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' 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 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