Woman forced to cancel conference after USU refuses to put metal detectors as she was threatened

USU disputes feminist's claims it handled threat poorly


The president of Utah State University sent an open letter to students Wednesday refuting claims from feminist Anita Sarkeesian after she criticized the school's handling of a terror threat against her.

President Stan Albrecht told students Utah State prepared as thoroughly as possible for security threats at Sarkeesian's on-campus speech, originally scheduled for Wednesday morning but brought into question after an anonymous email promised "the deadliest school shooting in American history."

"Prior to the threat, USU police were already making preparations for security as Ms. Sarkeesian had received threats in the past," Albrecht said in his letter. "After receiving the email, USU police added heightened security measures, including securing the Taggart Student Center auditorium far in advance, ensuring her safety to and from the event, and bringing in additional uniformed and plain-clothed police officers."

Sarkeesian said on Twitter earlier that the university had acted "irresponsibly" by not immediately informing her of the threat against her and refusing to add metal detectors or perform patdowns. She found out about the anonymous terror threat against her from news stories, she said.

Utah State had no choice but to follow state law by allowing concealed weapon carriers into Sarkeesian's event, Albrecht wrote.

"As a Utah public institution, we follow state law. ... Utah law provides that people who legally possess a concealed firearm permit are allowed to carry a firearm on public property, like the USU campus," Albrecht's letter reads.

Albrecht's letter didn't address how quickly Sarkeesian was told about the threat after the university was notified. An earlier statement on Utah State's website indicated university police planned to ban backpacks and other large bags at Sarkeesian's event.

Both parties expressed disappointment at the speech's cancellation and went to lengths to say they were not intimidated by the threatening email.

"USU acted irresponsibly," Sarkeesian tweeted. "They did not even inform me of the threat. I learned about it via news stories on Twitter after I landed in Utah."

Albrecht insisted the school is capable of protecting free speech and campus security equally well.

“"The Center for Women and Gender had invited a nationally known speaker to bring her perspective about an important topic to USU. ... We are disappointed that students and other community members did not benefit from (Sarkeesian's) presentation," Albrecht wrote. "While we will always prioritize the safety of our community, no threat changes Utah State University’s unwavering advocacy of academic freedom and free speech rights of everyone."

The threatening email, in which the writer identified themselves as a Utah State student, promised revenge against feminists for having their life. The message was ultimately harmless and not indicative of an actual planned attack, Albrecht wrote.

"There was no credible threat to students, staff or the speaker. ... This letter was intended to frighten the university into cancelling the event," he said.

Sarkeesian is the author of the video blog “Feminist Frequency” and creator of the video series Tropes vs.Women in Video Games, which analyzes how women are depicted in pop culture.

Police are conducting an ongoing investigation into the threat against Sarkeesian and the university.
http://www.standard.net/Police/2014/10/16/USU.html

So we have a woman who received death threats and threats of "the deadliest school shooting in American history" but the University would have let some guy come to the event with automatic rifles ?!
I'm glad that she cancelled her speech, that was the most clever thing to do in such a situation, the one solution that would prevent the university from a blood bath. But the sad part is that the guy who made this threats won, the University let him won.

When a particular even is targeted with threats of a shooting, even if it's in an open-carry state, is it really against the law not to allow people to carry weapon in this particular event ?
 
Top