Kid does a dumb, possibly illegal thing. Next page on the thread people are posting things about the kid’s personal life as though that should have some bearing in what happens next.
It should have no bearing, and just because he tripped into notoriety doesn’t change that.
More Info:
The group of 33 involved in the sit-in, did include folks that were NOT students.
I love the part about adult diapers…
http://chicagomaroon.com/2016/06/08/sg-president-faces-disciplinary-charges-for-facilitating-sit-in/
@GMTplus7 said " I guess you have no issue w your friends letting in people from off the street into your home.
Woo hoo! P-A-R-T-Y at @pickpocket 's house! BYOB!"
Actually my kids DO sometimes invite their friends into my house! As long as they’re non-destructive, no problem.
But you must agree that private family home is not quite the same as a University. University probably has a library that has areas open to the public (my home library is not). I might agree administration building is not generally open to free rein access by the public but I also find it a bit abhorrent that students should be barred from entry to offices whose ultimate purpose is to serve those students. Can we agree on a middle ground here?
And GMT+7 you are actually welcome to my house for lively discussion over a bottle of wine! 
I’ll bring cheese, too. 
Seriously? Many/most colleges dorms are “locked down from students.” Or, at least the students that don’t live in that dorm.
UChicago is surrounded by one of the highest crime rates in the nation, and admin buildings should just be open to anyone that wants to stroll in?
The kid did not let in a random mob of strangers. He let in a small group of known people, a few of which may have been non-u affiliated, and he and others from the University were there to monitor them.
@bluebayou said, “Seriously? Many/most colleges dorms are “locked down from students.” Or, at least the students that don’t live in that dorm.”
OK, so any student who allows an outsider friend into their dorm is subject to expulsion for “premeditated and dishonest behavior to gain entry to _____ Hall, creating an unsafe situation?”
I know! Reminded me of Lisa Nowak. http://www.denverpost.com/2007/02/05/diaper-wearing-astronaut-jailed-in-love-triangle-plot/
Expulsion is wrong in this case but so is mob mentality which assumes bringing in outside protesters to protest the university inside an university building.
An open space protest would be appropriate when it includes outsiders.
In my personal opinion, if the a protest can’t be managed with the university students by themselves at an elite university, they have no business protesting. What is your confidence level in your cause if you need to bring in outsiders to fight for you on your own campus?
^I thought the non students were cafeteria workers (those asking for the living wages)?
BREAKING (because I always wanted to do that…): He’s been placed on disciplinary probation, but will be allowed to graduate tomorrow.
Could you provide a link to the news report that says that the “outsiders” were fighting for the students, not the other way round?
This thread has a few funny moments. Consolation, I appreciated your constraint on this one:
“You’d think someone from a low SES background would understand the concept of breaking & entering…”
Also enjoyed the idea of a protest for a higher minimum wage for the students, by the students. Maybe I should suggest it to my daughter.
Anyway, this kid got himself inside the building and then let others in. The protest was peaceful and short. For some good causes, at least from the students’ point of view. I find it refreshing when students are activist about anything these days.
Expulsion actually sounds tragic and I sure do hope that doesn’t happen.
Is it necessary to break security rules to take someone inside to show and tell if they are not allowed to be in that building?
If these are employees of the cafeteria/university, why were they considered the security risk?
^they’re not, it was made up at some point in the thread. In the protest, both were considered the same but penalties, as announced, were specific to students.
Anyway, this has ended. Probation, not expulsion.
I’m troubled by the little tolerance for youth dissent/protest displayed on this thread though. Are we so old that we forgot our time of marching, chanting, sitting in, passing out petitions, starting assembly debates on crucial and urgent matters (that may or may no change later on), being revolted by injustice or complacency in the adult world and trying very hard to change it (quickly if possible because youth sees patience as weakness), the companionship of creating solutions and coming up with new policies for your community, the belief in justice and the utopia you could create, the incredulity when faced with adults who are too obtuse to see the truth you’re offering them as well as the solutions you’ve devised, the simple, undiluted righteousness that comes with being 20, the exhilaration when it seems you can change things for the better and the absolute crushing blow that comes with realizing you can’t change everything, and finally that perhaps you shouldn’t?
Most people did not do such things, so they probably don’t miss it.
I, like many of my extremely poor friends, worked out way through college – and got out in four years. There was little time for “marching, chanting, sitting in…” Being born in the project, putting food on the table was survival; little kids quickly realize that they “can’t change everything.” So, no, no “crushing blow.”
And fwiw, my pov was the same then. Protest is awesome; just own it, along with the penalties. Being busted by the man was a badge of honor in the 60’s.
not seeing a lot of difference between ranchers taking over a fish & wildlife office and this. Both seem pretty self indulgent, but I’m sure both have their supporters too.
Peaceful protests? Sure. This? Not so much.
Protest can still be done while respecting other people’s property rights.
In any case, this particular protest had so many different unrelated demands, as to be incoherent. I’m surprised they didn’t also throw in saving the spotted owl.
He had no right to let anyone in. That’s not his job, not his right. If the university didn’t care who was in the building, why have security restrictions at all? Why have people sign in to government buildings (court house, public library, museums) if there is no penalty for sneaking them in the side door?
People don’t get to decide their own punishments, that being expelled is too harsh or that it is okay as long as they didn’t take hostages or cause any damage. Is it okay to walk across a lawn that is posted ‘don’t walk on the grass’ as long as you decide you’re not doing any damage? Okay to shoplifting little things but not bigger ones? (Someone was just arrested for steal soda from a fast food restaurant after asking for a cup for water. Okay, because it was just a dollar?) How do we know that the employees in that building weren’t afraid of the students or didn’t feel free to leave and not have their property damaged?
Students have a right to protest within the regulations posted by the school. Outside, legally entering a building, by pulling a permit. They do not have a right to decide to sneak people into the building and if they do it they have to live with the consequences.