| Social Smarts Safe drinking always a duty
A Cornell University student fell down a gorge and died after too many drinks. At Michigan State University a student downed two dozen shots of booze celebrating his birthday. A Penn State student was found barely alive on her 21st birthday, her blood-alcohol level nearly seven times Pennsylvania's intoxication limit. Tragic endings to students' lives relating to alcohol consumption seems to plague college campuses. And the Texas legislature hopes that a new law will soon help curb that. The law, which goes into effect Wednesday, lowers the legal blood alcohol concentration level from .1 to .08. Texas has now joined numerous other states seeking to bring tighter restrictions to alcohol consumption. The tighter restrictions will punish those who are caught in the act of debauchery. But what about all the others who are never caught? We, as college students, understand and acknowledge that drinking is a prevalent college activity. We are repeatedly reminded of the dangers of drinking, yet we all know that it does happen. Most universities do a good job of warning its students of the consequences of participating in activities which involve alcohol consumption. But more often times than not, those warnings are ignored. We all know the facts : binge drinking - defined as five or more drinks in one sitting for men and four drinks or more for women - occurs in 42.7 percent of students, according to a 1998 Harvard University study. So our plea now is to the students to exercise caution while they are drinking. Most importantly, use good judgment. Lawmakers are making regulations only to keep us safe. Think about what you do, and don't go along with the "group-think" mentality. We know TCU students can be responsible. We've just got to prove it.
Introspection key to change After these bands of bigots have murdered their opposition - anyone with pigmented skin, some without, and all of the underprivileged - what new, enlightened society could we expect them to construct? That is the question I would like to pose to the Benjamin Nathaniel Smiths and Buford Furrows who believe they're going to be the catalysts for this society. In fact, they probably fantasize themselves as heroes. For those who don't know, Smith killed two and wounded eight. His victims included Asians, blacks and Jews during the course of his three-day shooting spree throughout the Midwest in July. In his final act of "heroism," he committed suicide rather than be apprehended by the police. Furrow unleashed his fury upon a Los Angeles area Jewish community center earlier this month, wounding five people, including three children. He later murdered a Filipino-American postman who was making his daily rounds. Furrow claimed his rampage was "a wake-up call to America to kill Jews." After these members of white supremacist organizations have slaughtered and slayed their way to the top, what comes next? Would they find cures for AIDS, cancer and other plagues? Would there be an end to crime, illiteracy, illegitimacy, laziness and wickedness? Can they imagine their all-white children frolicking in fields, learning an unbiased history and praying to a benevolent God in the wake of such a massacre? With no one to compete against or complain about, would the paranoia and animosity transform into charity and goodwill? Would this Utopia be free of what ills our society has today? Of course not. At what point can you turn around and say, "Now let there be prosperity and peace," once you start the savagery? What law-abiding citizens could populate such a place? If these are the same people who would watch the innocent die at the hands of such malevolence, who could guarantee the safety and stability of a government? These are the same people that can see children shot at, then post messages like this on the Internet: "Recent events should remind jews [sic] that they are indeed an unwelcome minority in this country and should leave one and all let the killings begin!" But the problem isn't just the Aryan Nation, the World Church of the Creator or the Phineas Priests. It isn't Smith or Furrow or Hitler-revivalists. The problem is us. Far too many of us aren't paying enough attention to these incidents. It's almost as if we prefer to focus on the irrelevant or quickly write these people off as deranged, rather than deal with our society's immediate problems. Apathy and short attention spans are America's greatest problems as we approach the new millennium. If someone aims a gun at children, Jewish or not, then it is everyone's concern. If we continue to allow people's ignorance and hate to go unchecked, then it starts to manifest itself into a hail of bullets. Then we marvel at the intensity and go back to examining President Clinton's sex life. You may think ignorance frees you from your responsibility as a concerned citizen, but it doesn't. We are all culpable when a school full of children has to duck the bullets of a lonely, disturbed skinhead. When we do nothing and say nothing, we give strength and even credence to those madmen who are cowards enough to harm others merely for being different. When searching for the answers to problems, it's usually best to start with yourself.
Joel Anderson is a senior news-editorial journalism major from Missouri City, Texas. Stereotypes steer views Jumping to conclusions leads to inappropriate labeling Already, in this first week of school, I'm hearing the whispers of the ignorant. "Great football team," I overheard, while standing in line at an off-campus location. "Let's just hope that Tomlinson kid can stay out of trouble." The comment came from one of two obviously wealthy, middle-aged white men as they stood nearby chatting away. Neither was very hush-hush, either. It was an unfair comment, to say the least, and certainly inappropriate. "LaDainian will be fine," my mind answered. I don't know why I didn't say it aloud. Maybe because I knew the "gentleman" had already added up the pieces, tallied the score in his mind, then slammed it shut. His probable, very biased factors: young, black skin, star athlete, too much time on his hands; and he could equal potential trouble for the future of TCU's athletics department. Well, go figure. We've seen this one before, right? Wrong! And football's not what I want to talk about, anyway. Let's discuss, for a moment, the idea of prematurely jumping to conclusions. I'm sure by now, most of you are familiar with this summer's incident concerning junior running back LaDainian Tomlinson. Local newspapers reported his arrest and that of former basketball player Lee Nailon - who has been in trouble before - amidst the possible presence of drugs. Police dropped all charges against Tomlinson a few days later. Meanwhile, Tomlinson spent most of the week maintaining that he simply misjudged a few people and that he was cursed to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I've asked around, and he seems to have an impeccable reputation. Assuming for a moment, then, that Tomlinson's reputation has validity, shouldn't we give him the benefit of the doubt? The only difference between Tomlinson and most others, it seems, is that someone chronicled his mistake in print, mostly because his being an athlete generates interest. I mean, to assume that athletes are troublemakers just because any TCU athlete has gotten into trouble before - never mind that he's African-American - tops the proverbial ignorance scale. I don't know Tomlinson personally, and I wasn't there when the incident took place. And that's my point. How can I make a judgment against him, having so little information with which to work? If given the chance, I believe Tomlinson would have come to this realization, as well, and simply found someplace else to be - somewhere Nailon wasn't. As it is, he never got that chance. Now he has to live with it, for the same stereotypical reasons that some presumed him guilty in the first place. Without tangible contradictory evidence, I have to believe Tomlinson is a good kid. A 20-year-old guy who, as he says, momentarily exercised poor judgment. For that matter, Nailon is probably a decent guy as well, merely overwhelmed by having more thrown at him than he could handle. Tomlinson could learn from what happened to Nailon at TCU. And, we could all learn from what happened to Tomlinson. Jumping to conclusions is not a good idea. Meanwhile, this is the last I'll speak of this incident, as Tomlinson would probably like nothing more than to forget it ever happened. Here's hoping you can forget about it, too.
Tim Skaggs is a senior speech communications major from Fort Worth. Letter to the editor New range would give school edge In response to Rusty Simmons' article regarding the construction of the new athletic buildings at TCU, I must inquire as to why nothing is being done for the creation of a new competitive shooting range. The current range is a fine facility, but supposedly it will be eventually demolished to expand the current Tom Brown/Pete Wright Residential Community parking lot. While TCU is investing millions into new athletic buildings and fields, why not incorporate a range into one of these new structures? A new shooting facility underneath a state-of-the-art athletic complex would not only save precious TCU real estate, but also allow Horned Frog rifle competitors the chance to lead other schools in the 21st century and to perhaps win the national competition.
Robert Davis, senior computer science major
The Skiff encourages and welcomes signed letters expressing your views on our news and opinion coverage. Submit letters to the Skiff newsroom in Moudy Building 291S. |
The TCU Daily Skiff © 1998, 1999 Credits |