Police and students do not agree on when a crowd becomes a riotous mob.

"When I think of riots, I think of fires, windows being broken and people flipping over cars," said James Gonzales (sophomore-business). "A group of people just chanting is not a riot."

Gonzales said the majority of the crowd at last month's disturbance did not cause any problems, but acknowledged a few of them could have caused a serious ruckus.

John Smith (junior-aerospace engineering) agreed with Gonzales and said he believes the police helped to incite the riot by spraying the crowd with pepper spray.

But students' claims that the crowd that gathered at the intersection of Locust and Beaver was celebratory and peaceful until police intervened are not true, said Lt. Diane Conrad of the State College Police Department.

"All you need is two or more people," Conrad said. "When it results in property damage, that is when we draw the line and police intervene."

A crowd of 4,000 people makes it hard for police to deal with only those who are causing the problems, Conrad said.

The officers order people to disperse once the crowd continues to grow into a size that could easily get out of control, she added.

People throwing bottles, crowding in the street, pushing and pulling on street signs and light poles, pounding on windows of store fronts and on windows of passing cars are a number of acts that warrant police intervention and clearing the streets, Conrad said.

Compared to the disturbances during the 1998 and 2000 Central Pennsylvania Festivals of the Arts, Conrad said the amount of property damage in last month's riot was lower.

The crowd that gathered on March 24 after the basketball team's win over North Carolina was much different than the one on March 17, Conrad said.

"It went downhill quickly," she said. "You could hear them coming. It was a large, resonating sound of people coming out of buildings."

"Officers hoped it would be celebratory," she added.

Police tried to keep the mood light by sometimes chanting and celebrating with the crowd, even posing for pictures with students. But this atmosphere soon deteriorated into profanity, drunkenness and bottle throwing, Conrad said.

The most controversial action in the past riots in "Beaver Canyon" has been the use of pepper spray by police.

"It could have gotten out of control at any point," Gonzales said. "But they used the pepper spray ahead of time. People got sprayed without reason."

Gonzales said there was enough property damage to justify the use of pepper spray to disperse the crowd.

Police said that in their effort to prevent or reduce property damage, using pepper spray was the next step they needed to clear the streets.

"We don't want to use it, but it is the next best option we have if people do not leave," Conrad said. "The next least offensive thing is the use of pepper spray."

Before using pepper spray or any physical means to disperse a crowd, officers rely on their presence and later, verbal warnings or orders are yelled out in an effort to disperse.

The officers on the scene used pepper spray on the crowd following two hours of ordering the crowd to disperse, Conrad said.

"People think they can be a spectator at a riot, and you can't," Conrad said.