Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (May 29, 2000)
THE BATTALION irruth fercd |n sa bargu r murde iRLOTTE, N.C. (AP)-Pn iave offered plea bargains Carolina Panthers player and three co-defendi in the shooting death off rlfriend, The Charlotte Oku, 1 Sunday. editors have dedded togivi n the chance to plead guilt degree murder and avoii nurder trial, sources told f jth, 26, and the other men; with first-degree murda v. 16 shooting of Chei Adams, 24, was pregnant# ’s baby when she was gum hile driving in southeastCb ancellor Adams was delivers gency Caesarean section. lea offers. Documents in ies confirm that prosecute it letters to all four defends ng pleas. .ith's lawyer, David Ru client isn't interested in n 8- i not going to commentoni lications from the DA's vld The Observer. "I can say ruth is not interested inar her than a trial to dear irday night, Rudolph said comment" on the pleabaifi jth has been jailed sinceDe defense of pornography Supreme Court justifiably defends racy cable TV channels) puts responsibility on parents anet LaRue does not like pornography, es pecially when it is po- ntially being seen by oung, impressionable hildfen. As an attorney ith a conservative ac- ivist organization, called he Family Research Cen ser (FRC), LaRue has fought the good fight on everal occasions. Flowever, with the FRC's nost recent supreme court battle against jornography, LaRue and her cohorts have nisconstrued and criticized what is in reality very smart and solid court decision. The courts ruling allows pornography companies to earn profits of their product, hich, while offensive to some, is still consti- sutionally protected free speech. Further, with their decision, the court has pointed out that parents, rather than cable companies or ler the prosecutors nor dele- ita hons, are the ones to be held responsible s would comment on repe ;l or a s upbringing. Last Monday, the court ruled to dismiss a 1996 federal law that sought to restrict chil dren from viewing pornography on cable television. The gray area of the law allowed for cable companies to simply scramble those unsavory channels' signals from non-sub scribing TV's. This technique results in the cut-up and discolored reception any student has seen when wondering why they call it the Spice Channel. Problem is, this method still let audio and visual snippets of lovin' get through to watchers. This was reason enough for LaRue's acted by The AssociatedPrc FRC to push for the enforcement of another part of the same '96 law which mandated that table television stations that did not fully scramble the signals of those seedy broadcasts to limit completely the airing of those stations to between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. Aficionados of afternoon scrambled pom were outraged. Not only them, but companies like Playboy Televi sion who earn their daily bread from showing the stuff were outraged that their mid-day broadcasts could be cut-off even for their sub scribers. Thankfully, the supreme court found a loophole in the law, as it is good at doing, and made an intelligent decision. The court decided that the best solution was found in yet another provision of the 1996 law which mandated cable companies to completely block the signal of any station that an individual customer requested. This provision put the decision up to parents whether they wanted a particular channel, scrambled or unscrambled to be turned of from their television. This should have been the perfect ending to the debate, but the FRC would not give up its shortsightedness. LaRue immediately chastised the ruling, saying "It's a sad day when the protection of children takes a back seat to the profits of pornographers." What LaRue and the FRC do not seem to realize is that, while protecting children is important, all people, yes, even pornogra phers, have the right to earn a buck. Forcing cable TV companies to cut their broadcast time down to eight hours severely cripples their profit making ability. Max Webber and Janet LaRue may dis agree, but that is how capitalism works. The porn industry is an industry just like any other providing their customers with a product they want. Pornography is still con stitutionally protected free speech, even if that speech is just moans and groans. Fur thermore, the industry has created thou sands of jobs for American workers, and not just of the hand and blow variety. Another point the FRC seems to be missing is that, ultimately, it is not up to porn producers to watch out for Ameri ca's children. Pornography in all its forms should be susceptible from outside regulation to keep it from young eyes — and this is already hap pening. Blocking and, to a lesser extent, scrambling of indecent television stations work. They do not hinder a company's cash flow nor do they harm those old enough to buy a subscription, turn it on and be turned on. Hugh Hefner should not be held responsi ble for what the kids of America see, it simply is not his job. His job is to cavort around the Playboy mansion all day in that silly red robe and make sweet, sweet love to the bunnies. However, the ultimate benefit of the supreme court's ruling is that it puts the final decision of what a child sees into the very hands it should rest in — a parent's. The pom industry makes a product, just like the bleach industry does. It is up to the parent to keep their chil dren from watching porn just as it is their job to keep a kid from drinking a gallon cf bleach. LaRue and the FRC should stop demanding pornographers and those who earn a living of off indecent material to constantly have to ap peal to the most offended denominator. LaRue may hate pornography like a strange version of The Catcher in the Rye, and think it her job to try to protect children from it. However, producing porn, as filthy, sweaty and depraved as it may be, is the full time job of many lucky individuals and the FRC should let them do their job without cut ting into their ability to make money. If LaRue wants to save America's children she should go home, call the cable company and block her own TV's channel 69. This is the best and already in place system to keep the kiddies away from the bunnies. Hopefully others will follow and the FRC will stop act ing like lawyers and start acting like parents. Eric Dickens is a senior English major. am not ing to corn ent on any immunica- vs f offtce U t ‘Most favored nation 5 status with say that Rat TTr» ttruth is not China benencial to U.S. economy rterested in ything other an a trial to ir his name." I! — David Rudoi Carruth's attornej n what might be considered an ■ jlodder coupling than Felix and Os car, President Clin ton and the Repub lican majority in Congress find themselves allied ?nd of the year, ith. Van Brett Watkins, Eugene Kennedy, 24; afi Drew "Boss" Abraham,! 1 uld face life in prisoner nalty if convicted of first-i rder. )ur men also are each chargt ispiring to commit murdt into an occupied vehicles MARK PASSWATERS on a highly emotional issue. A bill granting the People's Republic of China ludolf wants CarruthtriedJ P™ent Most Favored Nation (MFN) trading status will be voted on this week, and many liberal members of Congress are upset over the mea sure. They say that such a measure would eliminate the United States' ability to improve human rights in China and would coddle a totalitar ian communist system. Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., gave a speech in the House in which he ;un to try to kill. Adams' a';|asked, referring to this bill, "Are we d. ’ iprepared to sell our souls?" lea offers call for differentltl No, Congressman — those who nishment based on thedefe vote for the measure are more inter- The second gripe is that granting per manent MFN status to China takes away the biggest stick the United States can wield in an attempt to make China change. Increasing tariffs on China, MEN opponents reason, would damage their economy and force China to bow to America's will. Hogwash. American goods and services are consumed by the upper classes of Chinese society, not the great masses of people. Increased prices on American goods and services would be a minor discomfort that could be toler ated. On the other hand, Chinese imports leged role in the slaying records. Carruth could face 30 years in prison, accordit wspaper's sources, ith and Watkins, alleged cuments as the triggering h plead guilty for theirdft- cepted by prosecutors. Jt 1 for them to plead guilty egree murder and conspira it murder, a source said.ft 3 would run consecutively ins, ’who has a crintf vould get the harshest puf a source said, cutors have agreed to ■ plead guilty to second-^ der and conspiracy to coirf : and serve eight to 30 yea [ aid. ?dy would also have to test ruth and the other defend# lam's offer calls for him ilty solely to second-degt sources said. He could If' 10 years in prison. Abrah# requires him to submittot irviews with investigati 1 aid. ested in keeping clothes on Ameri can children's backs. To deny China MFN trading status would certain ly hold some negative conse quences for China; however, it Would be economic suicide for the United States. Liberal members of Congress seem to be under several misguided impres sions. The first is that the United States should not conduct free trade with communist governments, such as Cuba. Such a sentiment ignores history and the current economic situation in China. Even during the darkest days of the Cold War, the United States and the So viet Union traded with each other, de spite the fact that the Soviets were con sidered a far greater threat than the Chinese are now. Also, China is no longer a commu nist state in the Marxist model. While it does have a totalitarian government that does not allow dissent, China actu ally has an economic system that is de cisively capitalist. So much for that complaint. can often be found at such high-class es tablishments as Wal-Mart. Increasing tar iffs on goods coming into the United States would cause price increases on everyday items that people need. This, in turn, would cause great problems to the American working class, and would damage the rest of the economy as a result. Do the liberal members of Congress need to be re minded that they were elected to rep resent people in their districts and not people in China? The final grand fallacy on this issue is that keeping MFN trading status would give China no reason to change. In fact, keeping MFN status is probably the best way to make China reform. Many Chinese have embraced capitalist ideals and have benefited from them. This "entrepreneurial class," as Gover nor George W. Bush refers to it, has prospered under the economic changes in China. China's economy, which sput tered under Marxist economic models, has grown rapidly in the past decade. It stands to reason that if the capitalist economic model is that much more effi cient than the Marxist one, the political model might behave the same way. The only way democracy has a chance of flourishing in China is with free trade; destroying that option will take any possibility of political freedom in that nation with it. The opening of the Soviet Union to the ways of the West under g Mikhail Gorbachev led directly to the collapse of Soviet-style com munism. It stands to reason that taking a similar approach with China might have the same ef fect. Shutting the door on free trade with China will not cause that nation to change, but will cause harm to the American economy. At the turn of the 20th century, American Secretary of State John Hay developed the "Open Door" policies toward China. Such poli cies would not work today, as they were blatant acts of exploita tion. In essence, the "Open Door" policies gave each Western power a "sphere of influence" in Imperial China. Now, at the start of the 21st century, China is no longer a nation lagging far behind the rest of the world. It is an eco nomic power that must be dealt with as an equal — and this means with limited trade barriers. Giving China permanent Most Favored Nation status would en sure that America's economy will keep running smoothly by keeping that trade with China wide open. An "Open Door" toward China to day would be of great benefit to both na tions and should be embraced. If China were to be economically ostracized by • the United States, as liberal Democrats desire, it would be a horrible mistake. • ^ ; • *• • j,fc . .r* * Columbine tape rehashes tragedy Mark Passivaters is a senior electrical engineering major. A tough year has passed for those involved in the tur moil following the mas sacre at Columbine High School, but life has continued and the memories have started, ever so slightly, to blur. That is, until a tape showing viewers the blood-bathed school circulated through the mass media. The tape's pur pose, to train firefighters and rescue workers for simi lar crises, seemed to be legitimate. Families of the victims heard of the tape and want ed a copy for themselves to aid in lawsuits claiming that officials mishandled the event and failed to take heed of warning signs before the massacre occurred. The courts agreed. And not only did the families gain access to the tapes, but everyone else did too, for the completely reasonable price of 25 bucks. If only everything in the tape situa tion were so reasonable. Spreading these graphic scenes around the community surrounding Columbine was wrong. For several days after the tape's release, newspapers and broadcasts showed clips of bloodied textbooks and the li brary floor littered with cards marking the dead bodies' spots. Flipping on the television after the tape was released, many in the commu nity were probably plagued with flash backs of an awful event they were trying to forget. The people of Littleton, Col., have suffered enough. Insensitivity by the media should stop — immediately and completely. The Washington Post published an ar- tide reporting the outrage caused by the tape's release to the public, accompanied by — what else? — pictures of the bloody scenes depicted on the tape. A letter to the editor published May 14 asked why The Post used the photos if the people involved with Columbine were upset by them. The Post should have known that they would not appreciate more bloody photos being published. Instead of just showing the pictures for that one day. The Post still allows willing Web surfers to see the pictures and even view clips of the tape on their Web site. In a nation claiming to loathe the amount of vio lence available for consumption, it is hard to under stand why blood and guts still prevail in the news. However, not all blame belongs to the mass media. First, one must consider that the Littleton Fire De partment made the tape. The department even added a soundtrack complete with a Sarah McLachlan song and an anthem written by Columbine students after . the massacre. The department should not have dis tributed a training tape consisting of graphic scenes from one of the most publicized tragedies of 1999 so soon after the event. And though the tape's editor probably had only the best of intentions when adding the soundtrack, the musical additions added their own problems, since the department unfortunately forgot to ask permis sion to use the copyrighted material.Now the fire de partment is being sued for copyright infringement for ” a totally unnecessary soundtrack. Others intimately involved with the massacre can not claim innocence in this new situation, either. Fami- • lies of the victims demanded their own copies so they .. could sue those who did the "wrong" thing when the massacre occurred. It is not hard to imagine that a well-publicized ' American tragedy is surrounded by as many lawsuits as newsgath-;.. erers. By going to the courts and ob taining copies of the tape so quick ly, the families inadvertently al lowed everyone access to the sensitive material. The court did what the families wanted — they allowed them a copy of the tape — but they also allowed anyone else to have a copy as well, which is not what the families intended. According to The Washington Post, Jefferson County Attorney *■'' Frank Hutfless decided to make the tapes public "in order to avoid additional lawsuits by the public • or news media that would likely result in the release of the [tapes] to the general public." This quick release halted the Littleton Fire Department's plans to edit the tape, as well as shocked the community trying to heal from the tragedy. #■ Not only did the demands of the families cause their neighbors extraordinary pain, it also brought them extra-gory, extra-long footage of that pain. The Columbine tape saga gives Americans yet an other example of human error amidst tragedy. Unfor tunately, the mistakes made caused people more grief, more lawsuits and more nightmares. Maybe there will not be a "next time" to corre spond with the massacre at Columbine High. Howev er, if there is, maybe someone will pay attention to what happened this time, and in the future, tragedies like Columbine will not turn into a $25 novelty. Not only did the demands of the suing families cause their neighbors extraordinary pain, it also brought them extra-gory, extra-long footage of that pain. Jill Riley is a senior journalism major.