After reading the editorials submitted by both students and alumni reprimanding those who chose to congregate after our loss on April 2, I am compelled to publicize the fear lurking in their arguments.

The probability that one could anticipate an aggressive police response to a gathering that one attends without violent intentions is irrelevant. Those who assembled had a constitutionally protected right to do so, and I am appalled that some of my fellow Spartans could suggest that they waive that right simply because it would be easier. Would you say, "I told you so!" to Rosa Parks?

The principle is the same. Every time we allow our rights to be usurped, we communicate our apathy to our leaders and our willingness to accept their subordination. The only real power a government has is the ability to punish; in the absence of crime, it will pass laws that create more criminals and thereby maintain control of its citizens.

Think about the precedent that has been set. While the response to the "riot" is a debatable violation of the First Amendment, it is a local manifestation of an expansion of government control at the state and federal levels. Consider our drug laws, the USA Patriot Act, or Illinois v. Caballes. How many rights are we willing to lose?

It is not my intention to judge the suitability of the police response and the provocation they may have endured. However, the condemnation of the innocent civilian participants is both cowardly and undeserved.

Lauren Brace
philosophy junior