ige
Dl
■
The Battalion
Page 7
Monday • April 21, 1997
uns ’ll us
THE GOVERNMENT TREE (with apologies to Shel Silverstein)
Columnist
nti-gun
Proponents
overlook freedom
[( A mericans have the right and advantage of
L\ being armed — unlike the citizens of other
x \.countries whose governments are afraid to
st the people with arms.” — James Madison, The
deralist Papers - No. 46.
Sadly, in 1994, Congress ignored the founding fa-
:ers and trampled on the Constitution. The infa-
ous “crime bill” (H.R. 3355), banned certain semi-
utomatic firearms and large capacity ammunition
[lips holding more than 10 rounds. Americans were
o outraged over this attack on liberty, they helped
lake the 103rd Congress the last Congress con-
oiled by Democrats.
Fortunately, whenever freedom is assaulted, real
mericans fight back. Congressman Ron Paul of
Texas has introduced “The
Second Amendment Restora
tion Act of 1997,” (H.R. 1147.)
Paul’s bill would repeal bans
on over 180 types of semi-au
tomatic firearms and large ca
pacity magazines.
Disappointingly, Texas
A&M’s voice in Congress, Kevin
Brady, will not support it.
Brady’s assaults on gun rights
have drawn the ire of constitu
tional scholars and activists
alike (in the Texas House, he
lobbied against concealed car-
tiittijy). Brady may not like it, but when he took his oath of
office he pledged to defend the Constitution. It’s about
lime he kept his promise and co-sponsored H.R. 1147.
I Liberal politicians opposed to the repeal claim to
| have compelling reasons. Usually, they cite the
h' ridiculous arguments spouted by gun haters such as
Handgun Control,Inc. Luckily, the gun control lob-
h) 1 in Washington easily is debunked when fact is in
troduced into the debate. For example, anti-gun lib
erals attempt to justify the gun ban by saying things
such as:
•The founding fathers never imagined there would
be semi-automatic weapons.
To the contrary. There were, in fact, “semi-automat-
’ weapons in colonial times. Flintlock rifles usually
were fired in single-shot fashion. Some colonials, how-
J ever, would pour several musketballs into their rifle.
These “semi-automatics” fired multiple rounds at
|Up:
shew
1.
(( | Donny Ferguson
Sophomore political
science major
inr-.;
Once there was a tree...
and she respected a little hoy.
And every day the boy would go
to work
and he would earn a good paycheck
and he would spend it on food, clothing and
a home.
And he could own a gun
and pray in school
and then retire.
And he could enjoy freedom and liberty.
And if his rights were threatened, the tree protected him.
And the boy trusted the tree...
very much.
And he was free.
But time went by.
And the tree grew bigger.
And the boy was getting suspicious.
Then one day the tree came to the boy
and said "Boy, you work hard and earn a good paycheck
and you spend your money to make your life easier.
Aren’t you ashamed of your exploitation ofthe underclass
you white male oppressor?”
"What do you mean?, ’’said the boy.
/ work hard and just want to be left alone.
Cant I enjoy the fruits of my own labor?”
"I'm sorry, ’’said the tree, “you must be an uncaring
Republican.
I am morally superior and more compassionate.
1 will take your money, Boy, and spend it on arts
funding
and midnight basketball. Then I will engineer
society
and everyone will be happy. ”
And so the tree created the IRS
and taxed the boy
at a confiscatory rate
and took his money away.
And the boy wasn’t happy.
But the tree wasn’t satisfied
and wanted more
and the boy was frightened
And then one day
the tree came back
and the boy shook with worry
and he said, “Hello, Tree,
did my money go
to help the poor
and make them happy?”
“Actually, everyone is poor now, but I had good intentions, ”
said the tree.
“At least I can own my gun, ”
the boy said.
"The Second Amendment says "the right to keep and bear arms
shall not be infringed. ’
Aren’t you happy Tm free?”
“Your gun holds too many rounds, ” said the tree.
“And it looks militaristic,
and you could use it to keep me in check
so I will take your gun.
Then you can’t oppose me. ”
And so the tree ignored
the Constitution
and took the boy’s gun away
so she would look good on TV.
And the boy was beaten and robbed.
But the tree stayed away
for a long time.
And when she came back
the boy was so frustrated
he could hardly speak.
“Hello, Boy, “ she said.
“What have you done to serve
the government today?”
“I went to school and prayed, ”
said the boy.
"The First Amendment says of religion
you shall make no law prohibiting
the free exercise thereof’
Aren’t you happy Tm free?”
“You Christian extremist
you just want to impose your narrow-minded views on
people!, ”
said the tree.
“Schoolprayer is now illegal... I’ll hand out condoms instead. ”
And so the
Supreme
Tree Court banned school
prayer
and made the boy listen to Joycelyn
Elders.
And the boy was sad...
very sad
And after a long time
the boy retiredfrom his job.
“I am sorry. Tree, ”
said the boy, “but I’m done working for you—
NOW I can be free.”
“You’re not done yet, ’’said the tree.
“But I’ve been paying
into Medicare, ” said the boy
“It's now bankmpt, ”
said the tree. “You’ll
have to pay even more— ”
“But 1 have no more money
you took it all away, ” said the boy.
“Clinton hiked Social Security taxes, ’’said the tree.
“HE DID WHAT!?”
“Bureaucracy costs money ”said the tree.
“Government doesn’t work, ” sighed the boy.
“I have no money or freedoms
left to give you
I have nothing left. Well at least / smoke
this menthol cigarette. ”
“Iam sorry...
you can’t do that either, ” said the tree.
“Being the omniscient, maternal government that
lam.
I have banned tobacco to protect you. ”
“WHAT!?, ’’ said the boy,
mustering as much self-reliance
as he could,
“Government can control
that part of my life too!?”
“Pipe down. Boy freedom’s gone.
Get back to your job of supporting me. ”
And so the boy did.
And the tree was happy.
^ijc-i
mkm
semi-automatic and automatic rifles
combined (three percent). Statistics like
once
, outgunning single-shooters. George Washington these prove semi automatic firearms
and James Madison knew full well there would be
much more powerful guns ahead, and still mandated
.gillieright to keep and bear arms shall not be in-
' iJt)i fringed.” The “crime bill” gun ban is an unconstitu-
tional violation of Second Amendment liberties.
are not the real problem.
• Semi-automatic weapons have no
practical purpose.
In reality, semi-automatic
firearms are frequently used for
, a ftili • Semi-automatic firearms are “the preferred choice s P or t shooting and some make
of criminals.
I Actually, the Bureau of Justice Statistics reports vio
lent criminals cany or use a “military-type” firearm
wer than 1 percent of the time. New Jersey police
atistics show only .026 of the one percent involve
ssault rifles.” The FBI states police officers are three
mes more likely to be killed with their own gun than
ie shot by any “assault rifle.” Even though 85 percent
fthe nearly 200 guns banned are rifles, the FBI re-
orts six times as many people are killed with knives
|13 percent of homicides), than with single-shot,
fine collector’s items.
Most importantly semi-auto
matic firearms are perfect for self-
defense. During the Los Angeles riots,
Korean merchants were spared from
the destruction because they were
armed with semi-automatic rifles. Riot
ers backed down when they saw semi
automatic rifles, as opposed to the un
armed or under-armed merchants. Had
the “crime bill” been law in 1992, these
V
innocent citizens would have been
robbed and possibly murdered.
Sport shooting, collecting and the
eternal threat of riots and insurrections
require peaceable citi
zens to have the right to own
semi-automatic firearms.
As James Madison pointed out,
Americans are not subjects of a dicta
torship with the power to infringe
upon their gun rights. America is a
bastion of freedom, and it has created
the finest nation to grace God’s earth.
The semi-automatic firearms ban is a
step backward to King George Ill’s
monarchical autocracy which
chipped away at the American colo
nials’ right to bear arms.
George Washington, Thomas Jeffer
son and James Madison would be deeply
ashamed of gun banners and their ha
tred of freedom. The semi-automatic
weapons ban must be repealed — for
freedom’s sake. Constituents should call
Kevin Brady at (202) 225-4901 and ask
him to reverse his anti-Constitutional
stand by supporting “The Second
Amendment Restoration Act of 1997.”
A&M plan ignores students' rights
Columnist
Stephen Llano
Senior
history major
Ipring is a season of
V rebirth and renewal.
Jlexas A&M students
nish another round of
lasses and prepare for fi-
als, looking forward to
ie end of the semester.
But A&M administra-
ars are taking this season
eriously. They currently
re beginning work on a
[trategic plan for A&M to
peus on where the Uni-
[ersity should be heading
pthe future.
In a recent pamphlet released by the
diversity, President Ray Bowen said the
tens of the strategic plan is important
cause of lack of traditional funding.
“Sound strategic planning is essen-
al in an environment such as now
onfronted by Texas A&M University,”
owen said. “It is an environment of di
minishing resources from traditional
lovernment funding, and where greater
iccountability is demanded.”
While the necessity of a strategic
>lan for A&M is clear, the source of in-
>ut for the plan should be an area of
oncem for students.
Dr. Ronald G. Douglas, executive
ace president and provost, is leading
his strategic effort.
In the same pamphlet, Douglas said,
I am confident that, by working togeth-
■i we will produce a document that will
tovide a road map to keep us on course
toward new levels of achievement and
orvice to our constituencies.”
The use of the term “constituencies”
T Douglas is a red flag. This suggests
'otonly a political motivation, but also
«ces all employees, students, alumni,
'hte legislators or any one associated
’ith A&M on the same level.
The primary focus of a uni
versity’s plan should be the
student body.
Twelve principal themes
for the plan have been iden
tified for initial construction.
Each of them, in some form
or fashion, will directly affect
the student body, but there
is no specific plan for stu
dent involvement.
Douglas said the strategic
plan should be finished by Oc
tober 1997. This timetable
suggests that much work will
take place over the summer, when
many students are not at A&M. Obvi
ously, the consideration of student
opinion is already on the back burner.
Without students, A&M wouldn’t ex
ist. Whether this is a research university
or not, the presence of a student body is
the only reason that Bowen, Douglas or
any other University employee, from
professor to food services worker, has a
job. Obviously, students shouldn’t ex
pect the administration to come to
them begging for input, but students
should take direct and constant action
by telling administrators what they
would like to see in this plan.
Even though first phases of the
strategic plan have just started, there
are a few planks in the initial proposal
the committee should give primary
importance to:
• “Promote intellectual vitality by in
creasing geographic, economic, gender
and ethnic diversity.”
This is a good starting point. A com
mitment to diversity means more than
a commitment to multiple skin colors.
Diverse religions, economic back
grounds and regions of the nation and
the world are things that are going to
spark a viable intellectual environment.
Whereas diversity of race is important, it
is not the total of what diversity should
be at A&M.
• “Aspire to be the best research-
university incorporating the land
grand mission of the 21st century.”
Although these are important
considerations, they mostly are used
as crutches of justification for mis
guided academic policy. Justin Mor
rill’s original vision with the land grant
congressional act he proposed in 1857
was to provide education for those
who desired it at an affordable price.
Before more mandatory Student
Recreation Center fees or Reed Arena
fiascoes occur, the committee should
carefully study Morrill’s proposal and
include his basic goals. As for research,
professors should consistently be re
minded they would not be able to re
search if it wasn’t for students — the
people they are committed to teach.
• “Cultivate non-legislative re
sources.”
Funding through non-traditional
means can be attained, but it should be
done on an even keel. By allowing self-
fimding organizations to cultivate
alumni, some money is going to be lost
in the shuffle. By combining all fund
raising efforts through a larger and
more all-inclusive Development Foun
dation, perhaps some greater funding
for academics and other needs can be
fairly and easily distributed.
Although the committee will
have the best in mind for A&M
when they draft these goals, the in
put of all students should be con
sidered. Students make the Univer
sity what it is, and therefore should
be consulted when planning for the
future of this institution.
Spending critics forget student loans
C onservatives from Newt Gingrich to the
College Republicans speak out against
government handouts and demand
welfare reform. These outspoken critics also
are anxious to stop everyone else’s benefits.
But most of these conservatives display
a major inconsistency in their belief sys
tem. Often the same students who abhor
welfare and spit at the mention of social
ized health care have no complaints
against federally subsidized student loans
and federal grants — programs that reek of
socialism and government control.
It’s hypocritical for any conservative to de
nounce one set of freebies while greedily ac
cepting another.
Most Aggies are familiar with the conservative ar
guments against welfare or food stamps. These pro
grams steal from the rich to support the poor. The
subsidy recipients aren’t encouraged to take care of
themselves and the handouts eventually hurt the very
people they aim to help by fostering dependency and
low self-esteem.
Student grants and loans cause these problems
and more.
Federal money for education is still a government
handout. Besides fostering dependency on the pro
gram, these subsidies cause other problems as well.
The increase in loans and grants has allowed univer
sities to raise costs more rapidly. If students still paid for
their education from their own pocketbooks, schools
would have to be more accountable. As loans and
grants become more commonplace, schools with high
er costs can still consider themselves “affordable.”
Currently Texas A&M finished the largest fund-rais
ing drive in the history of higher education. But, A&M is
requesting an extra $1 billion from the legislature and is
still increasing student fees.
Federal and private loans have the added disadvan
tage of saddling students with debt. Now as graduates
leave the University to pursue families and careers they
must worry about the thousands of dollars they owe.
Dr. Walter Williams, an economist and professor at
George Mason University, maintains that too many stu-
Columnist
David Johnston
junior
mathematics major
dents are seeking degrees. Williams also ar- ;
gues it is immoral for citizens to pay for
someone else’s education.
The Legislative Relations committee
under the Student Government Associa
tion regularly lobbies the state legislator
for more money. Recently, the commit
tee has asked legislators to support a
program that would use state lottery
money to pay for the college education
of students who maintain a ‘B’ average
or better. This proposal would take close
to 70 million dollars a year from the
general budget. This money would have ;
to be made up in taxes or budget cuts.
Proponents of government subsidies for educa- ;
tion point out that people with degrees make more
money and contribute more to the economy. Un
fortunately, at the time a student enters college,
the government cannot be sure whether the stu
dent will become a millionaire or one of the 50 per
cent of Texas college students who drop out before
earning a degree. By giving a grant or subsidizing a
loan, the government is taking a gamble with tax
money. The investment may cause economic
growth or it may be lost forever. These programs
are not as beneficial as their proponents claim
since half of student loan recipients never pay
them back.
If the federal government got out of the educa
tion business, the world would not end. Young
people would still be able to go to college, if they
decided a degree was necessary. Enormous
amounts of private money every year provides
scholarships and even those evil loans.
Of course, Aggies also could get money the “old-fash
ioned way” — by earning it. It’s possible to put one’s self '
through school by working, and the armed forces still
offer college money in exchange for a few years of serv
ing the country.
Sure, without government intervention it may take
longer to graduate, but students likely will have better
work experience and not a looming cloud of debt. Be
sides, taxpayer money wouldn’t pay for silly elective
classes or football tickets.