Topic: Drunken Rioting Mankato Students
started by: Bubba
Posted by Bubba on Oct. 06 2003,5:09 pm
Back when I was a student, a stunt like that would get you a minimum of three years in the military as an alternative to jail. Now we talk about removing their state aid and maybe giving them a suspention. What is wrong with that University President? I know he is new to the job but if he doesn't come down harder on those drunken bumbs, he will be dealing with another riot again, and soon!
Posted by shaker on Oct. 06 2003,11:48 pm
Drunken college students----I don't think so--- lets call them what they are, CRIMINALS!!!! If you burn somebodys car you are an ARSONIST, not a college student, if you try to hit a police officer with a brick thats FELONY ASSULT, if people riot and destroy others property your not a college student, your a TERRORIST and and should suffer the consequence of your action.These criminals should have there ass booted out of school immediately, all state and fed. school aid should be denied forever and that is the beginning, they should go through the criminal justice system and spend time in jail. This kind of B.S. will never stop, only get worse if nobody has the balls to come down on these punks and SEND THEM A MESSAGE!!!!
Posted by Spidey on Oct. 07 2003,2:16 am
I have to agree with Shaker. What they did isn't just a college prank and they need to be held accountable. If my friends and I were to do what they did you can bet we would be behind bars right now with a many years of Interrogations to follow ... and rightly so.
Posted by hoosier on Oct. 07 2003,1:30 pm
Kick them out of school, then deny them any state assistence in the future. A lot of kids never get a shot at going to college, these kids did and look at what they have done with it. One kid who is accused of throwing bottles at police was in school for law enforcement. I really shouldnt even call them kids, they are supposed to be adults, now lets make them pay like adults. By the way, in my opinion this had nothing to do with sports, or the fact that the football team lost. These are criminals lookin for an excuse to do what they do. Our tax money should not go towards keeping any of these people in school. Time to learn some hard lessons, first one being, you blew your chance, now you pay your own way through college.
Posted by Justice on Oct. 07 2003,2:59 pm
I think the first lesson they learn after their actions should be how to cope and adapt in jail. There is just no excuse or justification for their actions. Lock their asses up!
Posted by hoosier on Oct. 07 2003,3:15 pm
Agreed! 
Posted by fresno on Oct. 08 2003,2:41 pm
could just as well get some rope and find a tall oak tree, whiskey for my men and beer for my horses, etc. kill em all let god sort em out huh?lol.:p
Posted by Slick on Oct. 09 2003,9:21 pm
The kids were not running through town, over turning cars, burning and lotting. Someone has taken great liberty in labeling this a riot. This occurred in a large appartment complex. Not in the public streets. The party was out of control. People were really drunk. A riot implies purpose. The only purpose here was alcohol poisoning.
Posted by Spidey on Oct. 10 2003,1:29 am
ri·ot noun (plural ri·ots)
1. violent disturbance: a public disturbance during which a group of angry people becomes noisy and out of control, often damaging property and acting violently. In law, a riot is typically defined as a group of three or more persons disturbing the peace for private purposes.
This should explain to you what a riot is. Just because these bozo's were drinking doesn't get them off the hook.
This "group" should be used to set an example of what will happen to you if you choose to behave like a lunatic.
Posted by minnow on Oct. 10 2003,2:04 am
None of this would have happened if they'd just let the young adults party. Cops should expect hostility when they attempt to "control" parties in full swing. Just leave em alone for christs sake. Then when they get mad, the cops play the R card....the riot card.College kids have always had drinking parties and such. *What's changed, is now we have "drink police" or "party police" more interested controlling college kids behavior and morals than fighting some crime.
Posted by Dustin Petersen on Oct. 10 2003,7:37 am
So minnow, are you suggesting that because the cops busted their party, these criminals were JUSTIFIED in their actions? Are you on crack?
Posted by Tiger on Oct. 10 2003,9:55 am
Hey Slick, did you miss the picture in the paper (can't remember if it was the Star Tribune or the Tribune or Mankato Free Press) with huge fires burning and a kid roasting a marshmellow? There were fires and a vehicle was started on fire. Get your infor straight. Just because it doesn't compare to the riots in L.A. years ago doesn't mean the individuals involved don't deserve to have legal action taken against them.
Posted by 1adam12 on Oct. 10 2003,11:31 am
Well, I was wondering when minnow was going to approve of their criminal behavior. They're not the victims here - they are the ones who failed to exercise restraint and self-control. That's why we have laws. People aren't free to do anything they want at the expense of others. That's why action was taken, not just cause it was a party. Slick - so its OK to torch other people's stuff as long as they stay in the parking lot?? I doubt the cars started on fire by spontaneous combustion...they were purposely burned. And yes, they were out in the streets too. It wasn't just one apartment complex.
609.71 Riot.
Subd. 3. Riot third degree. When three or more persons assembled disturb the public peace by an intentional act or threat of unlawful force or violence to person or property, each participant therein is guilty of riot third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $1,000, or both.
Posted by Judge not lest ..... on Oct. 10 2003,1:19 pm
Yep, they all made mistakes, should they pay for them for the rest of their lives? Sheesh! Who'd they kill?
Posted by Liberal on Oct. 10 2003,2:17 pm
Denying them state or federal financial aid is going way overboard The school and the local government should take care of this problem on their own and the state should keep it's nose out of it. Let the people involved in the riot be prosecuted by the city or county for the crimes they committed and let the school punish them as they see fit. But I doubt that that taking away their state or federal financial aid would help anything.
Posted by Dustin Petersen on Oct. 10 2003,2:21 pm
No, they shouldn't pay for the rest of their lives... but they should pay SOMETHING. Slap-on-the-wrist justice such as one year of unsupervised probation and a stayed fine is a joke and does absolutely nothing to prevent repeat offenses.Granted, these students didn't kill or cause serious bodily harm to anybody, but what they did was a little more serious than a simple illegal consumption. I realize that they may have simply gotten carried away with the "mob mentality" but it was still THEIR choice to participate, and everyone responsible should be held accountable for the choices they made.
Posted by Dustin Petersen on Oct. 10 2003,2:24 pm
Liberal, you seem to be forgetting that WE THE PEOPLE are footing the bill for their financial aid. Your last statement sounds almost like a Behling column.
Posted by Spidey on Oct. 10 2003,2:26 pm
No, this wasn't a "getting carried away" event. These kids became criminal. And yes, they should have their finacial aid taken away and given to someone who deserves it. This isn't ruining their lives ... it's making it more difficult, which it should after what they did. Now they can take all of that energy and work their way through college.
Posted by Liberal on Oct. 10 2003,2:37 pm
I know who's footing the bill for the aid. My point is that you can't punish one person more than another just because they are attending college and receiving financial aid. I'm sure that there were many people involved in the riot that weren't college students and I'm sure some of the college students involved don't get financial aid at all.So, why would it be fair to punish the college students more than the non-college student involved? And why would anyone want the state or federal government to start getting involved in punishing local crimes?
Posted by Dustin Petersen on Oct. 10 2003,2:39 pm
Spidey, I do not deny that they became criminal, but yes, they DID get carried away. However, I was not at all inferring that their loss of control should excuse their actions. On the contrary, I said that they should be held accountable for their participation. And I completely agree with you that their financial aid should be pulled. I certainly don't want to pay for it.
Posted by Dustin Petersen on Oct. 10 2003,2:49 pm
Liberal, I view financial aid as a reward, and I don't find it unreasonable for the state to pull that reward for criminal behavior. I realize that non-students were also involved, and I don't deny that they should be punished. However, I am not paying for them to go to school. They have no reward to take away.Incidentally, I also believe that welfare and food stamp recipients should have their benefits reduced or pulled if they are convicted of a crime.
I just feel that if you are receiving assistance of any kind, you should show a little appreciation to the people who are funding it.
Posted by minnow on Oct. 10 2003,3:52 pm
The people collecting it are the ones who fund it. 90% only use the safety net they paid into for under 3 years. Most states have 5 year lifetime totals. By removing benefits from parents who commit some crime you also hurt the children for whome most welfare is directed. Again Dustin, showing your true colors. Your ustter contempt and jealousy for anybody you think is getting something for nothing that your not getting. I guess I feel for ya to a degree considering the pay you had to endure at the Tribune.
But really, the safety net costs us next to nothing and most are within 3 paychecks of needing it themselves one day. We spend many thousands of times more for things like say the military. Why worry about a penny from you paycheck for a safety net...then give 15% of the gross to the military. It doesn't make any sense. It's penny wise, pound foolish.
Your position stems from jealousy and right wing religous beliefs more than anything else.
Posted by Dustin Petersen on Oct. 10 2003,11:05 pm
Minnow, I am jealous of no one. I am not bothered by people who receive welfare benefits, or financial aid, provided that they truly need it and are not abusing the system. However, I will grant you that the children may be hurt by cutting benefits for the crimes of their parents. I had not considered that, and it was right of you to point that out.And as far as my pay goes, I am not bothered in the least by people who make more money than I do. Money sure seems to be an issue with you though, and I find that just plain sad. With how often you remind us in the forum of how well off you are financially, I can't help but wonder just what it is that you are overcompensating for.
Lastly, though I admit that I am what you would call a born-again Christian, I fail to see how that is reflected in my post, or at least how it is different from any other person with politically conservative (or at least non-liberal) views. Where do you see the connection?
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Oct. 11 2003,12:19 am
IMHO-I think the lil rat bastards that did the damage should be shackled, tarred and feathered, caned, then sent off to a Marine boot camp, preferable the island, as it gets real cold at night. That outta straighten out their asses, what ever happened to the option of either jail or basic? I know it did alot of good to some troubled youths.
Also Minnow, you chastise Dustin for his belief in cutting all bennies to people who commit a crime, well I agree with Dustin. You point out that (the ol liberal whine) "the children will be hurt", what you also miss wouldn't the children be hurt, anyways if their parents were thrown in jail for commiting crimes, so how would taking their taxpayer funded money and aid, hurt them anymore? As I have learned there is more than just two sides to any given issue.
Sorry to be harsh, but there has to be consequences to any action that is taken by an Individual, even if it hurts those around them, guess they should have thought it through before acting on it eh?
Posted by shaker on Oct. 11 2003,12:36 am
I can agree with liberal some what, takeing away the benifits of some of the punks involved in the criminal riot a Mankato would be more harsh on them than some others that may have been involved that didn't attend school there. I guess that is the way it is. If you have something to lose then you had better be thinking about it and PROTECT it. Some people posting don't think that is all that big of a deal, well if someone burns my car or throws a brick a Me--I THINK IT IS A BIG DEAL. Being drunk don't cut it either, get hit in the head with a brick and you could end up dead, just don't make any difference if it came from a drunken college punk or somebody that is robbing you, your still history.
Posted by Lil Pimp on Oct. 12 2003,1:36 am
minnow-This was more than just a young adults party which was in full swing. The people involved brought their party outside into the street (Monks Ave-4 lane road servicing campus area) and proceeded to start destroying property. Granted it was probably less then 10% of the total participants which caused the problems but what should the police do? Let them raise hell as long as it is within the confines of an apartment complex? People who were just passing through Monks Ave. got bottles, stop signs & debris thrown at their vehicles before the police arrived.
I live 2 blocks off of Monks Avenue, I walked down there around 1:00AM after getting sick of seeing & hearing a police helicopter buzz my neighborhood. Yes, I said neighborhood, I am no longer at a student at MSU (class of '94), I live here now & own a home which is more then I can say for 99.9% of the 'rioters'. The police are not entirely innocent of adding fuel to the fire but they did their best. How can you expect them to be flawless, how many riots has Mankato (or Southern Minnesota) had before? I sincerely think they did their best.
Part of the problem is this area of campus is extremely densely populated, you have 5000+ people who live with in 3 square block area just off campus (MSU has little, if any, authority). Add with that, warm temps (let's party outside), LOTS of alcohol, more alcohol & alcohol & you are susceptible to problems. Throw in 100+ trouble makers & you have a recipe for disaster.
You are entitled to your opinion minnow. In fact, usually I agree with your posts but on this one you are overly simplifying the whole incident and I know this because I was a witness.
Posted by Liberal on Oct. 12 2003,11:28 am
How can it be fair to punish one person more than another based on financial need? If two students are throwing rocks at the police and one is from a well off family and gets no financial aid and the other is from a middle class family that receives financial aid then shouldn't they both receive equal punishment when convicted?
Also if students riot then the problem should be handled by the local government and by the school and that's as far as the punishment needs to go. Because not only is it wrong to treat people differently based on their financial need but it's also wrong to give the federal government the power to punish people for violating state and local laws.
Posted by minnow on Oct. 12 2003,5:31 pm
LOL.....exactly Liberal."You point out that (the ol liberal whine) "the children will be hurt", what you also miss wouldn't the children be hurt, anyways if their parents were thrown in jail for commiting crimes, so how would taking their taxpayer funded money and aid, hurt them anymore?"
------>Classic Albert Lea short bus logic! LOLOLOLOL
If you can't see the how dumb that statement is, I'm not going to waste my time explaining....LOL.I swear...sometimes it's just so blatantly obvious how stupid Albert Leans are, its just sick.
Posted by The Advocate on Oct. 12 2003,8:59 pm
The financial aid debate has to be kept out of the criminal conduct that some students and non-students participated in at Mankato State homecoming. First of all, there are students of every financial background. Some get financial aid and others do not. It is dependent upon the parents income level. If, for example the parents are making over $100.000. per year their child is entitled to no grants (free money) and qualify for only certain loans with the exception of the Direct Student Loans. These loans are very small. Hence, the student is paying either all of their own way (with exception of scholarships) or mom and dad are footing the bill. Poor students and/or single parents get the most money usually consisting of grants (free money) and qualify for every loan with no co-signers. Students who are dependent upon the financial aid will be affected to a much greater degree than students whose parents are footing the bill, and are not dependent upon the financial aid. This is financial discrimination. Very similarly, it would be inappropriate for the state to stop financial assistance (Welfare) for a mother or father on (Welfare) convicted of a crime. And leaping a step even further if Grandma or Grandpa were convicted of a crime would it be appropriate for them to not get Medicare coverage? 1 Adam 12 noted the statute in an earlier posting. That is what needs to be followed. If the Mankato State administration wants to expel those students, I guess that would be internal policy and their call but to mess with Federal monies may be a slippery slope they do not want to navigate.
Posted by Lil Pimp on Oct. 12 2003,11:04 pm
Great post Liberal.Liberal & minnow, I have to agree with you. The only reason MSU is looking at the financial aid angle is because it is one of the few recourses they believe are within their power. They can't do much else, this all happened off campus.
Posted by shaker on Oct. 13 2003,11:23 am
I can agree that taking aid from some students involved would not be fair when other students have the money and don't need it, to bad, life is not fair and that is the way it is.How about fines in the court system? Lay a $1000 buck fine on a very poor person and it will devastate him, to a very well to do person it would be chump change. No balance here.