Yah, completely innocent, there had only been violent protest for several days...violent enough to bring out the National Guard. Then these so called innocents stroll along between armed men and a violent crowed. If they were innocent, and I'm sure some were, they were stupid. It was probably just couple professional agitators that through the first brick, but they were surrounded by useful idiots who went along with it. And, they deservedly got shot. In my less then humble opinion, throwing bottles, rocks, or bricks is potentially lethal force and should be answered with a bullet.
For three decades we've been asked to believe that weekend warriors are going to drop the hammer of a .30-06 into a crowed they know is innocent. I don't buy it, these guys were provoked. Gee, the hippies only peaceably burnt down the ROTC building the day before.
Like I said, waste them.
That must be why Nixon's own Scranton Commission declared that the Guard's actions were "unnecessary, unwarranted, and inexcusable".
Nixon also said "I'm not a crook","We're all Keynesians now", and also claimed to be a republican. The man was all to quick to lie for political expedience.
Let see, their is a moral equivalence between violent insurrection and women and children in their own home. Yah, that's intellectually coherent.
Not true. Some of the students killed and injured were hundreds of yards away. The closest was about 85 yards. What is stupid is firing indiscriminately into a crowd of people.
It was probably just couple professional agitators that through the first brick...
For clarification, things were thrown but not bricks.
In my less then humble opinion, throwing bottles, rocks, or bricks is potentially lethal force and should be answered with a bullet.
Firing indiscriminately into a crowd of people is stupid.
Gee, the hippies only peaceably burnt down the ROTC building the day before.
Perhaps they did. However, there is no evidence.
Looking at the relative numbers and the actions of the protestors over the preceeding days, they were probably more terrified of the crowd than provoked by it. I seriously doubt that many of them realy wanted to be there. They way I understand it (correct me if I am wrong) is that they were being driven back by a vastly larger crowd of demonstrators acting in a violent and threatening manner. There was a bang, like a gunshot. The gaurd, probably beginning with one person and escalating rapidly, fired back in what they believed was self defense. It was just a plain crappy situation to be in.
So who fired the first shot? Or maybe threw a firecacker at the gaurd? I don't think anyone has ever figured that out. Who was responsible? No question about it. The demonstrators. Had they simply been peaceably demonstrating and not advancing on the gaurd in a hostile and threatening manner no one would have gotten killed. The campus police, or whomever gives them their orders, are also partly to blame for not nipping the gathering in the bud. Of course, if police try to head off trouble before a crowd goes out of controll, liberals, conservatives, libertarians, etc. begin crying POLICE STATE.