Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 2, 1998)
CSV TACTICS VS S*" '' Vwjpi Is** Ewsat ?■«*- *£ sor.wa ■fj£)rrvfA iwtfui ,j®i 'uywit '.rapm JT<K WUNS *>w* uursjnit sou -oos EDITOR IN CHIEF Sarafi Kidder EDITORIAL EDITOR Mfce Schmierbach NIGHT EDITOR Mfce Schmierbach _Ai EMEBALB EDITORIAL Proposals to close the downtown mall at night and exclude those cited for crimes would only move troubled youth elsewhere And it continues. Most University students put their four or five years in at the school, pack their belongings and abandon Eugene in a hurry. Ongoing trends in l'X>aJ government and community affairs tend to evepe their notice. This is too bad because recent events in Eugene could stand vims scrutiny from the University community. Much of Eugene seems determined to protect business own ers; perhaps a more locally active campus could add some perspective. Therefore, once again, we plunge into the increasingly frustrating muddle that is local crime control. Once again, we lament the loss of civil liberties and the discrimi nation against groups of people taking place in Eugene. And once again, we sus pect City Council members will eventually vote with their wallets and not their brains, passing yet another pro-business policy at the cost of community cohesive ness The latest attack on non-consumers is being leveled at the youth who frequent the Downtown Mall. According to a story in Monday's Register-Guard, two recent pro posals have surfaced that deal with a per ceived crime problem in the mall area. One proposal would ban anyone con victed of a crime on the mall from return ing for 60 days. The other would bar ac cess to the mall for everyone between 1 a.ra. and 6 a.m. Reports about rising crime rales on the mall are undoubtedly based on a real phe nomenon. While even shop owners con ceded the threat from violent crime has been blown up by local media, the Guard story documents numerous occurrences of vandalism and other property crimes. The problem is that the proposals aren't likely to solve such crimes at a community wide level. Sure, banning “troublemakers” will reduce trouble in the mall, but the youth at which ordinances are aimed will simply move to another area of town. Unless efforts are made to combat some of the causes of vagrancy and crime, a pat tern of moving problems will emerge in the community. Many of the people causing problems in the mall have already moved off 13th Avenue after the ban on dogs and skateboards was passed. Now the youth will simply move some where else, where a new set of restrictive ordinances will undoubtedly be passed. Eventually, the undesirables of Eugene will end up hanging out someplace where the local community doesn’t have the political clout to demand action against crime. And it will continue. Meanwhile, back at the mall, violent crime won’t go away. Most of it isn’t caused by the youth at which the pro posed ordinances are aimed. Moreover, violent crime carries its own kind of ex clusion: jail. 'Hie shop owners on the mall aren’t real ly looking for an end to crime. They’re hop ing the city will help their profit margin. Street kids don’t buy enough goods to justi fy tolerating their presence. Existing ordi nances, such as the one banning “sports” on the mall, already prove that the business owners are more concerned about their storefront image and the flow of consumer traffic than they are about the constitution ally guaranteed right to assemble. According to the ACLU, the new propos al would impede upon another right: due process. Because the exclusion would take place independent of any judicial decree, it could constitute double jeopardy. Addi tionally, it would grant police and even mall security guards the power to punish and enfcTfcethat punishment, rather than leaving it in the hands of the judiciary where it belongs. Particularly troublesome is the fact that the current exclusion proposal would en force the ban from the moment a citation is issued, regardless of the eventual outcome of a trial or other court proceeding. So much for the presumption of innocence. If the proposals were effective, there would at least be something to weigh against the loss of civil rights. As it stands now, however, both proposals make business owners feel better without alleviating crime in Eugene and at the cost of civil rights. Only in the minds of local business own ers does this justify the action. One mer chant was quoted in the Guard story as saying, “It blows me away when people bitch and moan about individuals' rights when these kids are having a dramatic ef fect on the people here.” That’s the new values equation of the 1990s: Rights are all well and good until they get in the way of making money. Un fortunately, the only voices the City Coun cil has been listening to are those of busi ness owners making precisely that pitch. Perhaps if college students and other mem bers of the community actively argue that rights still mean something, that will change. Otherwise, Eugene will see a further de cline in community cohesion and personal rights. And it will continue. Ibis editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald editorial Itoard Responses may be setil to otleQoregoti.uoref>on edit LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Support for OSPIRG This is a letter of support for the work that OSPIRG does on this campus and in the commu nity. OSPIRG involves students in socially valuable activities. These activities focus on issues from pesticide poisoning of the Willamette River to hunger and homelessness, and from recy cling to the protection of threat ened species. Their activities are not just educational but involve social service and action such as volunteering at local shelters and conducting canned-food drives. This past year OSPIRG volunteers collected signatures on a petition that they presented to Gov. Kitzhaber asking for right-to-know legislation with regards to the pesticides that routinely are sprayed on our food, forests, schoolyards and other areas. OSPIRG volunteers are part of the thousand points of light that are needed in a soci ety with an inadequate safety net for people, wildlife and the envi ronment. It is one way that stu dents gain experience in becom ing active citizens. Bob O'Brien Professor, sociology Vote in elections It is a sad state of affairs when only 8 percent of the student body turns out for elections. This is the number from last year and it would be a tragedy if it hap pened again. That is why a group of people called the Progressive Slate are currently working to get students more involved in cam pus. I am a member of the slate and am running for Student Sen ate seat No. 8, but I am most con cerned about more pressing is sues on this campus than my own campaign. I feel that if we as students fail to use our voice giv en to us in the form of votes in re gards to student-run programs and student-controlled fees, then we will be in grave danger of los ing what little say in this campus we have. Maybe you won’t get who you want in office, but if you vote anyway, you are saying to the ad ministration and other interest groups that “Hey! I’m paying at tention.” This gives more power to elected representatives to make positive and influential change within this institution. Changes such as increased awareness, especially for sexual assault survivors, concerns in Mac Court, protection of the Riverfront Research Park and, most important of all, people who are determined to stop the rising costs of tuition by pressur ing the state Legislature to spend more money on students and less money in the form of corporate tax breaks. Is this possible? Hell yeah! It is if we have an active, progressive student government. The ball is in your court: Use your vote, use your rights. Vote Progressive. Spencer Hamlin Candidate, Student Senate seat No. 8
