Isel
cuse
ie Battalion
o PINION
Page 11 • Monday, April 26, 1999
rhink about the children
parents groups seeking to change laws to protect children should worry about their own first
■
ost Americans would
agree that democracy is
niAflr pretty 8 ° od thing - Af '
UlUt' a11 8 P uts 8le people in
n^rge of the government and
arantees that the government
lido what they want. At
CUyO Mstlhat is how it is suppose
c work.
In reality the citizens are
nerally so apathetic and lazy
Brendan
GUY
nsesk
at they never bother to make their views known
mmn d S° vernment ends up being controlled by
B^ly-loeused special interest groups. This
j ids to poor, elected officials being endlessly bad-
VO uuWjB'by greedy corporations, shifty labor unions,
S' Hp religious fanatics and even environmental-
18.
GO (AP)
laley says:
o young be
cused of I;
irl last sin
ologize to:
) the fann:
lev said Sat
For the most part, there is nothing wrong with
s. If the people do not make their views known
their leaders, then they deserve what they get. •
id fve can hardly blame the corporations and the
ions for lobbying the government; they are just
ing to squeeze money out of it, a respectable
al f/e can all understand. The Bible thumpers
d eco-freaks are not so easily forgiven since they
?not out for money but instead for freaky things
jltrying to save our souls and giving us clean air
d water, but we will deal with them another
irgcd cor
However, there is one special interest group that
H'ing- U|: clearly unacceptable — an obnoxious clique of
lorv crinr. :j a l fascists that poses a grave threat to our great
1 slayingc: : jublic. Of course, I refer to the “for the children”
ho remai vocates.
also is char;: These groups have been proliferating wildly
iminalse.'.:® tjhe last couple of years. Their mantra is a
ed casein, nplie one that almost sounds reasonable at first:
rl. ildren need to be protected from the evils of the
s, ages/annrld. Unfortunately, to go about this laudable
lays after kal, it hey are perfectly willing to trample all over
in avacan:. - rights of adults.
'ighborhoodl Their loathsome presence can already be felt
been savjdoughout our society. They have already tried to
v molested Pose censorship on the Internet with the atro-
stscameas'f 1
ing by detect|
'o confess;
uise the;.
cious Communications Decency Act, which was
thankfully struck down by the Supreme Court.
They have placed ratings on television shows,
warning labels on rap music CDs and are working
to get v-chips inside televisions.
They are waging total war against the tobacco
companies and have coerced the government into
ROBERT HYNECEK/The Battalion
spending billions on anti-drug commercials. They
rave about the evils of television violence, sex,
profanity and drugs and call for government action
against these things, ostensibly to protect the chil
dren. But in reality, these people are control freaks
who simply want to dominate the lives of their fel
low citizens.
There is nothing wrong with parents trying to
protect their own children from these things. If
they want to take the ostrich approach and try to
protect their children from reality, that is their
business.
But is it too much to ask these parents to stick
to screwing up their own kids’ lives and leave
everyone else alone? There is absolutely no legiti
mate reason to get the government involved in
these matters.
Most governments are really only good at two
things: killing people and spending money —
skills that are generally not needed in the proper
raising of children. Who in the government can be
trusted to make the proper decisions on how to
protect children?
Think about it. If you are a conservative, would
youhrust Bill Clinton with your kids; if you are a
liberal, would you trust Trent Lott? Besides, the
government already has control over the education
system to warp the minds of children, there is real
ly no need to get the government further involved.
Parents — not schools, not churches, not the
media — are the dominant force in any child’s life.
The “for the children” crowd should stop harass
ing politicians and get back to taking care of their
own kids.
Maybe if they did that, then they would not
have to worry so much about their children getting
seduced by the dark side of rap music and Joe
Camel.
And if they really are so incapable of raising
their children without massive government assis
tance, then maybe these people should not be hav
ing children in the first place.
Perhaps in some African tribal society it really
does take a village to raise a child, but here in the
United States, where so many of us have neighbors
who cannot even keep their lawns mowed, it is
best for individual parents to raise their own chil
dren and keep the village out of it — to say noth
ing of the government.
Brendan Guy is a senior political science
and history major.
were drot'
Member.
ien on IL
NN should not have turned Colorado school shooting into circus
n
he horrific inci
dent that oc-
curred at
'‘ l ‘ ilumbine High
Ld H . n ; bool in Littleton,
ne - ° r n , do., this past week
1N is a serious re-
1! inder of the erosion
or
our culture, moral- Zach
HALL
wasi
ce U q t . t ‘.'j| and love for
? un 7ve|o!:B* ntP CNN’s cov-
in .|’ 7 ige of the tragedy was a blatant re-
llllk inder of the erosion of media stan-
rds and ethics.
Not to downplay the utter severity
the shootings, but CNN turned a ter-
lefeituation into a national specta-
IThe Jerry Springer Show” has
en known to show more class.
For most of an afternoon, the coun-
i was bombarded by live, up-to-the-
cond coverage of every action that
bolded in Littleton. The public was
en allowed first-hand, unedited, un
screened calls from students who were
lucky to escape alive.
Unfortunately, too many of the in
terviews seemed overly dramatic, and
some eyewitness’ stories did not even
stay consistent within the same inter
view.
It was almost as if CNN was waiting
for a student to come out and say
“Yeah, I was right there, and there
were shots, and then my best friend’s
head just exploded there right in front
of me.”
As if they had not made enough bad
decisions, CNN then proceeded to put
an 800 number on the screen for par
ents to call and check on their kids.
Ten minutes later they asked the public
to discontinue use of the number be
cause it was the wrong one and be
cause there had been a flood of calls
into it.
One has to ask why John Doe in
Caledonia, Miss., needs to have access
to that 800 number. Did CNN think
that parents and relatives of the Den
ver area would not be watching their
local news coverage instead of CNNs?
The question raised in a circum
stance such as this asks where the line
must be drawn between responsible
journalism and news stations’ thirst for
higher ratings.
There is no doubt that the
Columbine shootings were national
news or that it would draw national in
terest, but it was not a national
tragedy. Therefore, CNN’s decision to
broadcast live, unedited and un-re-
searched news was irresponsible.
Simply put, this was a tragic hap
pening that could have occurred in any
town of any state in America, just like
rape, murder, theft or freak accidents
happen every day in some community
across the country.
The difference here is that CNN’s
excessive coverage turned this incident
into a national media circus. The big
three news stations were certainly not
going to be outdone by CNN.
The discouraging thing about this
whole mess is that the public sat back
and watched with morbid curiosity.
However, what is more disheartening
is that when such tragedies hit close to
home, that same public becomes ap
palled at the lack of sensitivity por
trayed by the media.
For instance, I have not heard a sin
gle person exclaim about how insensi
tive it was for CNN to show pictures of
children with bullet wounds, or broad
cast supposed eyewitness accounts of
friends being blown away.
Some might argue that incidents
such a these should not be given so
much coverage because it encourages
copycat crimes.
While this is not a valid reason to
cover-up news, one does have to won
der about the rash of copycat crimes
that have occurred just since last
week’s shootings. CNN should i>e glad
to know that their ratings were high
among the copycat criminal demo
graphic.
This is not a suggestion that the me
dia should be in the business of decid
ing what the public should and should
not know; CNN had a responsibility to
inform the nation of this tragedy. But
in precious few circumstances should
local tragedies be escalated to the level
of a national media circus and certain
ly not to the extent that CNN took this
situation.
Ironically, this is not the first time
CNN has been accused of irresponsible
journalism. Hopefully, the public has
not become as desperate for shock and
entertainment as some media organiza
tions.
Zach Hall is a senior
political science major.
7-17
'S:
ize not basis for
mount of coverage
rSi Wati' fa response to Nathan Hoff-
mr's Apr. 15 mail call.
Tou said in your letter that The
Gallon should not give Gay
bareness Week so much atten-
'n or “front page news” because
ppsexuals only represent a mi-
% of people on campus.
Does this also mean that you
■ pol#ferthey don’t report on the
T A ||Pn Students Association or
, p U 0t e Texas Aggie Democrats?
©Se organizations represent a
0 [() ,vi7 in | r ity of the school population.
n ?> r piously you don’t prefer it be-
me f ' u iuse you are prejudiced,
ties in' 111 As the editor of The Battalion
pertly wrote himself, their job is
report the news, nothing less
■nothing more.
For you to suggest that The
mlion not report the activities
the gay student organization to
ttisfy your intolerance and con-
3r vatism is ridiculous. The news
Nia will not stop reporting
Pethingjust because you think
Wrong.
ter
igran'-
pane
n Jfk'' Open up your eyes, Nathan.
,vexpr II 'F live in a worlcl where this kind
111 ^hing exists, yes, even in Ag-
' e| and. Attempting to sweep it
rthe carpet does not make it
ay.
Michelle Cochran
Class of ‘00
MAIL CALL
Corps members not
superior to others
In response to Ronnie H.
Kirschner’s Apr. 19 mail call.
The last time I checked, A&M
was a University open to all races,
religions, backgrounds and ethnic
ities. But, most of all, it is open to
individuals who have one charac
teristic in common. That is free
dom. Notice that I used the word
freedom.
If I am not mistaken, I do not
think that you have sacrificed any
of your heart, soul, sweat or blood
for that freedom that we all share.
Well, just to let you know ... I
have.
And if anyone has a right to be
yell leader, I think that I am a
prime candidate. I am not saying
that I am running for yell leader,
but if sacrifice is what it takes,
then I have done more than my
fair share.
While you were in detention in
high school and chasing girls
through the halls, I was serving
this country, upholding the free
dom that has allowed ignorant,
narrow-minded individuals such as
yourself to even have the right to
call yourself an Aggie.
And now I am proud to say that
I am a member of this institution
that allows me the same right as
everyone else. And that is to call
myself an Aggie.
Everyone on this campus has
just as much right as any Corps
member to represent this fine
school as a yell leader. If the
Corps would just stop hazing,
wake up during class and look
around, they would see that this
school is no longer all Corps. We
cannot live in the past anymore.
And if you want things to be like
they used to be, then let us start
by getting rid of the all non-reg
championship football team that
gave everyone on this campus a
reason to yell.
Let us get rid of all the women
on campus, and let us downsize
the school to 60 or 70 students.
Also, if I am not mistaken,the of
fice of student body president was
invented by a white man. Does
that mean that Will Hurd does not
have the right to hold that position
just because he is not the same
type of person that the founder of
that position was? I think not.
Join the military, grow up, and
come back and look at this Univer
sity through the eyes of a mature
adult like I have.
I can guarantee, you will not
see things the same.
Eric Ferguson
Class of '01
Gun control not
answer to violence
In response to Caleb Mc
Daniel’s Apr. 24 opinion column.
I cannot understand how Mc
Daniel believes the solution to
ending school shootings is more
stringent gun laws.
It is a tragedy that our chil
dren are not even safe at school
anymore, but taking away our
right to bear arms will not solve
the problem.
Children will get ahold of guns
illegally, if that is their intent.
Laws restricting citizens rights
will not solve the problem of
shootings, they will only lead
more people obtaining weapons
illegally.
If anyone is responsible for
stopping the shootings, it is the
parents. In the case of
Columbine High School, how
could the parents of the two al
leged gunmen not know that
their children had multiple guns
and bombs in their rooms?
They had to have noticed that
their children were acting abnor
mally. I cannot fathom not know
ing what is going on with your chil
dren, not knowing what they are
doing in their rooms; my parents
always knew what I was doing,
whether I wanted them to or not.
The parents are ultimately re
sponsible for their children’s ac
tions, not the government. Strip
ping the Second Amendment
rights of law-abiding citizens is
not the solution to ending these
senseless shootings.
Leslie Hull
Class of '01
This recent atrocity against
humanity in Colorado will no
doubt give rise once again to the
debate for more completely use
less gun control laws.
The argument for gun control
has noble roots, but is inherently
flawed. None of the laws since
1932, 1968 or 1996 has had
any appreciable effect on crime.
Do you remember the “save all”
Brady Bill of 1996, do you feel
any safer?
The problem with gun control
laws is that they are only laws.
They are laws to prevent the
criminal use of guns. Criminals
do not abide by laws, that is why
we label them criminals.
In the first place, how many
criminals go down to their fa
vorite retail store and fill out the
blue sheets to legally buy a
firearm. Not many. Most guns
are obtained illegally, through
theft or bought from back-alley
dealers.
The two morally degraded psy
chopaths from Colorado are
prime examples of criminal disre
gard for laws.
One of them was 17 years
old; legally he was only to be in
possession of any kind of
firearm in the presence of an
adult guardian. Also, both of
them built and utilized pipe
bombs and other incendiary de
vices, both of which are strictly
forbidden by current legislation.
Do you think they thought,
“Hey, wait, we can’t be in pos
session of firearms within 1000
feet of a school because that
also is illegal.”
To the argument at hand, you
might suggest that the only way
to prevent criminal usage and
possession of a firearm is to
make all usage and possession
criminal. Wrong!
The war on drugs empirically
proves that banning, be it a sub
stance or a tool, like a handgun,
is useless. Illegal as it may be, if
I had the urge to score an 8-ball
that wouldn’t take more than 20
minutes.
Guns, handguns especially,
would be easy to smuggle into
the country, just like a kilo of co
caine. Banning guns only leaves
us with rich gun smugglers, well-
armed thugs and a vulnerable
citizenry being led to slaughter.
Travis Bernsen
Class of ’00
The Battalion encourages letters to the ed
itor. Letters must be 300 words or less and in
clude the author’s name, class and phone
number.
The opinion editor reserves the right to edit
letters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters
may be submitted in person at 013 Reed Mc
Donald with a valid student ID. Letters may also
be mailed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
013 Reed McDonald
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
77843-1111
Campus Mail: 1111
Fax: (409) 845-2647
E-mail: batt@tamvml.tamu.edu