S rate applies
dditionalS
to qualify ij. |
Hens,
Occasional tq
»rs. Brazos Am
iers.com or
graduates m
industry.
•k old female^
ots. spay, &
53
white/gray tato'
’9)268-1589.
tes, AKC, 1st«
I masked Pea*
old. S75/eacf'
re black male s
STATE
\^ATES
remodeled,
Is. Rick218-8<:
-miles from x~
sable modem. ’
ASAP. 3Mrr:
1/3bills, Aimee’
d. 4-bdrtn. tas:
es from campus.
:
huttle. I
needed, 3bdrm2
iwnhomes, S40C'
9)255-6885.
needed, 4bdr(tv2f
mo. +utilitles. Aif
oom in a “l-beft*
rpus, $350/mo.
1st month disc-
2 1 4-908^-
iergy.com
tor new house,
move-in ASAP! ■
/ICES
ive Driving. W';
Icket dismissal
M-T(6pm-9pm)j
ISat, Fri(6pm*
Sat(8am-2:3V
j ca Walk-ins ►
west price alio#.
Ste.217. 845«
iy. (CP-0017). 1
rlTED
sell lawn busi#
■e. Call J D. M
IT LOSS
GUT? IncreaseE;
j customers
istomers
to buy.
V
569
Thursday, June 21, 2001
COLLEGE
o bring more light-hearted,
enjoyable pieces to the
opinion page 0*1 The Battal
ion, this new column seeks to in
form college students about the
current state of love and sex in a
rural college town. If this col
umn offends some, sorry, but hopefully in
time, die humor generated from this endeavor
will make this column a Batt landmark (at least
until I am sick of writing it).
With so many people
getting “hoed up” for a
night at Northgate, Har
ry’s or Coffee Station, it
seems everyone is out to
get some, anti get it now.
From a school that calls
“mugging down” a tradi
tion and has underage
drinking as rampant as
malaria in a Southeast
Asian country, has casual
sex become too casual?
“Without sounding like a prude, sex
has become so cheap. A friend of mine
can’t control herself and throws morals
out the window when it comes to sex.
But I cannot judge people. Unfortunately
it is too casual, and people think it is cool
to say they slept with someone after they
got trashed. It is not. I am happy to be a
virgin in college with a healthy relation
ship — I just live vicariously through tel
evision. Why not?”
— Sarah Bieda, junior education major
and public policy research institute supervisor
“There is nothing wrong with it, but
people need to be careful. People and sex
are die same in this college as in any big
city. Sex is one of the basic needs of life.
So if it must be casual, and that is the only
way to get it, just be careful. Always won
der about the person you are trying to
hook up with. Girls may wear what they
do to get noticed, not necessarily to get
sex, but if they’re looking for it... ”
— Russell Durrant, senior
sports management major
From virgins to the ladies of Moulin Rouge,
everyone has an opinion on casual sex. We all
have to start asking the question, is it okay to
succumb to pure physical attraction?
If you meet someone at a bar or club and
cannot seem to think of anything but really grf-
ting to know that person you should consider
your options. You could go home with that
person and probably regret the entire incident,
go home with that person anti completely en
joy yourself by throwing responsibility out die
window or you can decide to go on a date with
that person (at least one) to see if you are really
interested in a moment of bliss.
One thing is certain; try to figure out if you
really are attracted to the individual or if it is
just the three pitchers, two vodka tonics, ludes
and weed that attracted you to die person in
the first place. With a uterus in the equation,
STls are not the only thing a casual-sex cou
ple has to worry about. So if die moment aris
es when physical attraction takes over all
thought processes, make sure that safe sex
finds its way into the bedroom, car, bathroom
or wherever. Hey, think of it as being some
what kinky (another column entirely) by call
ing it a menage a trois (You, die hot clubber
with no name and the condom).
If your weekends continue to remind you of a
random sex Groundhog Day, you may want to re
think your life’s direction. Some find comfort in
chocolate, odiers find it in Nintendo, but, hon-
esdy, blaming the bartender or your parents’
lack of love during early childhood is no excuse
for cheapening the temple God gave you.
Make sure you are doing it for yourself.
Jeff Kempfis a senior
management major.
o PINION
THE BATTALION
Fire />ower
Lawmakers should outlaw military rifles
A recent
article
in
Rolling
Stone re
ported an en
tire subcul
ture of
Americans
dedicated to
sniping and the use of ultra, high-
powered, military firearms. In the
story, backwoods frontiersmen
posing as normal people, take out
their adolescent aggression by dis
charging powerful firearms, evi
dently for “fun.”
They lie on hillsides, pepper
ing steel targets with bullets
from nearly a mile away. Among
the weapons, they use are the Ar-
malite AR-50 and the EDM
Windrunner, both .50-caliber
sniper rifles manufactured to kill
people and pierce armored vehi
cles from thousands of yards
away. And to do this, they did no
more paperwork than an 18-
year-old buying a pellet gun at a
local sports store. The scary
thing is that the story is true, and
the weapons of near mass de
struction these men use are legal.
A number of lawmakers, in
cluding Sen. Djatnne Feinstein, D-
Ca., and Rep. Henry Waxman, D-
Ca., are working to change that,
however. These legislators are
promoting a bill that would re
classify these behemoth rifles for
military use only, making them
nearly impossible for an average
citizen to buy. Inevitably, this ef
fort will produce a backlash from
conservative gun lovers. Nonethe
less, these guns must be banned
for the safety of the public.
Gun advocates, including John
Burtt, chairman of die Fifty Caliber
Shooters Association, say there is
.110 reason to criminalize die use of
diese weapons. Burtt states, cor
rectly, diat there is no record of a
.50-caliber sniper rifle, such as the
Windrunner, being used in a crime.
However, diere was a time when
there was no record of an assault ri
fle being used in a crime.
Once upon a time, it was legal
to buy and own a Browning Auto
matic Rifle (BAR) this turned out
to be a mistake police depart
ments the across the nation would
live to lament. After the invention
of the gun, gangsters realized its
potential uses, and some of the
most colorful characters of the era
including Bonnie and Clyde, used
them against police. Granted,
large, sniper rifles weigh between
2 5 and 40 pounds, making them
much heavier than a BAR, and
they fire far slower. However,
these facts make it less likely they
will be used in an armed robbery
and more likely they will be used
by a lunatic at the top of a college
bell tower.
Charles Whitman did not have
a .50-caliber rifle to shoot during
his infamous rampage in Austin.
He could only shoot passersby
with ease, not armored car drivers.
But he also did not have an auto
matic weapon. Whitman used
precise shooting with bolt-action,
hunting rifles for the majority of
his killing. One only can imagine
the destruction he could have
wreaked had he been using a rifle
designed to shoot straight
through a brick wall rather than
simply fell a deer in the forest.
One would assume that the
Brady Bill would have outlawed
weapons such as these, but instead
it applies only to assault weapons
— what the bill defines in part as
“weapons not operated by lever,
bolt, slide or pump.” Hence, these
large bolt-action rifles are exempt
from the bill.
Considering the controversy
that surrounded the Brady Bill, it
is unlikely that this latest meas
ure to restrict firearms will pass,
especially with a Republican in
the country’s highest office.
America can only sit and wait,
hoping that the .50-caliber’s un
blemished crime record stays
that way.
Jason Bennyhoff is a senior
journalism major.
Cannot count on Kyoto to protect
F or months, members
of the media, Democ
rats in Congress and
unemployed, environmen
talist protesters have been
complaining about the Bush
administration’s opposition
to the Kyoto global wann
ing protocol. Secretary of
State Colin Powell has called it “a dead letter,”
and President George W. Bush has called the
treaty “fatally flawed.”
Last week, leaders of the European Union
criticized Bush for his opposition to Kyoto.
“We don’t understand why the American gov
ernment cannot live up to the agreements that
tiie former administration agreed to,” said
Swedish Prime Minister Goran Persson.
Although trying to prevent global warming
is a great idea, the treaty would do little toward
these means. But it would make the United
States suffer for the sins of others. An examina
tion of tiie protocol shows die Bush adminis
tration’s stance to be well-founded, while many
Europeans come out looking like hypocrites.
Global warming is a global issue; The Ky
oto treaty tries to localize it by imposing re
strictions on certain nations, while letting oth
ers not change anything. The United States,
being the most prosperous nation — while not
even being close to the largest net polluter —
would be required to cut carbon dioxide emis
sions by 30 percent. Nine of the top 20 emit
ters, including massive polluters China and In
dia, are completely exempt from making
changes by the Kyoto protocol.
Developing nations, as Bush pointed out
last week, emit more net greenhouse gas
emissions than developed nations. Develop
ing nations are not expected to make changes
under the Kyoto protocol. In addition, forests
and other natural absorbers of carbon dioxide,
known as carbon sinks, were not considered
by the Kyoto protocol.
In his Wednesday column in the Wall Street
Journal, Pete DuPont said that in 1997, the
Senate found the treaty so biased that it voted
95-0 to reject it. In addition, Charles
Krauthammer of The Washington Post, in his
June 18 column, noted how even though
none of the nations in the European Union
had ratified the treaty, they still complain
about the United States’ position. The
Swedish environmental minister, Kjell Larson
may claim that as of now Europe is the
world’s leader on environmental concerns, but
the record disputes that notion.
Gregg Easterbrook, author of New Republic,
points out that “American ecological standards
are far more strict than European rules, and
have been for 20 years.” Easterbrook goes on to
say, “Paris today has worse smog than Houston;
water quality, especially those of rivers, is lower
in Europe than in the United States; acid rain
reduction has been more rapid in the United
States than in Europe; European Union nations
like Greece, Italy and Portugal still discharge
huge volumes of untreated municipal waste-
water, a practice banned in America.”
It is ironic that France’s president Jacques
Chirac can claim that “France will be one of the
leaders on this issue,” yet his nation was the last
country to cease having above ground nuclear
weapons tests and is the only country to under
take a terrorist act — the destruction of the ship
Rainbow Warrior — against Greenpeace.
The Clinton Energy Department estimated
that compliance with Kyoto would reduce
America’s rate of economic growth by 3 to 4
percentage points, or $350 billion. This would
be fine, if the rest of the world was required to
follow the same rules. Blaming one nation for
the same thing that others are doing is wrong, .
damaging to the world economy and gives en
vironmental hypocrites a sense of accomplish
ment while the problem still exists.
The Bush administration is right to reject
the Kyoto treaty. They have not rejected the
idea of stopping global warming. Working
toward that goal, and a treaty that will actu
ally help the planet, is noble. The support
ers of Kyoto are not.
Mark Passwaters is a senior
electrical engineering major.
CARTOON OF THE DAY
TWc OHcJN Rf CyCsfsj^-f- Ce)
The Battalion encourages letters to
the editor. Letters must be 300 words
or less and include the author's name,
class and phone number.
The opinion editor reserves the right
to edit letters for length, style and accu j
racy. Letters may be submitted in person
at 014 Reed McDonald with a valid stu
dent ID. Letters may also be mailed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
014 Reed McDonald
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
77843-1111
Campus Mail: 1111
Fax: (979) 845-2647
E-mail: battletters@hotmail.com