TO THE EDITOR:
Since Sunday, I’ve read several articles and a letter about the police raids on the former Yates Motor Company building. None of them give the police any defense in their actions, when they clearly had reason for what they did.
Look at the facts: Are we all forgetting that the Occupiers are usually anti-police? One article spoke of the constant jeering of police occurring whenever they were nearby, up until the raid began. This, coupled with the anarchists present, put the raid happening in a very police-unfriendly situation, one where it’s perfectly possible they could be threatened. And let’s not forget that the Occupiers had no legal right or reason to trespass and break into an empty, privately owned building. Not only that, but they boarded up the windows. Obviously, they didn’t want people to see inside or have ways to get in. The threat factor was there in full, and the police had to be prepared for what they couldn’t even see.
Most of the articles say that the police should have scoped it out beforehand, and that their method was too drastic. Yet, had they scoped it out, other occupiers outside the building might have reacted. Or worse, if weapons had been present, a real riot might have started. The police needed to act swiftly and definitely. Intimidation was the best way to ensure that.
I feel that the DTH’s reporting of this issue has been purely one-sided and that the police did the best thing to ensure their safety and the safety of those present. That is, no shots were fired, no one was injured, the people held have been released with no adverse record and peace was maintained.
Zachary Overdorf
Sophomore
Computer Science
