Judgment based on hate
ÔThought PoliceÕ cannot decide guilty verdict

If you have read George Orwell’s “1984”, you’ve heard of Big Brother and the “thought police” who monitor citizens at all times and punish them for any actions and thoughts that go against what the system has ordained. Although the concept of a real “1984” world seems too far-fetched to believe, it is already becoming a reality in Canada and even in America.

Hate crimes, according to the FBI, are crimes committed that “manifest prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation or ethnicity.” The Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999 classifies them as crimes against “the actual or perceived religion, gender, sexual orientation or disability of a person.”

That means if you commit a violent crime against an individual and the government believes that you committed the crime because you perceived the person was gay, depending on the severity of the crime, they could tack on an extra five years or more to what your sentence would have been.

It makes no sense to me that identical crimes can be weighed differently depending on who the victim is; as if one victim is worth more than the other depending on the mental state of the perpetrator of the crime.
Why are they called hate crimes anyway, as if regular crimes were committed out of love. If I am killed because I am black is it any more of a loss than if I am killed because I angered someone the other day? Either way I would be dead. The whole idea that a person’s thoughts at the time of the crime make the crime worse is crazy. I believe that legislation that endorses such idiocy is totally anti-constitutional.

As Kelly Sanders of the National Conference of State Legislatures said, “the law historically has gone against punishing people for their thoughts, and that is what hate-crime laws do ... you have to make sure when you’re drafting legislation that you’re not punishing people for their thoughts. And that’s a very difficult thing, because that’s what it is.”

And if you think that is bad, in Canada hate crimes not only refer to violence but also speech and writing that might possibly incite violence or genocide. That’s crazy, too. Almost anything can incite hate and violence. My opinion about life or politics or religion may be so offensive to someone else that they feel like killing me. Does that mean that I don’t have a right to speak my opinion?

In Canada, artists like Eminem would most likely be in prison. Not that I agree with the message of his music, but free speech is something that should be enjoyed by every human being.

Although hate crime laws are not yet as oppressive in America as they are in Canada or other countries around the world, they are steadily progressing in a negative fashion. It is evident to me that if we continue to progress in the manner that we are now, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights will not last much longer.
The sad thing in this country is that too many citizens blindly support hate crime legislation not knowing that they are supporting the eventual extermination of their own rights.

But who needs rights anyway? We’ve always got Big Brother!

John Sargent is a freshman computer science major.
He can be reached at (j.w.sargent@ student.tcu.edu).

Campus Waste
Water conservation should be priority

Look around you. Among the straw colored lawns and withered hedges that have become a trademark of North Texas stands an oasis — TCU. With its lush green grass and blooming flowers, TCU’s beautiful grounds are incomparable.

But it hasn’t come for free.

Every day, TCU uses an estimated 1.2 million gallons of water, which is dispersed through over 9,000 sprinkler heads, to keep our campus green. These sprinkler heads shoot up every day, sometimes hitting students and sidewalks more than the lawn.

Tuesday marked the 67th day without measurable rain at DFW International Airport and the 44th day of Texas temperatures hitting over the 100-degree mark. Cities throughout Tarrant and Dallas counties have been placed under water restrictions.

Fort Worth has not been placed on the water restriction list — yet. But if the stretch of rainless days continues, restrictions may come to our city as early as November.

Tarrant Regional Water District is encouraging, but not demanding, conservation from Fort Worth.
Meanwhile, TCU continues dousing its already luxuriant lawn. TCU is under no obligation to limit its water usage. But area lakes are going dry. It may not be a problem now, but it will be one come November.

Robert Sulak, director of landscaping and grounds, said sprinklers run even during the hottest times of the day because TCU’s water system is not sufficient to run all the sprinklers at once overnight.

Here is our suggestion: sacrifice a little green and give way to some brown.

Water at night, even if it means not all of the grounds can be watered at once. With alternating schedules, all the grounds will be cared for, but water can be saved.

Studies have begun to show that “graduate driver” programs decrease the rate of fatal teenage car-wrecks in the 31 states that have adopted them. Currently, Texas is considering a similar program that prevents teenage drivers from gaining a full license prior to the completion of two driving levels.

In order to achieve driver status, teenagers must first complete a “learner’s period” that would require an adult to be present in the car at all times. They must then go through an “intermediate period” that would require an adult to be present in the car during all so-called high-risk driving, including but not limited to, night driving and driving with other passengers in the car.

Upon the completion of these two levels (the length of time has not been determined), a teenager would then “graduate” to a full license governed only by driving laws and household rules.

When I read this, I had to seriously wonder: Should we be calling the government “dad?.”

I mean, just how involved in our personal decisions will we allow the government to become? To some degree, of course, the government must be allowed to govern, but is it right to let it extend its hands into our personal decisions?

Granted, the rate of fatal crashes is on the rise in Texas, whereas the rate has decreased in most other states. However, this fatality rate is not limited to teenage accidents. Placing strict laws to limit teenage drivers, therefore, is simply a shallow solution to a deeper problem.

Controlling teenage driving rules is a parental responsibility. Households must be allowed to set rules according to each individual’s needs or abilities. The laws under consideration by Texas may be reasonable if every teenager were in the habit of drinking and driving, but this is not the case.

There is, in fact, a large portion of the teenage population capable of acting wisely. Such baby-sitting would hinder the responsible minors whose abilities to commute to work, school or other social functions would be limited.

Meanwhile, those teenagers who fail to flinch in the face of drinking laws would not be affected by these driving laws. “Graduate driving” would simply become, for them, another reason to get a fake ID.
The solution, therefore, can’t be a ridiculous blanket rule.

What it all comes down to is the ability to make personal choices, both on the parts of parents and teenagers. Each party must be willing to act responsibly and in the best manner for the situation. Parents must be able to gauge their children’s driving ability and maturity, and teenagers must be able to see the consequences of irresponsible choices and recognize alternatives.

If parents doubt their teenager’s ability to drive as an adult, they should choose to withhold a license until he or she becomes mature enough to handle it. Unless the government has children of its own to look after, it should leave parents to do their parenting.

The government must learn to recognize that certain ground is private and must be dealt with inside family lines. Teenagers must not be dealt with as a singular personalities but as individuals, and that can only be done through family rule.

Right now, all I can think is: “Am I ever glad I got my license before all of this crap came into play.”

Miranda Nesler is a freshman English major from Houston.
She can be reached at (m.g.nesler@student.tcu.edu).