Charlottesville city council meeting briefly shut down by protesters

[TexasTowelie]

(Reuters) - A city council meeting in Charlottesville, Virginia briefly dissolved into an angry protest on Monday as activists and residents demanded answers from officials regarding the response from police during a deadly rally held by white supremacists.

About 100 activists and residents crowded into the council meeting, the first since the violent demonstrations two weekends ago, and shouted "Shame" and "Shut it down" toward council members and the mayor, forcing them to briefly end the meeting and leave the chambers, according to the New York Times.

As Mayor Mike Signer and council members left the room, two people held a sign that read "Blood On Your Hands," the Times reported.

No one was injured and three people were issued citations for disorderly conduct before the meeting resumed, the Times reported.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-protests-charlottesville-idUSKCN1B20CX

[lark]

1. The protestors had a right to demand answers and accountability,

The police let the violence go and did nothing to stop it at first, shameful indeed. It certainly looked like they approved of the Nazis until the car incident.

[Yonnie3]

2. Yes - they indeed should give answers

I think they believed if they took strong action the heavily armed supremacists would start firing in "self defense" and there would be hundreds dead and wounded. It was a no win situation, caused by the ACLU forcing the rally into too small an area under First Amendment rights and the open carry allowed in Virginia allowed under the Second Amendment and by the rally itself. I disagree that the Second Amendment should allow open carry in this situation. There are already areas in Virginia where it is not allowed.

[elleng]

3. I agree they should explain;

they likely had a rationale for what they did/didn't do, and when, and the public should be informed.

[Yonnie3]

4. I have a suspicion ...

that the State Police:
1) took "control" at some point
2) instructed LEOs that didn't have protective gear to stand down until they had it.
3) told locals that only the VSP would do the arrests
and so on ...

The locals are trying to figure out how to explain that it wasn't them.
The State Police are circling wagons as they usually do and saying nothing.

This is all *speculation* on my part.

I did listen to State Police communications discussing if they should take over enforcement at Friday's torch march. They only had observers there. It was not a question of giving assistance, but of taking over.


Oh and eleng

[elleng]

5. Hi, Yonnie3.

I only responded because my daughter, whose husband is a deputy sheriff here in MD, expressed frustration recently at reactions of many to police actions/non-actions because the public is not informed of police training and policies. Much of their apparent stand-offishness is deliberate and part of training.

HERE's maybe a piece of it:

‘How Would an
Ethical Officer React?’

A new class of Dallas recruits trains to step
into an uneasy moment in American policing.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/17/magazine/how-would-an-ethical-officer-react.html?