Asked what kind of protest might be appropriate, Smith cited a recent instance in an armed services hearing in which “people came in and they didn’t say anything, they just held up bloody hands. And the chairman noticed that and said, ‘You can’t do that, you’re out, and they got up and left.”
I don't think protest works without risk to the protestors. They have to be willing to take those risks to stand up for a cause, otherwise it's not a protest, it's just a group complaint.
If someone said "you can protest over there, at these certain times" you'd fuckin bet that I'd protest anywhere and any time except for what was specified.
Kennedy said, "Those who make peaceful protest impossible, make violent protest inevitable", the modern version should be "those who don't listen to peaceful protest, are signaling that they will only respond to violent protest".
So if protestors are disrupting classes, delaying traffic, and forcing the general public to acknowledge the issue at hand, then good, that's what a protest should do. If they are causing immediate danger to themselves or others, then they should expect to be removed, hopefully voluntarily.
