Friday. January 19, 2001
Opi NION
THE BATTALUON
te applies
ional 5
o qualify for
Personal safety a must
College students live in a dangerous world, should be allowed to carry guns
[ED
3 applications b
i computet buty
its on a window
nrning experiercs
6 Osier Blvd.,otti
s SLifeguards
(agner.
JND
xjlate Lab win
Square I
:ous
ecord?
M/BEACONir
e e-comnwc8*j
dfni/1141, 9i
;le
c 1100, redvr
-9369
females for airs'
[ logs f.L'j
s. rabbits S t>
■ Very cms
T ;
he goal of col
leges and univer
sities across
America is to attract the
top students in the
country. For this reason,
they try to present
themselves in the best
possible light, so that
any student would seem foolish not to at
tend. Many schools tout its quality educa
tion, nice facilities, friendly people, and a
. 77 ^ versl01 * clean and safe campus. However, many
schools are not as safe as they seem, and
most offer courses in self-defense.
Yet one of the most effective self-de-
a good hone
0 9 wiggles I
fense options is ruled out: carrying a li
censed concealed weapon. This discrepen-
cy is especially noticeable in states like
Texas, which allows concealed handgun
wj permits for citizens 21 and older and take
K he required courses, but do not allow stu-
ents to take these weapons on campus,
^vvhere they spend most of their time.
Under current Texas law, it is illegal to
^arry a firearm on any government proper-
y, including public universities. Students
ihould be allowed to carry weapons to
lelp prevent robberies and violent crime
>n campus. Many colleges are in essence
elf-contained cities, and therefore their
itizens should be allowed the same rights.
According to the Campus Crime Web-
lite, violent crimes are committed 12 times
I day on campuses across the country. For
Ivery 1,000 students on campus, 26 vio-
* peppw^ent crimes will be committed annually.
ill Katie at
fES
th condo. Ui
lare 3bdrm/
T or 255-15
— University students are concerned
bout this, as shown in a Harvard School
f Public Health College study.
4 Six percent of students attending col
leges in the South have guns, excluding
Jlunting weapons, compared with 4 per
cent in the West and 1 percent in the
ortheast. A number of these students
^yere women. The survey also found that
near cnripoi jivo-lhirds of student gun owners live off-
,et), $285/ir» ^1 b
■ampus.
“condo Most institutions prohibit guns on cam-
Jins, but researchers estimate students
" apartment.4 ee p at j east 100,000 guns in the nation’s
-dormitories. While some students may
droom in
s . private bafwave less pure motives, many are willing
379-680-2193 J () | e g a ] trouble so they can defend
iM bills. w/D|<% emse i ves , should the need arise,
r paidTwl Student Right-to-Know and Cam-
^wo^eeiHXi pus Security Act of 1990 and later amend
ments to the act require colleges and uni
versities to publish statistics in 10 differ
ent crime categories.
In the last three years at Texas A&M
eight forcible sex offenses and 176 bur
glaries were reported. A burglary is un
lawful entry into a building or other struc
ture with the intent to commit a felony or
a theft.
Students should be
allowed weapons to help
prevent robberies and
violent crime on campus.
Many colleges are in
essence self-contained
cities, and therefore their
citizens should be
allowed the same rights.
From 1997-1998, Texas Tech Universi
ty reported three forcible sex offenses,
four robberies, five aggravated assaults
and 17 burglaries.
In the same period, the University of
Texas reported one forced sexual assault,
seven robberies, four aggravated assaults
and 45 burglaries. All of these crimes oc
curred on the campuses of universities
that have campus police departments.
The crimes that often cause the most
concern are those against persons, espe
cially the forcible sex offenses. Mary
Zeiss Stange, author of Arms and the
IVoman: A Feminist Reappraisal, reported
in 1995 that, of the approximately 65 mil
lion to 80 million American gun owners,
an estimated 17 million are women. Half
of the people who own guns for self-de- .
fense are women.
The crime-fighting effect of armed
women was demonstrated in Orlando,
Fla., where a long-standing rape problem
existed. As reported in the Washington
Times, the police in Orlando offered a
gun-training program for women that re
sulted in a 76 percent decrease in rapes.
According to Professor John Lott in his
book More Guns, Less Crime, violent
crime rates are much lower in right-to-car-
ry states than in states that severely re
strict concealed weapons permits. He
found that rape and sexual assault rates
plummet in areas where a greater number
of women have concealed-carry permits.
“The differences in specific crime rates
among states that allow and those that for
bid concealed handguns are dramatic.”
Additionally, many may fear that an in
crease in gun carriers would result in more
shootings, but Lott found that “98 percent
of the time that people use guns defensive
ly, they merely have to brandish a weapon
to break off an attack.”
Many recent events have triggered this
concern with gun laws, and caused some to
call for stronger restrictions on legal
weapons. Weapons restrictions are the op
posite response that should be taken. Crim
inals, who do not buy guns legally, fear the
possibility that their victims may be armed.
The Department of Justice survey of in
carcerated felons reported that 93 percent
of handgun offenders had obtained their
most recent guns illegally. According to
James D. Wright and Peter Rossi in Armed
and Considered Dangerous: a Survey of
Felons and their Firearms, convicted felons
are more worried about armed victims than
the police.
While many news stories involving
guns are stories of thugs attacking help
less victims, various experts have estimat
ed that civilians use guns in self-defense
as many as 2 million to 3 million times per
year. In fact, www.pulpless.com sponsors
q Website with a “gun defense clock” that
reports that 111,122 criminal attacks have
been stopped by guns since Jan. 1.
The recent prison break of seven in
mates from the Connally Unit in Kenedy,
Texas has law enforcement on alert. In a
Battalion article earlier this week, Bob
Wiatt, director of University Police Depart
ment, encouraged members of the A&M
community be on the lookout for any suspi
cious individuals or incidents. However,
the only defense option for any student
who sees these fugitives, or gets caught in a
dangerous situation, is to call for help.
College students, whether they live on
campus or simply attend class on campus,
should be allowed the same level of pro
tection as any other citizen. Allowing stu
dents to exercise their Second Amendment
rights would only help to combat on cam
pus crime.
Andrew Stephenson is a sophomore
environmental design major.
•V1.5bth, walk'
<jrm/2bth, S®
3bth, rent
apartment, $2#
js. __
5/ month rani (*•'
■ I 2bdrm/2btl l
rills, on bus-rod'
3-927-5846.
Unfinished business
Although Clinton leaves White House his legacy is unknown
w
ith
much
of the
; bb-’
ES
>ts-of-fun,
jLirtt. M-W
;pm-8pm)
aside
3 west price
846-6117.
La#’
;u
xiiry lownhouss
ire, Rio Cos#
846-8916.
Restaurants,
ation’s focus
entered on the
inauguration of
George W. .
ush as Ameri-
a’s 43rd presi
dent Saturday,
t is easy to overlook today’s signif
icance as the final day of the Clin
ton administration. As Saturday
will herald the dawn of a new era in
Washington, today is the last plank
a bridge that has been built for
past eight years, spanning the
ivide between the 20th and 21st
alic' ;:
in ;
the
centuries.
Like all presidents before him,
-j^lBill Clinton is no longer account-
.oss
<j and .,
j condos, io#«ible > the political forces of Wash-
5-2° 2 6. ington, the watchful eye of the press
°pring bre^ inc l the votes of the national elec-
son pRODdf orate. Now, history will assume the
ole of evaluating Clinton.
Surely, as countless columnists
nd pundits have said the past few
proven nutrition 8 ®ve k s , the Clinton administration
will be scorned by future historians
.s a cormpt and harrowing eight
r 'Dim y ears from which Americans were
ZTcuprfi lucky to survive intact. In the end,
fla/HilW** 11 ™’ "
ftckeuM 1 ,!
SUNCT
ase.cojS.
“comeback kid” who bounced
ack on the eve of the 1992 New
lampshire primary, escaped inves
tigation after investigation and
* hrugged off an impeachment may
have one comeback left.
Presidential legacies are hard to
olidify. With the exception of
"ashington and Lincoln, who led
he country through times of great
eril, every president has had his
istorical advocates and detractors,
ore often than not, the pointed
agger of public opinion was soft
ened by the passage of time.
There is no better example of
this phenomenon than Richard
Nixon. After he was forced to re
sign in 1974 because of the fallout
surrounding the Watergate scandal
and the prospect of impeachment,
most modern historians saved him
a place of shame in the annals of
American history. Surely, they said,
the black mark of being the only
president to resign from the office
would haunt Nixon forever.
There can be no debate that
even today, more than a quarter of a
century later, Nixon is still remem
bered as the one man who stepped
away from the Oval Office. How
ever, recent historians have begun
to delve into other parts of his ca
reer. Now parts of Nixon’s life in
addition to Watergate are making
their way into books, such as his
role in the Alger Hiss spy case, his
job as America’s foil to former So
viet leader Nikita Khmshchev dur
ing his tenure as vice president, and
his historic diplomatic contact with
communist China.
On the other side of the coin,
presidents such as Calvin Coolidge
and Ronald Reagan left office un
der good terms, hailed as economic
saviors of the nation. By the con
clusion of their successors’ terms,
both men’s economic policies had
sent America into an economic
landslide. Even though both
Coolidge and Reagan were fortu
nate enough to escape the scorn of
public opinion while in office, the
success of their administrations has
been debated by historians.
Today, the black eyes on the -
Clinton presidency — Whitewater,
the failure of nationalized health
care, Travelgate, the Lewinsky af
fair and his impeachment — are
visible scars that Clinton will carry
into history. Although such scars
never go away completely, some
will fade over time.
In the year 2001, no one really
has much of an opinion on Andrew
Jackson, the nation's seventh presi
dent. Most know him simply as the
guy on the $20 bill. When he ended
his tenure as president, he was one
of the most vilified men in America
for his policies concerning the
Bank of the United States and his
awarding of executive posts to po
litical supporters.
Today will be the
last day of the Clin
ton era and Satur
day will be his first
day on trial in the
eternal court of
history.
Today, Andrew Johnson is one of
two men with an asterisk next to his
name in history books denoting his
impeachment by the House of Rep
resentatives, but no one points to his
administration as a gaping hole in
the American moral tapestry.
Warren Harding, a man whose
administration had more scandals
than it did days, is just a stuffy old
name to most of America’s
schoolchildren.
History will move past the out
rage that many now feel over Clin
ton’s actions and the effects of his
administration. Likewise, the fer
vent support that he continues to
enjoy from a large portion of the
population will subside.
Historians of the future may
look at his eight-year span as a pe
riod of unparalleled economic
growth, dominance in world af
fairs, and the birth of a true Infor
mation Age. They may recognize
him as the first Democratic presi
dent to be re-elected since
Franklin Roosevelt and one who
faced some of the most vehement
opposition in Congress during his
administration. It is difficult to
name another president in modern
history who accomplished so
much in the face of unrelenting
opposition.
Others may look at the growth
of terrorism, the lack of any sweep
ing reforms and the seemingly end
less train of scandals and find him
to be among America’s most lack
ing presidents. In any case, it is too
soon to attempt to summarize and
evaluate what Clinton has done for
and to America.
The final chapter in the Clinton
legacy may not be shaped for many
years to come. As one of the
youngest presidents in history, he
faces a long post-presidency life.
He could spend his retirement in
privacy as Nixon and Reagan chose
to do. Alternatively, he could follow
the path of Jimmy Carter, a presi
dent who has arguably been more
effective in making the world a bet
ter place as a private citizen than as
chief executive. Either way, it is un
likely that Clinton will disappear
completely from the public eye.
Today is the last day of the Clin
ton era and Saturday will be his
first day on trial in the eternal court
of history. Never unanimous and
always subject to revision, history’s
opinion may be as split as public
opinion is today.
In the end, Clinton will join the
likes of Grover Cleveland, Ben
jamin Harrison, and even George
W. Bush —just another stuffy old
name in a textbook.
Nicholas Roznovsky is a senior
political science major.
Mail
Student should
cover A&M issues
\n response to Kyle Whitacre’s
Jan. 18 column
What has The Battalion come to?
We all know The Battalion has not
been a journalistic masterpiece, but
it has sunken to new lows. What is up
with the killer shrimp opinion article?
It is too ridiculous to be real and
not funny enough to be sarcasm. I
think The Battalion needs to do more
investigative pieces on the Universi
ty. The Battalion hardly ever criticizes
the University — is it that much a
puppet of the University?
For example, in today’s article
about the bookstore and the added
security, you just briefly mentioned
that A&M is paying for that security.
The bookstore is a private company,
so why are we the students and
Texas taxpayers paying for the secu
rity? The bookstore needs to hire a
private security firm or reimburse
A&M for the A&M officers.
This is one example, but there are
tons of similar matters each semes
ter that The Battalion fails to report
or elaborate on. Please abandon
ridiculous articles like the shrimp ar
ticle and publish something worth
reading.
Ryan Burkhalter
Class of‘02
Players should
take advantage
of NFL draft
In response to Doug Fuentes’Jan.
16 column
Hey, Toombs and Ferguson, did
you read Tuesday’s Battalion?
Some journalism student, who prob
ably never even touched a football
field, said you should play another
year at A&M.
Never mind that at any point next
season you guys both can have ca-
Call
reer-ending injuries and never make
it to the pros, or the fact that you are
fullfilling lifelong dreams. I knowthat
you could both easily do something
like tear a ligament in your knee,
promising you to never make a cent
playing ball, but Doug Fuentes says
you’ll be just fine if you stay.
He says some other guys left like
you and they sucked in the pros.
This, for some reason, is supposed
to mean you guys will suck.
I say you should go. Blow this one-
horse town and make what the pub
lic is willing to pay you. Just remem
ber to give A&M props when you’re
interviewed after the game.
Casey Friesenhahn
Class of ‘03
Students display
poor manners
I had the opportunity to attend the
men’s basketball game Wednesday
night for the first time since I attend
ed Texas A&M in the early ‘80s.
Things sure have changed from the
old days in the Holler House on the
Brazos, G. Rollie White.
The game was very enjoyable ex
cept for the final score and an inci
dent by a student group called the
Reed Rowdies. For the most part
these students displayed great en
thusiasm and demonstrated good
sportsmanship — until late in the
second half when they began taunt
ing a Longhorn player with a chant
of “SAT” and “Stupid” over and
over again.
The chant was neither clever or
in good taste. We hold ourselves to
a higher standard as sports fans.
ESPN and fans from around the Big
12 regularly compliment us on our
spirit and sportsmanship.
The chant by the Reed Rowdies
was not an example of that spirit
and not an example of good
sportsmanship.
As an Aggie I was embarrassed
by the Reed Rowdies second half
chant.
Mark C. Tuschak
Class of ‘84