This post, this story, gives me no comfort or pleasure, at all! I have history with both. Student, student athlete and athletic staff during my younger years. And with LAPD for a large part of my career. I respect both organizations. I have stated many times, law enforcement is an “imperfect science.”
This report outlines what may be the facts surrounding the handling of the demonstrations and occupation of the campus by protesters. But what must also be considered, but may not be reflected in the report is the fuller history.
continue with post after image…
I have a history with both UCLA and LAPD…So, am I bias?! Maybe, both bias pro and against! But you can judge for yourself…and I am sure you would no matter what I say!
Campus activities and unrest across the country have demonstrated that much more than basic education has been the curriculum. Activism! I do not recognize activism as a degree subject. Yes, there is the following:
– AI Source Lab
*
A college major that primarily focuses on political or social activism is Political Science. Studying political science allows you to learn about government systems, political behaviors, and how to bring about change through policy and advocacy, making it a relevant field for those interested in activism.
Other related majors that could be relevant for social activism include:
- Sociology:Examines social structures and how they impact individuals and groups, which can be useful for understanding social issues and advocating for change.
- Public Policy:Focuses on the development and analysis of government policies, allowing individuals to work on creating legislation for social change.
- Journalism:Can be used to raise awareness about important social issues through reporting and investigative journalism.
- Community Development Studies:Focuses on community organizing and strategies to address social issues at a local level.
*
I suppose one could reason from what you see here that activism might fit as an element in discussion, but no where do you see it as the recommended course of study. Have our professors, teachers and chosen lecturers brought activism to the forefront in the classrooms? You judge for yourself. Is it what we fund and recommend for our colleges and universities? My opinion, no.
Activist and activism have taken over many if not most of our colleges. We do not pay for that, and we do not pay for the costs that result from the acts that come with it playing out on campuses.
The next element is our schools leadership and the policies that are either in place but not followed, or not in place at all. I have attended countless seminars and talks on the UCLA campus over the many years since I graduated. The speakers, and the audience (based on their comments and questions) show up clearly on the side of what leads to activism.
Are there arguable issues across the landscape of this country? Without question! But what has happen shows that there is a cost and an expanding and broadening damage that results from one sided speakers.
Is it all on the students, no…on the professors, no…all on the administration, no…all on those Regents…no, again. We have to recognize that we have all, to some degree, allowed this. So we also share some blame. The taxpayers lack of activism! Paying parents lack of activism, in the form of ensuring that what they pay for is expended correctly.
The Police…
The UCLA Chief, John Thomas, is a retired LAPD Supervisor. I was casually acquainted with him back in the day. But I cannot say that I know much about his PD history. But, based on what I was aware of, and the fact that he matriculated up the difficult management process with the Department, I would have given him the benefit of the doubt. But LAPD and the University of California Police, though both law enforcement, are very different animals.
Does the Chief make policy? Does the Chief represent the final authority on management of the police and decisions on operations on campus? Based on the comments in the report, perhaps, maybe absolutely not, presuming the commission got it right. But is it fact? I do not know.
What the report says is PD Chief, John Thomas, may have made decisions that included leaving LAPD, the closest and the logical go-to agency for support, for virtually any criminal or threat incident on the UCLA campus. Can this be justified? With all due respect, no! There are no law enforcement agencies in all of America more experienced in all facets of management and operations. Not necessarily the best, but equal to the best at least. My personal experience with LAPD included more demonstrations and riots than I care to remember. We may not have done it perfect…there is no such thing as perfect in policing, we did it very well. So how can anyone, particularly a former LAPD Lieutenant, and experienced with other agencies, apparently choose to shun partnering with the surrounding PD, the largest PD in the area, and the most experienced?! If it wasn’t under direct orders, it was a bad decision, and with that, a bad decision!
Let’s be clear here. Crime, the safety and security of persons, and protection of the property, along with access to education, as funded by the state and tax payers is the job of the campus police. Any decisions made must begin from those points. The only other issue might be, how do you do that. But that is not rocket science! You take legal, planned and practiced, reasonable action to prevent the small acts from becoming larger acts. When appropriate, you make arrests for criminal acts…simple!
This did not happen.
Students, activists and whoever…were allowed to enter the campus. Once there, they either organized on site, or were planned and organized before arriving. The protesters used the lull in response by the UC police to take positions and begin what became their eventual campus takeover.
Once the takeover was in place, and some time has passed, the UC police request support from other agencies. LAPD was eventually requested but upon arrival were relegated to what could be seen as a standby status. All the while the protesters are erecting structural support for their takeover.
The protest became a success in terms of shutting down, disrupting and commanding the ground. Further they captured the attention of a media that is always hungry for dramatic and sensational events, particularly when students and police are involved. And just as significant, there seemed to be a supportive voice to one of the two key offended groups in the National, global disputed events in Israel.
The bottom line, summing up the key point here is this. UCLA Police failed in the management of the activities happening on campus, leading to occupation of the school. Police were put in the position of coming from behind to slow down the takeover, controling the raging crowds, ensuring the safety of students, and regaining control of the university proper. Eventually the structures erected by the demonstrators was stopped, deconstructed and removed. Eventually some amount of the disrupters were addressed with either removal or arrest. Eventually the various police, to include multiple agencies found a workable operational plan to protect person and property. It was some time before the education process was able to restart on campus.
But, on the scale that ultimately resulted, this takeover and stoppage of the university’s education responsibility and purpose, should not have happened.
There are solutions beyond what has taken place since this event happened. There is a new Dean of the school. There is a new Chief of the UC police, and we are to understand that there is an ongoing evaluation and analysis of the broad failure. But, as we all know, whenever official intuitives have perceived failure, the public very often seek and demand that some outside entity be put in place to find causes, failures and solutions.