<p>ivyambition and talebi- you cannot seriously be arguing that freedom of assembly and freedom of speech allows any kind of behavior anywhere. You have to know that is just ridiculous. One cannot just walk into the White House or Congress and start yelling because they have the right to assemble and speak. This is the property of UCI, they have the right to set the rules for decorum and evict people that violate them. If you are really going to argue that the First Amendment means anarchy reigns, then there is really nothing left to talk about.</p>
<p>I’d like to go into further detail as well, vintij. </p>
<p>“Its a cat chasing its tale.” </p>
<p>Cats chase tails.</p>
<p>It seems like Vintij sees both sides of the story. Of course it was wrong and unfair that go to jail, but unfortunately that’s what the Authority decided to do.</p>
<p>I agree that they “should have started a facebook page” like everyone else.</p>
<p>@ vintij lol I thought the irony would be obvious, a point is usually best made through humor (just ask fox news). Well said though, this entire event would make a perfect case study; there are so many facets and details to be considered…so much to argue about endlessly in section. </p>
<p>@ emilsinclair9 something tales me that could be accurate in a Dr. Seuss book…</p>
<p>@ adam4homes, they did start a facebook page, it’s called, “stand with the eleven.”</p>
<p>@ fallenchemist, I guess you make a good point. Perhaps they would’ve conveyed their message more effectively at the Q&A session, rather than looking like a bunch of attention seeking “high schoolers.”</p>
<p>Why is channel seven news assuming this falls under freedom of speech? They are painting these kids out as hero’s. Look people conduct is not protected by free speech. If a heckler is liable to licit violent reactions he or she may be removed, no matter what the content is. </p>
<p>Trust me, reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions may lawfully be imposed on speech, even while the authorities may not control the content of that speech. Again, fighting words, and obscenities are NOT protected. Understand? They are NOT protected. Arresting the hecklers goes a bit far, but that’s none of my business. These hecklers might have thought they were protected, but they absolutely were not. The conduct was not correct, the aggression in their speech was not protected, the fact that they could have easily caused a violent reaction or incited an immediate breach of peace also does not help their case. Please don’t just read the constitution, you have to read the federal and state cases that have interpreted and reinterpreted the constitution over to shape laws. Even if they were the ones to get attacked in that room, that is still a breach of peace. While it may not have looked like true fighting words, it still could have, and to some degree did, cause a violent reaction.</p>
<p>^^^^ Interpretation: It’s all picket signs and peaceful protest until someone throws a pipebomb.</p>