LSD causes chromosome damage (never validated).

Mar - The Berkeley Barb starts the smokable banana rumor (based upon Donovan's song "Mellow Yellow")

Mar 3 - Alice B. Toklas dies

Mar 18 - First U.S. supertanker wreck. Torrey Canyon spills 90,000 tons of oil onto English shores

Mar 26 - Be-In at Central Park in NY. 10,000 attend

Apr 5 - Grayline starts hippie tours of Haight/Ashbury

Apr 10 - Vietnam Week starts. Draft card burnings and anti-draft demonstrations

Apr 15 - Anti-Vietnam War protest. 400,000 march from Central Park to UN. Speeches by Martin Luther King, Stokely Carmichael and Dr. Benjamin Spock

May - Paul McCartney announces that all the Beatles have "dropped acid."

May 19 - First U.S. air strike on Hanoi

May 20 - Flower Power Day in NYC 1967

Jun 2 - Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band album by the Beatles released.

Jun 16 - Monterey Pop Festival

Jun 21 - Summer Solstice Party in Golden Gate Park

Jun 25 - Beatles sing "All You Need Is Love" on TV 1967

Jun 30 - 448,400 US troops now in Vietnam

July - The Summer of Love in San Francisco

July - Summer of Rioting in the US. Blacks take to the streets in Chicago, Brooklyn, Cleveland and Baltimore

July 1 - Sgt. Pepper hits #1

July 11 - Newark riots start long hot summer

July 24 - 43 Die in Detroit rioting, worst in U.S. history

July 26 - H. Rap Brown arrested for inciting a riot in Maryland

July 29 - Door's Light My Fire and Procol Harem's Whiter Shade of Pale vie for #1

Aug 26 - Jimi Hendrix's "Are You Experienced" hits the charts

Aug 27 - Beatles in India with Maharishi informed of Brian Epstein's death

Sept - Richard Alpert meets Bhagwan Dass at the Blue Tibetan in Katmandu, stays in India & follows him until he meets his guru.

Sept 15 - Donovan performs at the Hollywood Bowl

Oct 3 - Woody Guthrie dies

Oct 8 - Che Guevarra killed in Bolivia by US-trained troops

Oct 12 - Big Brother and the Holding Company's Cheap Thrills with Janis Joplin at top of LP charts.

Oct 20 - Seven KKK members convicted of conspiracy in 1964 murders of three civil rights worker

Oct 21-22 - Anti-war protesters storm the Pentagon

Oct 21 - "Diggers" exorcise the Pentagon. 35,000 Demonstrate, 647 arrested

Oct 26 - Draft deferments eliminated for those who violate draft laws or interfere with recruitment

Nov 14 - Air Quality Act provides $428 million to fight air pollution

Nov 20 - National Commission on Product Safety established

Dec - Beatles release "Magical Mystery Tour"

Dec - 486,000 American troops in Vietnam, of the 15,000 killed to date, 60% died in 1967.

Dec - "Stop the Draft" movement organized by 40 antiwar groups, nationwide protests ensue.

Dec 5 - 1000 antiwar protesters try to close NYC induction center. 585 arrested including Allen Ginsberg and Dr. Benjamin Spock

Dec 5 - Beatles open Apple Shop in London

Dec 8 - Otis Redding records "Dock of the Bay"

Dec 10 - Otis Redding dies in plane crash

Dec 22 - Owsley busted, stops making acid

Dec 31 - Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, Paul Krassner, Dick Gregory, & friends pronounce themselves "Yippies"





1968

Jan 16 - Youth International Party (Yippies) founded

Jan 18 - Eartha Kitt visiting LBJ at White House speaks out against the war

Jan 22 - B-52 carrying H-bomb crashes in Greenland

Jan 23 - USS Pueblo seized by Korea

Jan 31 - Viet Cong launch Tet Offensive

Feb - Timothy Leary evicted from Millbrook house

Feb - Beatles go to India to visit Maharishi Mahesh Yogi at Rishikesh on the Ganges river. Mia Farrow, Donovan follow.

Feb 8 - George Wallace announce candidacy for President on law and order platform

Mar 12 - Eugene McCarthy wins 42% of New Hampshire vote in presidential primary

Mar 16 - My Lai massacre 200 - 500 Vietnamese villagers killed

Mar 16 - Robert F. Kennedy announces candidacy for President

Mar 31 - LBJ announces decision not to run again and offers partial Vietnam bombing halt

Apr 4 - Martin Luther King shot and killed in Memphis

Apr - The week following Martin Luther King Jr.'s murder sees black uprisings in 125 cities across the U.S.

Apr 6 - Oakland Police ambush Black Panthers. Eldridge Cleaver arrested with a bullet-shattered leg. Bobby Hutton shot and killed.

Apr 8 - Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs established (DEA)

Apr 11 - LBJ signs civil rights bill banning housing discrimination

Apr 11 - Major call-up of reserves for duty in Vietnam

Apr 14 - Love-in at Malibu Canyon, Calif.

Apr 15 - Start of Spring Mobilization against the Vietnam war

Apr 23 - SDS lead students take over 5 buildings at Colombia Univ for a week. 700 arrested

Apr 24 - 300 Black students occupy admin. building at Boston Univ. demanding black studies and financial aid

Apr 25 - Paul Horn records in the Taj Mahal

Apr 29 - The rock musical HAIR opened on Broadway at the Biltmore Theater

May 10 - Vietnam peace talks begin in Paris

Jun 3 - Andy Warhol shot by woman

Jun 5 - Bobby Kennedy assassinated by Sirhan Sirhan moments after winning California primary.

Jun 14 - Dr. Benjamin Spock convicted of conspiracy to abet draft evasion

July 1 - Nuclear nonproliferation treaty signed by 61 nations

Aug 1 - 541,000 U.S. Troops in Vietnam

Aug 8 - Nixon and Agnew nominated during Miami riots

Aug 20 - Soviets invade Czechoslovakia

August 25-29 - Democratic Convention in Chicago demonstrations & police riot 10,000 +/- demonstrators vs. 11,000 Chicago police; 6,000 National Guard; 7,500 U.S. army troops; and 1,000 FBI, CIA & other services agents (Humphrey nominated on platform supporting the war)

Aug 28 - Humphrey and Muskie nominated amid violent antiwar protests in Chicago. Bystanders and press also beaten by police

Oct 18 - John & Yoko Busted

Nov - First "Whole Earth Catalog" published by Stewart Brand.

Nov 5 - Nixon elected President, Spiro T. Agnew, VP

Nov 6 - Student Strike at SF State









1969

Jan 28 - Santa Barbara, Ca. oil well blowout

Feb - Massive strike at U.C. Berkeley for ethnic studies

Feb 11 - 200 students smash computers with axes & set computer center on fire during sit-in protesting prof's racism at St. George Williams College, Montreal

Feb 13 - 33 students arrested at admin bldg sit-in at Univ of Mass.

Feb 18 - Students seize building and boycott started at Howard University

Feb 24 - Students occupy Admin bldg at Penn State

Feb 27 - Police charge student picket lines, club and arrest two Chicano leaders at U.C. Berkeley

Feb 27 - Thousands rampage thru nine buildings at U of Wisconsin, Madison over black enrollments

Mar 12 - Paul McCartney marries Linda Eastman

Mar 20 - John & Yoko fly to Gibraltar, get married then fly to Amsterdam for one week "lie-in" for peace

Mar 20 - James Earl Ray sentenced to 99 years for murder of Martin Luther King Jr.

Apr - 543,000 US troops now in Vietnam

Apr 4 - Smothers Brothers tv show canceled because it is too controversial

Apr 9 - 300 Harvard students led by SDS seize Univ Hall and evict eight deans

Apr 10 - Police called into Harvard, 37 injured, 200 arrested

Apr 11 - Start of 3 day student strike at Harvard

Apr 22 - Harvard faculty votes to create black studies program &

give students vote in selection of its faculty

Apr 22 - City College of NY closed after black & Puerto Rican students lock selves inside asking higher minority enrollment

Apr 23 - Sirhan Sirhan sentenced to death for murder of Bobby Kennedy

Apr 24 - U.S. B-52s launch biggest attack on North Vietnam. Protests in 40 cities

May 15 - Hippies in People's Park in Berkeley attacked by police and Nat'l Guard

July - Stephen Gaskin starts The Farm commune in Tennessee.

July 3 - Brian Jones of Rolling Stones dies

July 14 - Easy Rider premieres

July 20 - Men walk on the Moon

July 27 - Police raid on gay bar in Greenwich Village, NYC results in Stonewall Uprising. 2000 protesters battle 400 police, start of Gay Liberation Movement

Aug - Blind Faith forms, with Eric Clapton, Ginger Baker from Cream and Steve Winwood from Traffic.

Aug 9 - Sharon Tate & LaBiancas found murdered by Charles Manson & Crew

August 15 - 17 WOODSTOCK Festival 500,000 people gathered for three days of music and peace that changed the world

Aug 24 - Movie 'Alice's Restaurant released with Arlo Guthrie

Aug 26 - FBI reports 98% increase in marijuana arrests from 1966 - 1968

Sept 3 - Ho Chi Min, leader of North Vietnam, dies

Sept 24 - Chicago Eight trial begins. Tom Hayden, Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin et. al charged with conspiracy to incite riots

Oct - Is Paul dead? Beatles controversy

Oct 8-11 - The Weatherman "Days of Rage"

Oct 15 - Peace Day. 500,000 protesters nationwide. First Vietnam Moratorium

Oct 21 - Jack Kerouac, beat author of "On the Road" dies.

Oct 30 - Supreme Court orders desegregation nationwide

Nov 15 - 500,000 + march in Wash. DC for peace. Largest antiwar rally in U.S. history. Speakers: McCarthy, McGovern, Coretta King, Dick Gregory, Leonard Bernstein. Singers: Arlo Guthrie, Pete Seeger, Peter, Paul, & Mary, John Denver, Mitch Miller, touring cast of Hair

1969

Nov 17 - First round of SALT talks in Helsinki

Nov 20 - 78 American Indians seize Alcatraz Island and demand its return

Nov 20 - DDT use banned in residential areas

Nov 24 - Lt. William Calley charged with murdering 102 So. Vietnamese civilians at My Lai

Nov 25 - President Nixon orders all US germ warfare stockpiles destroyed

Dec - Over 100,000 US troops dead or injured in Vietnam.

Dec 1 - First draft lottery since W.W.II held in NYC

Dec 8 - Raid on Black Panther headquarters in LA - four hour shoot-out

Dec 24 - Rolling Stones "Altamont" concert erupts in violence, one spectator killed

jefnvk
May 5, 2005, 12:26 PM
If I was wrong I apologise, but the sources that I have seen (including my public education) said some of the kids that where killed where just students walking to class.

I **thought** that two were. If anyone knows otherwise, please tell.

That is why I am of the opinion that the mistake they made was random firing, not aimed.

And again, the closest casuality was at 20 yards, so common sense would tell me that there were people right up close to the Guardsmen.

Tory
May 5, 2005, 12:54 PM
Quote:

If I was wrong I apologise, but the sources that I have seen (including my public education) said some of the kids that where killed where just students walking to class.

"I **thought** that two were. If anyone knows otherwise, please tell."

All four victims were hundreds of yards away from, and thus taking no part in, the demonstration.

"That is why I am of the opinion that the mistake they made was random firing, not aimed.

"And again, the closest casuality was at 20 yards, so common sense would tell me that there were people right up close to the Guardsmen."


Whence cometh this "20 yards" figure? My information shows that NONE of those shot - the 4 killed or the 9 wounded - was less than 100 yards away. :scrutiny:

"Common sense would tell me" that 20 yards = 60 feet; hardly "right up close to the Guardsmen." :rolleyes:

JohnBT
May 5, 2005, 01:59 PM
Atticus - I have to run to make an appointment, but that list brings back the memories. Notice though that the few building takeovers listed weren't what are normally thought of as riots - more like sit-ins.

The rash of campus-based 'riots' came later.

Gotta go.

The music was much better back then. Much better. :)

John

jefnvk
May 5, 2005, 02:16 PM
Tory, follow the link above (first post), click on FAQ, Click on May 4, 1970.

The guardsmen then retraced their line of march. Some demonstrators followed as close as 20 yards, but most were between 60 and 75 yards behind the guard. Near the crest of Blanket Hill, the guard turned and 28 guardsmen fired between 61 and 67 shots in 13 seconds toward the parking lot. Four persons lay dying and nine wounded. The closest casualty was 20 yards and the farthest was almost 250 yards away.

Closest casuality was 20 yards, not fatality. Furthermore, they were shooting downhill, so if they shot over the targets, they were probably still going to hit someone.

I would think 20 yards is plenty close enough to throw moltov's and rocks. Definitely not close enough to hit or stab someone, but close enough to do damage.

Rereading the original post, the students killed were about 90 to 130 yards away from the guardsmen. The above paragraph says that the main crowd was 60-70 yards the guardsmen, with some troublemakers close. That means the closest person killed was about 20 yards behind the main crowd. A threat? No, but defintiely close enough to get caught up whatever was going to break out. What I am questioning is her logic in being so close to a rioting crowd with guns pointed at them.

DMF
May 5, 2005, 10:02 PM
. . . some of the kids that where killed where just students walking to class. It's been a while since I did any research on this, but as I recall ALL classes had been cancelled.

fallingblock
May 6, 2005, 09:10 AM
The "just walking to class" legend is a classic misrepresentation of the left.

The Ohio National Guard troops involved lacked sufficient riot-control training and were rather poorly-led into the bargain.

On that day students were rioting, destroying property, trespassing and assaulting guardsmen.

When Kent State occurred, I was serving in an artillery unit at Ft. Bragg.

We had been trained in riot-control and were on stand-by for deployment at the time.

I agree completely with Preacherman....

Those were very sad times in the U.S.A. :(

BlackCat
May 6, 2005, 04:08 PM
I don't feel much sympathy for the longhairs

My cup runneth over.

You claim to be a preacher, wow, what a great attitude to have! So godly.

You claim to be a federal LEO, so that statement is not at all surprising in that respect. I wouldn't expect anything less.

You're a moderator here, that's not even close to being an acceptable thing to say in that regard.

:cuss:

DMF
May 6, 2005, 06:01 PM
I don't feel much sympathy for the longhairs You claim to be a federal LEO, so that statement is not at all surprising in that respect. I wouldn't expect anything less.
What fed LEO expressed that sentiment? Because it certainly wasn't me. I made to previous posts on this thread and have NEVER suggested anything of the sort. Is there some other fed LEO you're referring to? I don't judge people by the length of their hair, or any other superficial attribute.

Again, I suggest reading Michener's book.

Daniel T
May 6, 2005, 06:04 PM
Preacherman wrote that line in the first post DMF. Maybe he should have just said "hippy" if he meant hippy.

svtruth
May 6, 2005, 06:29 PM
The riots at Kent State IIRC were protesting our involvement in Vietnam, a "war" Robert MacNamara later in a cowardly aw shucks memoir admitted we should not have been in. But what the heck, Bob, onle 58,000 of our soldiers died.

Monkeyleg
May 6, 2005, 07:51 PM
I was twenty at the time, and remember feeling bad, but not that bad. Having huddled in a basement of a church during the '64 riots in DC, I never had much sympathy for rioters.

All of this was uncharted territory. Police departments were scrambling to develop special units (the TAC squad here were essentially just the biggest cops on the force). Tactics and training came much later.

The National Guard was a poor choice for riot control at that time, but there really wasn't another choice.

I had friends at that time who were involved in the most extreme of the fringe groups, and they were focused on violence.

For those who lived through the Sixties, they were a great time for music (and sex and drugs). But it was also one of the most violent periods in our history. Nothing the so-called "militia groups" of today could match what the SDS, the Panthers and other groups back then were up to.

AZ Jeff
May 7, 2005, 12:11 PM
Monkeyleg is correct in his assessment of the overall situation. I was 18 (and in college at the time), so I lived in the times (but NOT at Kent State). Not only was riot control pretty primitive at the time, but a "one size fits all" approach was used.

As Monkeyleg said, there WERE persons protesting the war who were flat-out anarchists, and wanted to "take down" the "establishment" through any and all means. (For more details, do a search on "Students for Democratic Society" and "Weather Underground".)

Then, there were those student who honestly did not support the war in Viet Nam, but did not advocate violence.

Further down were students who just wanted to watch the whole confrontation (gawkers).

Finally, there were students who were actually trying to go to class and stay out of the whole mess (like yours truly).

When the police (or as at Kent State, the Nat'l Guard) were dispatched to deal with a "situation", all four categories of students wound up getting impacted.

All I know is that, when I heard about a protest going on somewhere on Campus, I AVOIDED that area. The LAST thing I wanted was my engineering education getting disrupted by something that was, to me at the time, of lesser importance. It also helped me avoid becoming a victim of some violence. :o

Cool Hand Luke 22:36
May 7, 2005, 12:32 PM
Here's a pic of...oops, wrong repressive regime.

Funny how those Chinese student protestors built themselves a replica of our American Statue of Liberty before the tanks rolled in. I guess they just didn't realize that the US Government is equally as brutal. :rolleyes:

Boss Spearman
May 7, 2005, 12:40 PM
The preacher at my parent's church was a student there during the shooting. He explained to us what happened, and was so detailed and good at explaining it, that it stuck in my mind.
He saw the National guard people and there was no doubt their leader deliberately ordered them to fire.

Cool Hand Luke 22:36
May 7, 2005, 12:46 PM
Monkeyleg is correct in his assessment of the overall situation. I was 18 (and in college at the time), so I lived in the times (but NOT at Kent State). Not only was riot control pretty primitive at the time, but a "one size fits all" approach was used.

I disagree with you on this. I lived through it all here in Washington, D.C.: The March on Washington, the riots after King was shot, Resurrection City, The Peace Moratorium (largest demonstration in US history), and many other huge and none too peaceful protests.

Overall he US did a remarkably good job in handling the protests and riots of the 60's and 70's. There aren't too many countries that would have been as restrained. I still recall the Whitehouse being ringed with DC Transit buses in to keep the anti-war protesters from storming the place as they proclaimed that they would. The Kremiln would have been ringed with machine gun nests.

Monkeyleg
May 7, 2005, 07:16 PM
Cool Hand Luke, maybe the police in DC were organized, but they weren't around here. There are still areas of land in the inner city where buildings were burned down that are still vacant.

An interesting comparison to Kent State might be the Bonus March of 1932. There's a pretty comprehensive article about it here. (http://wappingersschools.org/JohnJayHS/students/ap/ap33/)

308win
May 7, 2005, 07:45 PM
Not only were they murdered, they were murdered by Ohio National Guard AKA draft dodgers.

I was in basic at Ft Leonardwood and I can tell you that the NGs and ARs were keeping a very low profile in our basic training company for the eight weeks we RAs were forced to coexist with them.

richyoung
May 8, 2005, 03:03 AM
1. If classes are canceled due to riots and burning buildings, keep more distance between you and the riot than 90 yards - at least 1000 yards, or better yet, stay home..

2. Don't throw light bulbs and bricks at people holding loading M-1 Garands - a popping light bulb could convince someone they are being shot at. thus prompting them to bust a cap in your unwashed butt.

3. Don't stick around to watch the riot - M2 ball goes a long way, and the dude wearing the gas mask might miss the SDS leader chunking the brick at him, and hit you by accident.

4. Attempting to prevent the violence and mindless destruction of war by going on a violent and mindlessly destructive rampage represents a level of irony that only college professors can appreciate, and they are on your side already. Besides, it can get you killed.

Sergeant Bob
May 8, 2005, 08:37 AM
The last time a protestor attempted to throw a brick at me (Jan. 20, 1990 in downtown Panama City, 1st anniversary of Operation Just Cause), he almost got a 1979 Buick Skylark up his A$$ at 60 mph.
I can understand why someone might want to shoot at a so called "peace protestor" who is heaving bricks at him.

GEM
May 8, 2005, 03:55 PM
Lots of tough guys here. It was a disgrace to America. BTW, I knew a guy in an another Ohio unit that was made mainly of college kids (not a farm boy unit). They told their lieutenant that if this continued and he ordered them to fire on students, he might take a round in the melee. He said dont' worry.

If there was a continued use of lethal force deliberately against the demonstrators, the country might have disintegrated into open civil war.

My campus was occupied by state and local police and had massive riots. Using guns would have been the last thing to do unless under direct attack that could not be handled by standard riot precautions. Sending in NG with little equipment for riots and/or training would have been ridiculous.

jefnvk
May 8, 2005, 10:52 PM
If there was a continued use of lethal force deliberately against the demonstrators, the country might have disintegrated into open civil war.

I agree completely. And I don't think shooting demonstrators is the right thing to do.

But rioting, burning buildings you disagree with, destroying property, assualting people, something needs to bring that crowd under control right quick. Unfortunately, open firing was what was required to do so.

saltydog
May 8, 2005, 11:23 PM
This could get interesting. Not defending anybodies actions but:

How would you react by replacing the Kent State students with pissed off Pro-Gun Right Activists who are tired of Govt intervention of their God given rights that their for-fathers shed their blood for? Would they throw bricks? Burn down a building? Hmmmmm.

Right or wrong you have to understand their state of mind. Back then people didn't trust their Govt at all. Today people just turn their heads and move on. Those days were interesting indeed. Yes I was in HS at that time.

GEM
May 9, 2005, 04:11 PM
But rioting, burning buildings you disagree with, destroying property, assualting people, something needs to bring that crowd under control right quick. Unfortunately, open firing was what was required to do so.

Unfortunately, your statement has nothing to do with the facts. As also pointed out, the use of lethal force cannot be undertaken lightly. This was not a reasoned use of force but a sad aberration.

jefnvk
May 9, 2005, 05:02 PM
Unfortunately, your statement has nothing to do with the facts. As also pointed out, the use of lethal force cannot be undertaken lightly. This was not a reasoned use of force but a sad aberration.

Yeah, I believe it does.

When a drunk is running around at 100 MPH, the police stop him. Why? He will hurt someone.

When kids are driving around at night shooting paintball guns at people, the police stop them. Why? Because someone is going to get hurt.

When that guy stole the Tank around LA, and went on a rampage, police stopped him. With lethal force. Why? He was going to hurt someone.

Were the guardsmen in immediate danger? I dunno. Wasn't there. I do believe Moltov's were in use at one point, a very deadly weapon. Rocks are by no means nice to be hit with. A building had been burnt down, and when the firemen arrived, their equiopment destroyed to prevent them from fighting the fire. They had proven their intent on destruction.

The crowd needed to be stopped. Someone was going to get hurt before long.

Werewolf
May 9, 2005, 05:03 PM
4. Attempting to prevent the violence and mindless destruction of war by going on a violent and mindlessly destructive rampage represents a level of irony that only college professors can appreciate, and they are on your side already. Besides, it can get you killed.Reminds me of a saying that went around about that time.

"Rioting for peace is like f****ng for virginity"...

richyoung
May 9, 2005, 07:04 PM
Using guns would have been the last thing to do unless under direct attack that could not be handled by standard riot precautions.


And what, pray tell, is the appropriate response to a Molotov Cocktail or brick upside the head? I would have shot. Plus please explain how the deceased were "peacefully walking to class" less than a football field away from a riot, on a campus where classes were cancelled?

bountyhunter
May 9, 2005, 07:06 PM
I don't feel much sympathy for the longhairs, but I do feel sympathy for the USA, so deeply divided back then - and things don't seem to have improved much, do they? Then read a book by James Michener titled: "Kent State: What Happened?"

You will find out that the nat guard were not surrounded (open on three sides) were not being bombarded by bottles (pelted by a few small rocks) and opened fire without any order. Further, of the 30 or so who fired, nearly all fired over the heads as warning. Only a few aimed at humans and those who did committed murder. :cuss:

bountyhunter
May 9, 2005, 07:08 PM
And what, pray tell, is the appropriate response to a Molotov Cocktail or brick upside the head? Read the book, that is just a load of crap peddled at the time to substantiate the defense they used as "clear and present danger" to justify murder committed by not more than three or four soldiers.

bountyhunter
May 9, 2005, 07:12 PM
http://www.spectacle.org/595/kent.html

Kent State, May 4, 1970: America Kills Its Children
Twenty-five years ago this month, students came out on the Kent State campus and scores of others to protest the bombing of Cambodia-- a decision of President Nixon's that appeared to expand the Vietnam War. Some rocks were thrown, some windows were broken, and an attempt was made to burn the ROTC building. Governor James Rhodes sent in the National Guard.
The units that responded were ill-trained and came right from riot duty elsewhere; they hadn't had much sleep. The first day, there was some brutality; the Guard bayonetted two men, one a disabled veteran, who had cursed or yelled at them from cars. The following day, May 4th, the Guard, commanded with an amazing lack of military judgment, marched down a hill, to a field in the middle of angry demonstrators, then back up again. Seconds before they would have passed around the corner of a large building, and out of sight of the crowd, many of the Guardsmen wheeled and fired directly into the students, hitting thirteen, killing four of them, pulling the trigger over and over, for thirteen seconds. (Count out loud--one Mississippi, two Mississippi, to see how long this is.) Guardsmen--none of whom were later punished, civilly, administratively, or criminally--admitted firing at specific unarmed targets; one man shot a demonstrator who was giving him the finger. The closest student shot was fully sixty feet away; all but one were more than 100 feet away; all but two were more than 200 feet away. One of the dead was 255 feet away; the rest were 300 to 400 feet away. The most distant student shot was more than 700 feet from the Guardsmen.

Some rocks had been thrown, and some tear gas canisters fired by the Guard had been hurled back, but (though some of the Guardsmen certainly must know the truth) no-one has ever been able to establish why the Guard fired when they were seconds away from safety around the corner of the building. None had been injured worse than a minor bruise, no demonstrators were armed, there was simply nothing threatening them that justified an armed and murderous response. In addition to the demonstrators, none of whom was closer than sixty feet, the campus was full of onlookers and students on their way to class; two of the four dead fell in this category. Most Guardsmen later testified that they turned and fired because everyone else was. There was an attempt to blame a mysterious sniper, of whom no trace was ever found; there was no evidence, on the ground, on still photographs or a film, of a shot fired by anyone but the Guardsmen. One officer is seen in many of the photographs, out in front, pointing a pistol; one possibility is that he fired first, causing the others, ahead of him, to turn and fire. Or (as some witnesses testified) he or another officer may have given an order to fire. It is indisputable that the Guardsmen were not in any immediate physical danger when they fired; the crowd was not pursuing them; they were seconds away from being out of sight of the demonstration.

There was also an undercover FBI informant, Terry Norman, carrying a gun on the field that day. Though he later turned his gun into the police, who announced it had not been fired, later ballistic tests by the FBI showed that it had been fired since it was last cleaned-- but by then it was too late to determine whether it had been fired before or on May 4th.

It would be too charitable to say that the investigation was botched; there was no investigation. Even the New York City police, who are themselves prone to brutality and corruption, do a better job. Every time an officer discharges his weapon, it is taken from him, and there is an investigation. Here--to the fatal detriment of the federal criminal trial which followed--it was never conclusively established which Guardsmen had fired, or which of them had shot the wounded and the dead. Since all were wearing gas masks, it is impossible to identify them in pictures (many had also removed or covered their name tags, a classic ploy of law enforcement officers about to commit brutality in the '60's and '70's), and though many confessed to having fired their weapons, none admitted to being in the first row and therefore, among the first to fire. The ballistic evidence could have helped here, but none was taken.

One rumor has it that the Guardsmen were told the same night that they would never be prosecuted by the state of Ohio. And they never were. The Nixon administration stalled for years, announcing "investigations" that led nowhere; White House tapes subsequently released show that Nixon thought demonstrators were bums, asked the Secret Service to go beat them up, and apparently felt that the Kent State victims had it coming. As did most of the country; William Gordon calls the killings "the most popular murders ever committed in the United States."

The history of the next few years is very sad. A federal prosecution was finally brought, but the presiding judge is said to have signalled his preference for the defendants, guiding their attorney's conduct of the case to help them avoid legal errors. He dismissed all charges at the close of the prosecution's case, avoiding the need for a defense and taking the case away from the jury. Among his reasons: a failure to prove specific intent to deprive the victims of their civil rights; due to the lack of any investigation, it was almost impossible at this late date to show which Guardsmen shot which victim.

In the New York City police force, which is far from perfect, officers who have killed or injured someone under questionable circumstances are often dismissed from the force even though there is not enough evidence for a criminal conviction; the standard of proof is not the same for an administrative action as for a criminal case. You don't want an unstable, sadistic person on the force, even though there may not be enough evidence for a criminal conviction. But the Guardsmen--even the one who confessed to shooting an unarmed demonstrator giving him the finger--were not deemed unfit to serve the State, even though they had fired indiscriminately into a crowd containing many passsersby and students on their way to classes.

A civil suit brought by the wounded students and the parents of the dead ones deteriorated among infighting by the plaintiffs' lawyers. Unable to agree on a single theory of the case, they contradicted each other. The jury returned a verdict for the defendants.

This verdict was overturned on appeal--the main ground was that the judge did not take seriously enough the attempted coercion of a juror who was assaulted by a stranger demanding an unspecified verdict--and a retrial was scheduled. On the eve of it, the exhausted plaintiffs settled with the state for $675,000.00, which was divided 13 ways. Half of it went to Dean Kahler, the most seriously wounded survivor, and only $15,000 apiece went to the families of each of the slain students, a pathetically small verdict in a day when lives are accounted to be worth in the many millions of dollars. The state issued a statement of "regret" which stopped short of an apology for the events of May 4th, nine years before.

I write this just a week after the Kansas city bombing that appears to have taken 200 lives (the rescuers are still searching the wreckage) and the theme today is the same as 25 years ago. Hate was in the air then, as it is today. Admittedly, the First Amendment protects hate speech, whether it comes from the most marginal extremist or the highest public official. Demonizing someone else for their beliefs or their race, or even calling for their immediate assassination, is legal in America today and was twenty-five years ago. But the fact that something is legal to do does not make it right to do, or relieve the speaker of any moral responsibility for the consequences.

President Nixon created a public atmosphere in which students who opposed the war were fair game for those who supported the government. In the week following Kent State, construction workers rioted on Wall Street, attacking antiwar demonstrators and sending many to the hospital, some permanently crippled. It was reported at the time that, a day or two after the deaths, President Nixon called the parents of the only slain student known to be a bystander--he was a member of ROTC--to express condolences. The phone never rang in the other parents' houses. The message couldn't have been clearer: they had it coming.

I was fifteen that year, raised in a very comfortable middle class environment and very naive. Kent State was my political education. What I discovered that week, and that year, was that America in those times was perfectly willing to harass, beat and kill its own children if they disagreed with government policy. The step from being a member of the protected American mainstream to being a marginalized outsider, not entitled to the protection of law enforcement and fair prey to any violent, flag-waving bully who happened to pass, was to stand up and say you did not believe the Vietnam war was right.

I am not sure that anyone too young to remember those times can really appreciate what it was like. We know today the extent to which the FBI was involved in dirty tricks, illegal wiretapping and burglaries against even moderate antiwar organizations. Prior to Kent State, I had joined an organization called Student Mobilization Against the War. One day, their offices were burglarized and their membership lists stolen. We had no doubt at the time that it was the government, and we were right.

I led demonstrations that week outside my high school protesting the Kent State killings and, afterwards, the principal summoned me and my father to his office and threatened to have me expelled as a trouble-maker. My father--I am very proud of him, as he was not an ideological man and his opposition to the war was very muted--replied that if I was expelled, he would fight it "all the way to the Supreme Court." I had done nothing else than exercise my First Amendment right of protest. We heard nothing more about expulsion, but a close friend of mine, who didn't have an assertive parent to stand up for him, was thrown out of school.

That week, people came out of the woodwork--wearing black leather, chains wrapped around their fists, waving American flags--people we had never before seen in our neighborhoods. These patriots set up a counterdemonstration across the street from ours. For hours, a rumor was rampant that they would attack us and that the police would not intervene--exactly what had happened on Wall Street a day or so before. Their cursing and chain-rattling became uglier until finally they summoned their courage and charged. Someone shouted "Link arms!" and five or six teenagers, me among them, joined to interpose our bodies between the attackers and demonstrators. The Brooklyn police, unlike those on Wall Street, or the National Guard in Kent days earlier, did not seek or condone the killing of children. They ran in and forced the attackers back. I was fifteen then and am forty now, but I have never had a finer moment in my life. It was the only moment in my life that I came close to living up to Gandhi's statement that "we must be the change we wish to see in the world."

Here are the names of those who died at Kent State, so that they may not be forgotten:


ALISON KRAUSE

JEFFREY MILLER

SANDRA SCHEUER

WILLIAM SCHROEDER

AZ Jeff
May 9, 2005, 07:15 PM
Rich Young penned:
Plus please explain how the deceased were "peacefully walking to class" less than a football field away from a riot, on a campus where classes were cancelled?

You need to get the chronology correct. The KSU campus was NOT closed until AFTER the shootings. At the time of the confrontation with the NG, regular classes were still being held.

Bigjake
May 9, 2005, 07:42 PM
thanks for not feeding the trolls

richyoung
May 9, 2005, 07:46 PM
"Read the book, that is just a load of crap peddled at the time to substantiate the defense they used as "clear and present danger" to justify
murder committed by not more than three or four soldiers."

WHY DID THE GUARDSMEN FIRE?

The most important question associated with the events of May 4 is why did members of the Guard fire into a crowd of unarmed students? Two quite different answers have been advanced to this question: (1) the Guardsmen fired in self-defense, and the shootings were therefore justified and (2) the Guardsmen were not in immediate danger, and therefore the shootings were unjustified.

The answer offered by the Guardsmen is that they fired because they were in fear of their lives. Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen, and they therefore had to fire in self-defense. Some authors (e.g., Michener, 1971 and Grant and Hill, 1974) agree with this assessment. Much more importantly, federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen. In a 1974 federal criminal trial, District Judge Frank Battisti dismissed the case against eight Guardsmen indicted by a federal grand jury, ruling at mid-trial that the government's case against the Guardsmen was so weak that the defense did not have to present its case. In the much longer and more complex federal civil trial of 1975, a jury voted 9-3 that none of the Guardsmen were legally responsible for the shootings.

I take the above to mean that Michener beleives the guard was justified in opening fire. FWIW a rock is a "deadly weapon", and no one denies the rioters, (illegally gathered, i might add), were throwing rocks. Finally, it seems the guardsmen have been cleared in every legal action brought about, so I'd be a little more careful about slinging the "murderer" tag around.

bountyhunter
May 9, 2005, 07:53 PM
I take the above to mean that Michener beleives the guard was justified in opening fire. hat's not what his book says and it is not what the facts support. A group of armed soldiers with open terrain on three sides, and a clear cover position directly in their path if they kept walking was not in imminent threat from a bunch of kidds flipping them off and throwing stones from upwards of 50 to 100 yards away.

Michener did not conclude the guard were justified and neither has anybody else who impartially examined the facts of the event.

I actually read his book, as well as all the other available documentation at the time.

Finally, it seems the guardsmen have been cleared in every legal action brought about, so I'd be a little more careful about slinging the "murderer" tag around. Well, then why don't you sue? I recall a still photo of a guardsman aiming at the photgrapher taking the picture. If you aim an M-4 at an unarmed man and kill him, that's murder. Period. And I will slap the murder tag on anybody who does it.

Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen, Which was an ad hoc lie invented after the fact. One thing witnesses agree on is the "crowd" was walking parallel and staying at distance. Further, the guard had the option of increasing the distance in any of three directions. The 'advancing hoardes" line of bull was put together after the incident, as was most of the story. The testimony of the "clear and present danger" parroted so accurately by all involved was obviously rehearsed. The "facts" were altered to support the self defense excuse, the reality of it does not agree. Examine the photos actually taken at the time, the testimony of witnesses who heard no order to fire and sporadic bursts of fire, and the physical evidence of placement of the students shot versus the guard. Stevie Wonder could see what happened here.

AZ Jeff
May 9, 2005, 08:01 PM
richyoung posted this:
I take the above to mean that Michener beleives the guard was justified in opening fire. FWIW a rock is a "deadly weapon", and no one denies the rioters, (illegally gathered, i might add), were throwing rocks.
The real issue here with the NG was not whether the shooting was justified (and that's a separate debate) but why persons as far away as 300+ yards wound up getting hit. The problem I see is that it's hard to claim a student (or anarchist) that far away presented a danger to anyone. I would be inclined to think the NG was not being very discriminating in their choice of targets if they were engaging persons up to 300 yds away.

Incidentally, two of the four students killed that day were never tied to the demonstration in any way. They appear to have been literally minding their own business, and just going to class, when they got caught in the fusillade.

oscar
May 9, 2005, 08:04 PM
I was in Vietnam at the time. I worked in an intelligence function and the inventory of weapons that came out of Cambodia was unbelievable. I believe we did the right thing by going in. I wish that the kids back home could have understood what we were doing and why.

AZ Jeff
May 9, 2005, 08:08 PM
Oscar, you are absolutely correct. History has shown that our invading Cambodia was the correct thing to do. Of course, the media of the time never reported it, and most of the American population got their information from that VERY filtered source.

So....it's not surprising that both the students (and the American population as a whole) thought that the invasion of Cambodia was a "bad thing".

It sort of makes you wonder how much of what the media now reports on Iraq is accurate. Then again, those of us who know persons over there KNOW that the whole story is not getting back to the American voters.

Rebar
May 9, 2005, 08:36 PM
I was wondering when bountyhunter would show up with his mile-long irrelivant and/or biased quotes.

Don't bother arguing with him, he'll just pull a "bountyhunter(tm)" and drop the topic when he's proven wrong.

bountyhunter
May 9, 2005, 08:40 PM
The great thing about getting a moronogram from rebar is you don't have to tell him where to shove it..... he's been told so many times, it should be memorized by now. And to Rebar, adieu:

Ad Hominem.... the last refuge of the mentally unarmed.

Since you are offended by my post, but claim I always "drop a thread when proven wrong"... logic would dictate an infallible method to drive me away would be to show how wrong my "irrelevant" quotes were?

What's that.... ad hominem and drivel is the sum total of your contribution?

One might think you had no ammunition to back up your claim that my post was "irrelevant". BTW, whining doesn't do much to advance your case.

Rebar
May 9, 2005, 08:44 PM
LOL - bountyhunter, your well-earned reputation is already known by most here. It's an honor to be put on your ignore list.

308win
May 9, 2005, 09:07 PM
The great thing about getting a moronogram from rebar is you don't have to tell him where to shove it..... he's been told so many times, it should be memorized by now. And to Rebar, adieu:

Bountyhuner,
Don't bother arguing with morons, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Kaylee
May 9, 2005, 09:07 PM
guys, take it to PM, or drop it.
Now.

DMF
May 9, 2005, 09:17 PM
Then read a book by James Michener titled: "Kent State: What Happened?" bountyhunter, it's odd that you recommend Michener's book, yet are so passionate about saying the Guardsmen murdered the students, and were completely unjustified in shooting. Michener's book does not lay the blame on the Guard. It points out many mistakes were made by Gov. Rhoades, and the Guard, but certainly does not show the Guardsmen to be murderers.

jefnvk
May 9, 2005, 09:39 PM
thanks for not feeding the trolls

I don't see any trolls :confused:

If you aim an M-4 at an unarmed man and kill him

Could be wrong, but I think M4's didn't exist in the late 60's.

I would be inclined to think the NG was not being very discriminating in their choice of targets if they were engaging persons up to 300 yds away.

If they were actually engaging targets at 100 yards, I'll partly change my mind. Until proven, I'll continue with my thoughts that they were probably engaging closer targets, and ended up hitting the farther targets, amking them negligent.

Incidentally, two of the four students killed that day were never tied to the demonstration in any way. They appear to have been literally minding their own business, and just going to class, when they got caught in the fusillade.

And for them, I am sorry. That is why any bad looking situtation I see, I am staying clear away from. Being a few yards back from a roioting group with guns pointed at them, I would think most non-involved people would ahve the sense to stay away from.

Most Guardsmen later testified that they turned and fired because everyone else was.

Unfortunately, I think this sounds like the most logical scenario. Someone got an itchy trigger finger, or someone else fired, and as soon as the first shot went off, everyone went off. Especially when coupled with this:
There was also an undercover FBI informant, Terry Norman, carrying a gun on the field that day. Though he later turned his gun into the police, who announced it had not been fired, later ballistic tests by the FBI showed that it had been fired since it was last cleaned-- but by then it was too late to determine whether it had been fired before or on May 4th.
and/or this:
One officer is seen in many of the photographs, out in front, pointing a pistol; one possibility is that he fired first, causing the others, ahead of him, to turn and fire. Or (as some witnesses testified) he or another officer may have given an order to fire.


What I discovered that week, and that year, was that America in those times was perfectly willing to harass, beat and kill its own children if they disagreed with government policy.

Nope, if you were showing that you were willing to become violent and destructive, you would be dealt with. As would any other criminal. I sincerely doubt if they were sitting down, playing guitar and singing 'Give Peace a Chance' (oh, just think of the irony there, a favorite protest song, in a time where protests were anything but peaceful), any of this would have happened.

The answer offered by the Guardsmen is that they fired because they were in fear of their lives. Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen, and they therefore had to fire in self-defense.

How many will sit here and praise a CCW holder for shooting a guy stealing his car, or saying that if they were in that situtation they would? How will we hear all day that any CCW holder that proclaimed to the press that 'they were in fear of their lives' must be innocent?

DRZinn
May 9, 2005, 10:17 PM
but why persons as far away as 300+ yards wound up getting hit.Read again - 300+ feet away.

saltydog
May 9, 2005, 10:21 PM
It was just another place in American history of a situation "gone bad." Hell look at Waco and Ruby Ridge. It will happen again. I hope it doesn't happen to anybody here. :(

AZ Jeff
May 10, 2005, 12:49 AM
DocZinn penned;
Read again - 300+ feet away.

If you read here---http://speccoll.library.kent.edu/4may70/index.html, you will find the ranges between the NG and the students shot was anywhere from 20 to 250 yards.

DRZinn
May 10, 2005, 01:27 AM
I see. I was using only the information on those killed.

bjbarron
May 10, 2005, 03:38 AM
I was in the Service at the time, in my early twenties.

I saw it as a tragedy, but one that was bound to happen. The Guardsmen were poorly trained, the demonstration was getting out of control, and bricks were thrown at the Guard. Nationwide, the protestors would push and push, burn and trash, pelt and overpower...

It was bound to happen. Some were happy that it did. This incident and Tet (with the help of the media) turned American opinion firmly against the war.

RevDisk
May 10, 2005, 04:34 AM
Could be wrong, but I think M4's didn't exist in the late 60's.

They did, sorta. CAR-15 and XM177E2. Ohio NG didn't have them at the time anyways. Come to think about it, they still don't for the most part.


My thoughts on the situation... If the rioters were such an threat, why didn't the NG guys shoot the closest rioters instead of the ones farther away? You don't go for long shots when you're supposedly being attacked with hand launched projectiles (ie, rocks). My riot training said not to shoot people throwing small rocks. Molotovs, yes, but not small rocks. Not a realistic life endangering threat under most circumstances, due to the invention of a piece of equipment called a "helmet". Then again, this is based on my current riot training. I have no idea what they taught back then.


Still, poor training and poor leadership. Officers in question should have been relieved and the NG unit sent for extensive riot control training. Reading the movements of the NG unit, the officer was a complete idiot and should have been relieved for incredible stupidity.

jefnvk
May 10, 2005, 11:51 AM
My thoughts on the situation... If the rioters were such an threat, why didn't the NG guys shoot the closest rioters instead of the ones farther away?

It sounded like there was a mix of guardsmen shooting warning shots over their heads, and some actually aiming for specific targets. Unfortunately, an '06 will penetrate a lot. If you dig through the pictures on that site, one of the students were either hurt or killed after the round went through a tree.

I do agree that they were very negligent in their targets.

RevDisk
May 10, 2005, 12:37 PM
It sounded like there was a mix of guardsmen shooting warning shots over their heads, and some actually aiming for specific targets. Unfortunately, an '06 will penetrate a lot. If you dig through the pictures on that site, one of the students were either hurt or killed after the round went through a tree.

I do agree that they were very negligent in their targets.

Jefnvk, I'm not the best ballistics guy on the planet. Nor am I a history expert on the events. From what I understand, the NG unit had the high ground. Thus they were firing down at the protesters. If the NG guys shoot over the heads of the protesters, wouldn't that cause the bullets to go flying into the protesters that were far away and not actively doing anything against the soldiers?

The NG is not supposed to use "warning shots" in the middle of a crowded American urban environment. Dead US citizens tend to make for angry politicians. Mr Bullet has this odd characteristic. Mr Bullet don't have thoughts and feelings. Mr Bullet does not care if he misses the intended target and kill a bystander. So, one must be rather careful when sending Mr Bullet downrange. One is responsible for whoever or whatever Mr Bullet runs into at a high rate of speed.

"Warning shots" is not a valid excuse for killing protesters that were not an immediate threat. And last time I went through training, my instructors made this very clear.


Oh yea. Regarding protests. I don't care for them. They're a waste of time. Granted, if people want to walk down a street carrying a sign and someone tries to stop them, I'd lend a hand in "dealing" with the someone trying to prevent the protest. It is VERY much their right to protest, even through there are many more efficienct ways of protesting actions than marches IMHO. A protest that has a "proper permit" is a joke. "Free speed zones" are insulting.

Personally, I prefered the old fashion protest marches. No signs, but plenty of pitchforks and torches. Now THAT is a protest march I'd respect. (Only if targetted at politicians, of course. I'm a humanitarian.)

Carl N. Brown
May 10, 2005, 01:38 PM
Kent State is one of those issues mired in bull manure.
James A Michner did a credible job of trying to get the whole
story. If you care, check out his book.
- The guard sent to Kent State had been at a Teamster strike for a week
and were stressed out.
- The anti-war all-stars there supposed to be headed to Kent City did
not have travel plans according to FBI surveillance.
- The Governor of Ohio over reacted to rumors of an anti-war protest.
- 6,000 students were home, not on campus, that weekend; when they
returned to find the guard on their campus, it became an anti-guard protest.
- The burning of the WWII "remporary" building housing the ROTC was
never explained and was probably an accident, not a provocation by the
protestors or secret government agents.

Gun owners should pay attention to this: the killing of Jeffrey Miller was
justified because after he was dead he was found to be the owner of
a non-functional .32 rimfire antique pistol.

bountyhunter
May 10, 2005, 02:00 PM
http://www.may4archive.org/chronology.shtml

12:25 p.m.
Canterbury concludes that the crowd has been dispersed and orders the Guard to march back to the Commons area. Most of the students believe the "action" to be over and begin walking away from the area. Some continue to shout obscenities and throw rocks at the Guard. As the Guard reaches the crest of Blanket Hill near the Pagoda of Taylor Hall, twenty-eight Guardsmen suddenly turn around 180 degrees, walk back a few steps, and fire their weapons into the group located in the parking lot. Sixty-one shots are fired in thirteen seconds. Four students are killed and nine others injured. Various professors are successful in preventing further bloodshed.



Chronology of events:


10:00 a.m.
At a meeting attended by local and state officials, some of those present incorrectly assume Governor Rhodes had declared martial law to be in effect, and thus argue that a rally scheduled for noon is illegal. While there is disagreement on this interpretation, the decision is made after the meeting that the rally should not be allowed.

11:00 a.m.
A group of approximately two hundred students gather on the university Commons area. Because of the central location and the approaching noon hour, many of those present are on their way to class or preparing to eat lunch. A sizeable number of students gather to watch the Guard, while others gather near the campus victory bell to protest the Guard's presence on the Kent State campus.

11:45 a.m.
As the class break occurs at Kent State, many more students pour on to the Commons. General Canterbury of the National Guard notices the increasing number of students and assumes that all are gathering to participate in the scheduled rally. He orders the group to disperse immediately. The message is communicated via a mechanical speaker, and is not heard by many members of the crowd. Those who do hear the message express anger. Prior to this announcement, there has been no violence. Rocks and obscenities are now directed at the Guard.

11:55 a.m.
Some students begin to ring the victory bell. Most of those present are standing on the edge of the Commons watching the Guard and the two hundred students near the victory bell. General Canterbury orders the ninety-six Guardsmen to disperse the crowd. The Guardsmen are equipped with loaded M-1 rifles and ample tear gas supplies.

Noon
Tear gas canisters are exploded among the students, but wind conditions limit their effectiveness. The Guard continues its march across the Commons area. As the crowd of students scatter up Blanket Hill, many shout obscenities and hurl objects at the Guard.

12:10 p.m.
The Guard clears the Commons area and the students are forced into several groups. Canterbury directs some of the Guardsmen up Blanket Hill and on to a practice football field where they are met by a chain-link fence. For approximately ten minutes the Guard stays in this position, apparently confused as to their next move. During this time tear gas canisters are thrown back and forth from the Guard's position to a small group of students located in the Prentice Hall parking lot. The majority of students are located in front of Taylor Hall to the Guard's left.

12:20 p.m.
Realizing there is confusion among the Guard located on the practice football field, Major Jones walks to the practice football field through the crowd of students near Taylor Hall who are observing the Guard. At this time several members of the Guard kneel and aim their weapons at the approximately fifteen students in the Prentice Hall parking lot. One Guardsman fires his weapon in the air. The Guard incorrectly assumes their tear gas supply to be relinquished.

12:25 p.m.
Canterbury concludes that the crowd has been dispersed and orders the Guard to march back to the Commons area. Most of the students believe the "action" to be over and begin walking away from the area. Some continue to shout obscenities and throw rocks at the Guard. As the Guard reaches the crest of Blanket Hill near the Pagoda of Taylor Hall, twenty-eight Guardsmen suddenly turn around 180 degrees, walk back a few steps, and fire their weapons into the group located in the parking lot. Sixty-one shots are fired in thirteen seconds. Four students are killed and nine others injured. Various professors are successful in preventing further bloodshed.





http://speccoll.library.kent.edu/4may70/MissionBetrayed.htm

CHAPTER SIX: The Failing Light of Autumn.

Joe Rhodes was wrong. Nixon flouted the recommendations of the Commission, and yet there were no deaths in protests that fall, or ever again. The message was as clear as the scenario had intended it. If you protested, you could be killed, no questions asked (or none that counted). You didn’t even have to be protesting. You could be standing there watching, like Bill Schroeder, or walking through the area, like Sandra Scheuer. They would get away with it.



http://members.aol.com/nrbooks/newinfo.htm

"The Guardsmen successfully thwarted investigators by falsely denying that hand signals to fire existed; by removing their name tags so that investigators could not subsequently identify which soldiers might have received the order to fire; and by telling tales of being endangered by encroaching students. A Justice Department summary of the evidence reported that none of the four students killed were close enough "to pose even a remote danger to the National Guard at the time of the firing."

Two key witnesses (ironically, both ex-Marines who saw combat in Vietnam) suggested that a sergeant gave a hand signal to fire, while others implied that a major gave the firing signal by motioning with his riot stick. Both the sergeant and the major denied under oath giving the order to fire.

Mr. Gordon stops short of pointing a finger at either individual, but he relentlessly ridicules their denials and their other sworn trial testimony. He concludes: "While the smoking gun still eludes us . . . there appears to have been extensive perjury at the trials. Even considering all the mitigating and extenuating circumstances, the Guardsmen literally appear to have gotten away with murder."






http://alancanfora.com/9.html


It was shocking to see the armed, uniformed guardsmen suddenly all turn together and start to shoot a powerful 13-second barrage of 67 shots into our crowd of unarmed students. For a brief moment, I assumed they were firing blanks because there was no reason whatsoever to fire live ammunition, as they seemed to be retreating over the hilltop. At the moment the massacre occurred, as I stood and watched carefully, I saw several of my fellow-students run away and "hit the dirt" (drop to the ground). As the bullets began to fly, my survival instinct caused me to decide to make a quick dash behind an oak tree a few feet away--the only tree in the direct line-of-fire.

Just as I reached safety, kneeling behind that beautiful tree during the first seconds of gunfire, I felt a sharp pain in my right wrist when an M-1 bullet passed through my arm. With shock and utter disbelief, I immediately thought to myself: "I've been shot! It seems like a nightmare but this is real. I've really been shot!" My pain was great during that unique moment of unprecedented anguish but I had another serious concern: the bullets were continuing to rain in my direction for another 11 or 12 seconds.

Among the 76 Ohio National Guard soldiers stretched across the hilltop, only about a dozen members of Troop G -- the death squad -- stood calmly aiming in a firing line. They killed four Kent State University students and wounded nine others, including me. One wounded victim, Dean Kahler, remains paralyzed as a result.

During the gunfire, I was in great pain and distress but quite aware that I had to remain tucked behind that narrow, young tree which absorbed several bullets intended for me.

richyoung
May 10, 2005, 02:22 PM
Big whoop - I could come up with at least as many sources "proving" that Alger Hiss WASN'T a communist agent,...but we all know he is. Throwing rocks and bricks at people with loaded M-1 Garands is an invitation that Darwinism accepted at Kent State. It's real easy to avoid being shot during a riot - DON'T GO TO THE RIOT!

bountyhunter
May 10, 2005, 02:25 PM
It's real easy to avoid being shot during a riot - DON'T GO TO THE RIOT! And therein lies the problem... so much propoganda so completely swallowed that you do not even realize two of the people shot dead were a couple of hundred yards away and had not been involved at all, nor did they know that anything was occurring.

I suppose they "deserved it" too?

Don't let the facts get in the way. But the truth is out there if you ever get a desire to see it.

bountyhunter
May 10, 2005, 02:30 PM
bountyhunter, it's odd that you recommend Michener's book, yet are so passionate about saying the Guardsmen murdered the students, and were completely unjustified in shooting. Michener's book does not lay the blame on the Guard. It points out many mistakes were made by Gov. Rhoades, and the Guard, but certainly does not show the Guardsmen to be murderers. I recommended it not because Michener spouted an opinion, but because it is a large base of knowledge that shows most of what happened. Michener did not write it to show blame, he did it to inform.

I always delude myself into thinking people can form the right opinion given the facts, some of which are in that book. It is by no means the only book avauilable. Another is this one: William Gordon's:

Four Dead In Ohio: Was There A Conspiracy At Kent State?


The point is, don't just swallow the pack of BS served up to whitewash the event back then. There is photographic evidence, eyewitness evidence, and most of all: common sense evidence. Avail yourself and find the truth.

Sean Smith
May 10, 2005, 03:05 PM
I think the bottom line is that it is awful hard to justify people a football field or two away from the disorder getting shot... :scrutiny:

Kaylee
May 10, 2005, 03:27 PM
I think the bottom line is that it is awful hard to justify people a football field or two away from the disorder getting shot...

Hard to justify? Perhaps. Not hard to explain though. People can miss. And as Revdisk has said "Mr Bullet does not care if he misses the intended target and kills a bystander."

I'd be real cautious about throwing around the word "murder" though. :scrutiny:
If 20-some guardsmen with M1s had set out to "murder" the rioters there'd be a lot longer casualty list than there was.

AZ Jeff
May 10, 2005, 03:47 PM
RichYoung posted:
Throwing rocks and bricks at people with loaded M-1 Garands is an invitation that Darwinism accepted at Kent State. It's real easy to avoid being shot during a riot - DON'T GO TO THE RIOT!

I don't mean to be insulting, but Rich, were you ever in college, and particularly, were you ever in college when any sort of massing of students occurred?

I ask becuase, as I posted earlier in this thread, I WAS. I know from personal experience that, while you personally might not want to be part of an activity on campus, events might start to unfold around you inwhich you had no intention of participating.

It's very flippant to say "don't go to the riot" because it's equally possible that the "riot may come to you". I bet more than one KSU student walked out of one of the nearby buildings to find him or herself smack in the middle of something in which they had no interest. If they happened to walk out just prior to the gunfire--talk about being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

richyoung
May 10, 2005, 05:42 PM
And therein lies the problem... so much propoganda so completely swallowed that you do not even realize two of the people shot dead were a couple of hundred yards away and had not been involved at all, nor did they know that anything was occurring.


HORSEPUCKY - a football field away, no one could see the tear gas? THEY COULD SMELL THE TEAR GAS! Here the chants? See the burning ROTC building? Here the "victory bell" they rang to start the riot? If I can sit in one end zone of a stadium, and see 22 people play football at the other end, I'm darn sure going to see a riot involving hundreds of people, tear gas, the National Guard, yadda, yadda, yadda. For the record, the school administration and individual professors are IDIOTS for trying to hold class in this circumstance - the students were idiots for being there. I can't imagine a teacher that wouldn't accept "my mom made me stay home because of the riot" as an excuse. The "innocently walking to class" BS doesn't fly any more than "I was going to pay for the candy bar you saw me stuff in my underwear" story.

richyoung
May 10, 2005, 05:51 PM
don't mean to be insulting, but Rich, were you ever in college,


University of Texas, 1979 - 1980, Cameron University various times since


and particularly, were you ever in college when any sort of massing of students occurred?

numerous times - during the Iran hostage crisis - often caught between the Jewish students and the pro-PLO crowd

I ask becuase, as I posted earlier in this thread, I WAS.

ditto

I know from personal experience that, while you personally might not want to be part of an activity on campus, events might start to unfold around you inwhich you had no intention of participating.

Was seached by campus security after pro PLO, pro revolutionary Iran crowd lost one too many arguments to me in public - claimed I had a bomb in my brief case. All they found were the recent editions of "Air Classics" and "Wings", and my school work. HOWEVER, even at that tender age, had I emerged from a building to smell tear gas and see/hear a riot, I would have gone back inside. I WOULD NOT go chunk missiles at anyone, much less those with loaded weapons, and am personally at a loss to explain the REFUSAL to accord to THUGS, ROWDIES, AND HOOLIGANS some SMALL MEASURE of responsability for their own misfortune when they get hurt, killed, or arrested, (or visit the same on allegedly innocent bystanders and property) in the course of RIOTING for or against their pet cause or sports championship.

AZ Jeff
May 10, 2005, 05:55 PM
RichYoung penned:

HORSEPUCKY - a football field away, no one could see the tear gas? THEY COULD SMELL THE TEAR GAS! Here the chants? See the burning ROTC building?

Rich, I think you need to do some reading on the KSU incident, as you are getting some issues mixed up here:
1. the tear gas episode was 1/4 mile from the gunfire site, and NOT in a straight line.
2. The ROTC building was burned TWO DAYS BEFORE the gunfire episode.

I don't know about chants, but the crowd began to assemble at the recess of morning classes (about 11:45AM), and the shooting happened at 12:25PM. Now if one happened to be in one of the class buildings during this period, I don't know if one would have been aware of the goings-on outside until that person actually walked out the door into the melee.

I can tell you, as a student at that time, that there was always SOMETHING going on on campus. Not necessarily a violent protest, but some sort of commotion/activity was commonplace. To suggest that the kids were stupid, or asking for trouble is to NOT understand the campuses of the 1960's (or now, for that matter).

bountyhunter
May 10, 2005, 06:04 PM
From the book: FOUR DEAD IN OHIO: WAS THERE A
CONSPIRACY AT KENT STATE?





Mr. Gordon was able to penetrate secret federal grand jury testimony and learn that in 1974, the Justice Department asked a federal grand jury to indict eight Guardsmen on conspiracy charges. The grand jury balked and instead indicted eight soldiers on charges they violated the due process rights of the four slain and nine wounded students.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Previously undisclosed FBI files reveal that:

1. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover felt the victims deserved to be shot;

2. Hoover eagerly followed Nixon's instructions to "knock down" (that is, discredit) accurate news reports that the shootings were not necessary and that the Guardsmen could be prosecuted; and

3. After Hoover relayed that order, one of his top aides boasting of "scotching" those accurate news accounts.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Both the FBI and campus police covered up of an incident involving an armed undercover photographer who was seen brandishing a .38 caliber pistol at students shortly after the Guard fired. Because the photographer, Terry Norman, was the only civilian with a weapon, he was initially suspected of being the man who fired the first shot.

The author discovered that 13 Kent State police statements mysteriously disappeared from the desk from an officer when the FBI asked to see them; that Norman's sponsors in the KSU police department attempted to influence the statements of at least two eyewitnesses who thought Norman fired; that Norman positioned himself between the students and the Guardsmen and threw as many as a dozen rocks at the students; and that both the FBI and campus police, in "Mission Impossible"-style tried to disavow any knowledge of the actions of their undercover informant.

A newly discovered FBI lab report of Norman's pistol also raises the question of whether Norman fired his gun at some point during the May 4, 1970 incident. However, acoustical tests commissioned by the Justice Department prove that even if Norman fired his gun, he could not have fired the first shot and thus could not have been, as Senator Birch Bayh once charged, "the fatal catalyst" for the Kent State tragedy.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kent State administrators prevented the public from discovering that six KSU police officers alleged that KSU's police chief, Donald Schwartzmiller, was drunk during the burning of the University R.O.T.C. building on May 2, 1970, and could not take command.

This is important because KSU police never attempted to stop the arsonists, and the burning of the R.O.T.C. building was the one act of violence which resulted in the calling-out of the National Guard.

Had the arson attempts failed (and the university's own investigation concluded: "The persons involved in the actual incendiarism were few, were separated from the main crowd, and could easily have been apprehended by the police"), the Guard never would have been called to campus, and no one would have been killed on May 4.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In an extensive and exclusive interview for the book, President Richard Nixon's chief domestic adviser John Ehrlichman claimed that Nixon initially secretly nixed the federal prosecution of the Guardsmen at the request of Ohio Governor James A. Rhodes. Ehrlichman also said it was fair to say that Nixon "calculatingly exploited" antiwar protestors for political gain.








The closest casualty was 20 yards and the farthest was almost 250 yards away.
FYI, 250 yards is more than 1/8 of a mile.



http://speccoll.library.kent.edu/4may70/exhibit/chronology/index.html


May 4
By noon May 4, two thousand people had gathered in the vicinity of the commons. Many knew that the rally had been banned. Others, especially commuters, did not know of this prohibition. Chants, curses and rocks answered an order to disperse. Shortly after noon, tear gas canisters were fired. The gas, blowing in the wind, had little effect. The guard moved forward with fixed bayonets, forcing demonstrators to retreat. Reaching the crest of the hill by Taylor Hall, the guard moved the demonstrators even further to a nearby athletic practice field. Once on the practice field, the guard recognized that the crowd had not dispersed and, further, that the field was fenced on three sides. Tear gas was traded for more rocks and verbal abuse.

The guardsmen then retraced their line of march. Some demonstrators followed as close as 20 yards, but most were between 60 and 75 yards behind the guard. Near the crest of Blanket Hill, the guard turned and 28 guardsmen fired between 61 and 67 shots in 13 seconds toward the parking lot. Four persons lay dying and nine wounded. The closest casualty was 20 yards and the farthest was almost 250 yards away. All 13 were students at Kent State University. The four students who were killed were Jeffrey Miller, Allison Krause, William Schroeder and Sandra Scheuer. The nine wounded students were Joseph Lewis, John Cleary, Thomas Grace, Alan Canfora, Dean Kahler, Douglas Wrentmore, James Russell, Robert Stamps, and Donald MacKenzie. Dean Kahler was permanently paralyzed from his injury.

Disbelief, fright and attempts at first aid gave way quickly to anger. A group of two hundred to three hundred demonstrators gathered on a slope nearby and were ordered to move. Faculty members were able to convince the group to disperse.

A University ambulance moved through the campus making the following announcement over a public address system: "By order of President White, the University is closed. Students should pack their things and leave the campus as quickly as possible." Late that afternoon, the county prosecutor obtained an injunction closing the University indefinitely. Normal campus activities did not resume until the summer session.

bountyhunter
May 10, 2005, 06:14 PM
http://people.cohums.ohio-state.edu/grimsley1/warchild/kent.htm

Monday, May 4, hundreds of students demonstrated against the presence of the Guard on their campus. (Note: Most U.S. history textbooks claim that it was a demonstration against the Vietnam War, which was, at best, only indirectly the case.)

Around noon, Brig. Gen. Robert Canterbury decided to disperse the demonstrators. A jeep containing an officer with a bull horn rolled forward slowly. The officer read them the riot act, a legal requirement before further action could be taken. Predictably, the students failed to comply with its demand to leave the area. Canterbury then sent a skirmish line of Guardsmen, equipped with .30 caliber M-1 rifles (with fixed bayonets), M-79 grenade launchers (to fire tear gas canisters), and gas masks. Starting from the burned-out hulk of the ROTC building, the Guard swept eastward, up and over Blanket Hill and ultimately into a practice field on the far side.

As a riot control measure, the maneuver was completely ineffective, even counterproductive. The students simply gave way on either side, shouted slogans and obscenities, and in some cases lobbed the tear gas canisters back at the Guardsmen. Worse, the practice field was fenced in on three sides, so that the Guardsmen in effect trapped themselves there. The students swept in behind, surrounding them. The Guardsmen responded by dropping to one knee and taking aim at the students.

Fortunately they did not open fire. But on the return trip to the ROTC building, one Guard contingent neared the southwest corner of Taylor Hall, KSU's journalism building. At that point, near a concrete pagoda recently built by engineering students as a class project, some Guardsmen suddenly turned east and fired into a nearby parking lot. The volley lasted thirteen seconds. Many Guardsmen fired into the air, but some did not, and at the end of the fusillade nine students lay wounded--one would be paralyzed for life--and four were dead. Of the four, only two--Jeffrey Miller and Allison Krause--had participated in the demonstration. Sandy Scheuer was on her way to class. So was Bill Schroeder, an ROTC cadet.

Prof. Frank was having lunch at the campus commons when the firing occurred. Within minutes he reached the parking lot and began giving what aid he could. The photo at right shows him begging students to leave the scene. (The black line near the curb in the back is the flow of blood from Jeffrey Miller's shattered skull.) Subsequently the students, enraged, went boiling down the western slope of Blanket Hill to confront the Guard near the ROTC building. Several KSU faculty marshals, including Frank, tried to negotiate with Gen. Canterbury to prevent more violence, but Canterbury insisted that the students must disperse. At that point, it looked more than ever as if another shooting would occur, because the students were out of their minds with grief and fury and Canterbury was locked into a very rigid pattern of thought.

Prof. Frank went to the students and, in an emotional plea, said: "I don't care whether you've never listened to anyone before in your lives. I am begging you right now. . If you don't disperse right now, they're going to move in, and it can only be a slaughter. Would you please listen to me? Jesus Christ, I don't want to be a part of this . . . !" A transcript doesn't begin to convey the effect of Prof. Frank's words. Fortunately you can hear them for yourself by clicking here, which will take you to an award-winning half-hour documentary by WKSU Radio. Prof. Frank's plea begins at the 25-minute, 30-second mark. (The fusillade is at the 19-minute, 56-second mark.)

Something in Prof. Frank's voice got through to the students as nothing and no one else had. Slowly, by two's and three's, they left the area. In a few instances they bodily picked up their friends and took them away. I'm convinced that it was the sheer humanity of Prof. Frank's plea that prevented a further tragedy that day.







http://www.historymania.com/american_history/Kent_State_shootings

The shootings killed four students and wounded nine. Only one of the four students killed was participating in the protest, and one of the students killed, William Schroeder (who was observing but not participating in the demonstration) was a member of the campus ROTC chapter. Of those wounded, none was closer than 71 feet (22 m) from the guardsmen. Of those killed, the nearest was 265 feet (81 m) from the guardsmen.

bountyhunter
May 10, 2005, 06:20 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Schroeder_%28Kent_State_massacre%29


Schroeder was killed with a shot in the back. According to reports, he was not taking a part in the Vietnam war protests that preceded the shootings, but simply going from one class to the next. [1]



William Knox Schroeder (July 20, 1950–May 4, 1970) was a student at Kent State University, Ohio, when he was killed by Ohio National Guardsmen in the Kent State shootings on May 4, 1970.

At age 17, Schroeder applied for the Army Reserve Officer Training Corps Scholarship. He received the Academic Achievement award from both the Colorado School of Mines and from Kent State University, where he was a psychology student. He also earned the Association of the United States Army award for excellence in history.

Schroeder was killed with a shot in the back. According to reports, he was not taking a part in the Vietnam war protests that preceded the shootings, but simply going from one class to the next. [1] (http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2773389) His college roommate, Lou Cusella, stated that he believed Schroeder was trying to flee when shot. "Bill was 332 feet away from the nearest National Guardsman, not much of a threat. He was shot with a textbook in his hand." [2] (http://www.udayton.edu/news/nr/050100.html) Three other students were killed in the shootings: Allison Krause, Jeffrey Miller and Sandra Scheuer.

jefnvk
May 10, 2005, 06:24 PM
I guess my real problem here is that some people place 100% of the blame on the Guardsmen, and won't recognize that the violent protestors share blame.

Kinda like on here when someone in the news will say that some home invader shouldn't have been shot in the act, and most will say that if he didn't want to be shot, he shouldn't have been in my home.

Or someone shot while robbing someone else, the liberal media will say that if the gun had been removed, all would still be alive and well, and the conservatives will say that had he not robbed the guy, all would still be alive and well.

Their right to protest ended the second they hurled the rock. That second, they became criminals. Probably not deserving of being shot, but criminals nonetheless. After all, the First Amendment does read:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

EDIT: rich, two were just students. IIRC, one was ROTC, VERY highly doubtful he was in any protest. Those two definitely didn't deserve to be shot, and a little situtational awareness would have helped tremendously.

bountyhunter
May 10, 2005, 06:28 PM
http://www.allsands.com/History/Events/kentstateshoot_tez_gn.htm

A thirteen second barrage of automatic gunfire erupted from the ranks of the National Guard. Two students involved with the rally were killed instantly, while two others who were changing classes lay fatally struck by stray bullets.


May 4th started out as a typical college day. Students were streaming in and out of class buildings, and discussing the weekend's strange turn of events. For most, the presence of the National Guard was a curiosity. Many of the students were not planning on attending the rally at 11:00, but were curious to see how it would turn out. Those who were planning on attending the rally started milling about in the commons area. Meanwhile, the Guardsmen began a series of drills intended to generate a sense of control over the crowd. These maneuvers were standard procedure, consisting mostly of marches and organized retreats. The more politically active students started taunting the Guardsmen verbally, but the troops paid little attention.


As the crowd began to grow larger, the Guardsmen began to feel uneasy about their vulnerable position in the open field. Rumors had been spreading about snipers, and FBI agents were seen in the crowd. In order to regain a position of power and control, the Guardsmen began a march up Blanket Hill, towards a decorative Japanese pagoda. By now, the Guardsmen were wearing full gas masks, and had difficulty communicating. Tear gas had been thrown into the crowd as a defensive tactic, but the students threw the canisters back towards the Guard formation. As the Guard reached the pagoda area at the high point of Blanket Hill, a confusing set of events took place. Allegedly, an officer swung his right arm towards the crowd, his service revolver clearly visible. Some of the Guardsmen interpreted this action as an order to fire, while others either did not see this signal or openly disagreed with the implied 'order'.


A thirteen second barrage of automatic gunfire erupted from the ranks of the National Guard. Two students involved with the rally were killed instantly, while two others who were changing classes lay fatally struck by stray bullets. Nine other students were injured to various degrees, from a grazed thumb to a shattered spine. The campus was in complete chaos from that point on, and the National Guard was ordered to stand down.

richyoung
May 10, 2005, 06:53 PM
rich, two were just students. IIRC, one was ROTC, VERY highly doubtful he was in any protest. Those two definitely didn't deserve to be shot, and a little situtational awareness would have helped tremendously.

OK - I'll stipulate that apparently two of the killed were not taking part in the riot. The question then becomes, "Who do we blame for their deaths?" While there is plenty of blame to pass around, I'm not going to heap a mound of it on tired, poorly trained, poorly led guardsmen that are being treated like a piniata at a cinquo de mayo festival - you throw bricks and lightbulbs at armed men who can't see or hear so good due to the gas masks they are wearing, and, BTW, have been warned about snipers, and trouble will follow. So, who to blame:

1. Campus administration and faculty - NOT cancelling class in the circumstances is criminally negligent.

2. The rioting troublemakers - without them, the guard wouldn't even be there, much less firing.

3. The local law enforcement and campus police, for letting it get to that point.

4. The state government that sent the guard into that powder keg.


Lastly, making a big point out of someone getting hit "X hundreds of yards away" is simply specious - the M2 Ball that the Garands were doubtless loaded with is perfectly capable of passing through a torso, tree, or automobile and remaining lethal - it will pentrate half an inch of steel. The fact that some fell at a long range is in no way indicitive that those people were specifically targeted - without more forensic detail, they may have been struck by rounds that passed through another victim, or evn by ricochet. A hit on a man-sized target at 300 yards is a good accomplishment for a deer hunter with a scope and premium ammo - it almost beyond accomplishment for a shooter equipped with essentially a military surplus cast-off loaded with low-bidder ammo and aimed through a (probably unzeroed) peep sight as seen through a gas mask window.

jefnvk
May 10, 2005, 08:31 PM
A thirteen second barrage of automatic gunfire

First of all, M1's are not 'automatic'. That statement just leaves me with a feeling of what else is wrong in the article.

bountyhunter - no offense, but I don't know where you are going with that. Doesn't seem to fit with your earlier arguing. Sounds like the people wern't deliberitely aiming and firing like a firing squad, but it was panic fire. Sorry if I am missing something, but your arguments don;t seem to go together.

it almost beyond accomplishment for a shooter equipped with essentially a military surplus cast-off loaded with low-bidder ammo and aimed through a (probably unzeroed) peep sight as seen through a gas mask window.

Sorry, that is a no-go. IIRC, the Marines shot out to 500 yards (metres?) when Grandpa was in, with the M1 and ball ammo.

DMF
May 10, 2005, 09:13 PM
I recommended it not because Michener spouted an opinion, but because it is a large base of knowledge that shows most of what happened. Michener did not write it to show blame, he did it to inform. bountyhunter, that's the same reason I recommended Michener's book. However, much of what you presented here in an attempt to show the Guardsman murdered those students, and were completely unjustified in their actions, is contradictory to the information Michener presents in the book.

richyoung
May 11, 2005, 11:39 AM
Sorry, that is a no-go. IIRC, the Marines shot out to 500 yards (metres?) when Grandpa was in, with the M1 and ball ammo.


I have no doubt they did - maybe even hit sometimes. Probably from the prone position, (or some other supported shooting position), and probably not with a gas mask on. Probably with zeroed sights, a recently manufactured gun, and a hit ratio of 10 to 20 percent. BUT THATS NOT THE SITUATION WE HAVE HERE! Strap on that gas mask, march in formation several hundred yards lugging that 10 poung Garand while people thow rocks at you, then turn around and nail a man-sized target at three hundred yards through the gas mask lens and tear gas smoke off-hand first shot with an unzeroed 30 year old weapon. Unless your last name is "Hathcock, tain't happaning. I own a Garand - I shoot my Garand (in matches, no less), and doubt that I could perform the feat.

Yooper
May 11, 2005, 12:31 PM
Kent State is an example of what happens when the wrong decision is made by absolutely everyone.

richyoung
May 11, 2005, 01:17 PM
I'll dito that, Yooper...

Carl N. Brown
May 13, 2005, 10:47 AM
Kent State, like Ruby Ridge and Waco, was an example of bad decisions
by everyone involved; but, government authorities should exhibit better
judgement than mere civilians do if they deserve our trust in their power.

The Governor of Ohio should have been there; the President or Dean of the
University should have closed the campus Fri. or Sat. while 6000 students
were home, off campus that weekend. I don't blame the guardsmen or the
students AS MUCH as I blame the people supposedly responsible for them.
The guard and students were left on the campus unsupervised.

Sure, the guardsmen and the students are responsible for their actions,
but the bad decisions were made higher up by people who don't seem to
be held accountable. And the conspiracy theories and whitewashes are as
bad as the original acts, if not worse.

If you enjoyed reading about "Kent State - 35 years ago today..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!