Perhaps you didn't hear the whole story.
messages.ucsc.edu/04-05/04-19.tent-update.asp

The protesters were unwilling to negotiate and knew what was coming. They were breaking the law. My thoughts are that they were provoking the police so that the police would make a move and then the protesters would have footage of "violent torture blah blah blah" in order to produce an emotional response from others in the community. However they failed to accomplish this goal. I would like you to know that among the responses to this incident that I have seen, I am one of the most favorable to the protestors. That doesn't necessarily mean I support them, just that the other responses were much more passionately in support of the police and against the protestors.

And excuse me for this next comment but I thought the protesters were damn whiny. As I watched some videos I found myself telling them to shut up.

From that article you posted it seems that Jack Weinberg gave himself up. Then, in a way respectful to the police, the students held a protest around the car after stopping it. Then there were both pro and con speeches, proving that the students were not unreasonable or unthinking. During the sit-in at sproul hall, the students were respectful and civil.

The protesters at "Tent State" did none of these things. Excuse me again, but it looked like a whiny hippie party. This image is furthered by your dedication to sue or abuse the "terrorist" staff and police force. Again I must say that maybe if you sounded less unreasonable more people would listen to you.