San Francisco police arrest 100 in Bank of America protest

[KeepItReal]

Source: LA Times



Reporting from San Francisco— Protesters in the Occupy Wall Street movement seized a Bank of America branch in the city's financial district Wednesday, a demonstration that forced jittery customers and employees to flee and ended in nearly 100 arrests.

It took about 40 police officers in riot gear nearly four hours to clear the bank, but no one was injured. Police said many of those arrested were UC Santa Cruz students who were protesting fee increases and budget cuts.

...

"I respectfully ask you to protest outside," a bank official told the protesters, while shooing away a customer who tried to deposit a check. Most of the demonstrators left and continued on their march, but about 100 remained, setting up a tent in the lobby and sitting on the floor.

...

Many of the protesters included UC Berkeley and UC Santa Cruz students, who joined Occupy San Francisco demonstrators to denounce bank bailouts and tuition increases. Unions chartered buses to take Berkeley students and others to the noon rally and march.
The bank was targeted because one of the UC regents, Monica Lozano, publisher of the newspaper La Opinion, also serves on the board of Bank of America Corp. "Where is Monica?" protesters chanted.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-sf-occupy-20111117,0,5764736.story

[aquart]

1. I keep thinking about happy Xmas in cop homes.

That overtime is going to the store.

[FreakinDJ]

2. Fucking class traitors

[urgk]

3. Unfortunately, the police only had 90 protestors in their account...

....and upon over-drawing, had to pay Bank of America a 35 protestors fee.

[droidamus2]

4. A simple question

Why is it that when the police send large numbers of officers to non-violent demonstrations they always show up in full riot gear with there batons out ready to bust heads? It's not the demonstrators that are presenting a threat of rioting it is the police as shown by their being prepared for violence where none is currently occurring. Who's more likely to resort to violence a person armed with weapons (batons, tear gas, rubber bullets) and dressed with all the protection necessary to keep them from getting hurt when violence erupts or a person in street clothes with no weapons? (okay they could pick up a rock or bottle or something but they don't come to the demonstration armed).

[No Elephants]

5. Why?

Because punch young women in the stomach with their bare hands might be misinterpreted?