While I generally agree with the position of this paper, I have been reading various discussions engendered by this incident with Charles Murray. People made other good points too. Among them were the idea that Mr. Murray's position has been debated at length and has been discredited, so why should we give him a forum again? Another idea that came up is that he should not have been allowed to showcase his discredited ideas without another person on stage presenting the opposing viewpoint, to which people replied that that would be giving too much credence to Murray's ideas, and also that would give the impression that the argument is 50/50 if only one person opposed him. It probably wouldn't be practical (or accepted) if you had a hundred people opposing him.
To complicate matters further, someone said that the ideas he intended to present at this forum had nothing to do with his historic position that is the one people object to so strenuously. I don't know if that is true or not.
So, what is the solution? I don't know. Perhaps a peaceful demonstration that still allowed him to speak, and a vigorous refutation in the question and answer period following his talk would have been better.
Find it here: http://princetoninfo.com/index.php/component/us1more/?Itemid=&key=3-22-17west&more=1&action=comment