Newsroom: (541) 346-5511 Room 300, Erb Memorial Union PO. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403 E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com Online Edition: www.dailyemerald.com Editor in Chief: Jessica Blanchard Managing Editor: Michael J. Kleckher Editorial Editor: Julie Lauderbaugh Assistant Editorial Editor: Jacquelyn Lewis Friday, November 16,2001 Editorial Eight young men Yesterday the papers car ried a story about eight young men in New York who, as conscientious objectors to war, received a sentence of a year and a day in federal prison because they refused to register for the draft. Picture the crowded court room scene: eight tense featured University of Oregon 125th ANNIVERSARY Originally published on Nov. 16,1940 ineoiogians and numer ous grave faced spec tators watching the show. The judge asks the eight if they would like to reconsider and reg ister “ at this last minute. ” Can they do it? Can they aban don their principles? Can they al low themselves to be beaten into submission? The answer, of course, is no. The eight young men hold, in principle, that a soldier’s first duty is not to lay down his life for his country, but rather to be pre pared to murder other young I men. They believe that war and | mass slaughter are evil, and that | two wrongs can never make a right. Who is there to say that the young men’s beliefs are wrong? Who is there that would enjoy wantonly annihilating his fellow creature? And yet in our country we be lieve that the whole is only as strong as its parts. We also be lieve that one unit takes its strength from the strength of the whole. Thousands of other young men who registered for the draft felt repulsed at the thought of murder, the soldier’s business. But weak individually, perhaps, they felt that in a united country there is strength. The significance of this clash of wills and beliefs seems to be a revelation of a degree of toler ance in our national spirit. We are still free people. Eight young men who violently disagree with the mob rule are permitted to de fend themselves. Those who dis agree with the young men’s ac tion can still sympathize with the young men’s principles. Consider what would happen to the eight young men in a totali tarian world. Editor’s note: This editorial was taken from the Nov. 16, 1940, edition of the Oregon Daily Emerald. Letters to the editor Free speech isn’t a shield The peace activists who hold American policies and culture re sponsible for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks air their opinions as free citizens of the United States — writing, speaking and protesting under the protection of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. In his letter to the editor “Patri otism means respecting dissent” (ODE, 11/2), Garger accuses me of wanting to deny these peace ac tivists their freedom of speech when I criticized their opinions in my letter to the editor (“Peace ac tivists are hypocrites,” ODE, 10/22). This is undiluted absurdity. Us ing the same liberty guaranteed by the First Amendment, I simply conveyed my personal judgment that these peace activists are hyp ocritical and that their views are outrageous and indefensible. - Suppressing people's freedom of speech should not be confused with discounting foolish opin ions. While I may be disgusted by these peace activists' repellent views, I also defend their freedom to state them because the First Amendment is a bedrock of American liberty. The First Amendment is not, however, a shield against denunciation- of people who express unpopular or misguided points of view. Sean Walston graduate student physics ‘United We Stand’ oversimplifies issue On Nov. 5, the United States Postal Service issued a stamp with an American flag along with the phrase “United We Stand” across the bottom. However appropriate this initially seems, the phrase has taken on a damaging, polarizing character. To suggest all U.S. citizens sup port the Bush administration’s cur rent policy in Afghanistan stifles public debate, polarizing our coun try into a “with us or against us” mentality. A united course of ac tion implies those who sway from popular opinion aren’t only un sympathetic to victims, but “un American.” Censoring discourse, especially at a time when it’s most needed, is to silence the voice of democracy. During the Vietnam War, we suffered a similar split, where you were either a “warmonger” or a pacifist. The Vietnam War is still fresh in the minds of those who fought the military war and the so cial and political war at home. The political and military lessons are still humbling influences in our foreign policy. Lessons of the Vietnam War,. however, tend to be forgotten, sub stituted by an easier-to-swallow version of war, where good versus evil is clearly defined and public support is unanimous. This pic ture, painted after World War H, led us down the long, bloody road to Vietnam. History may repeat itself if we forget lessons of the past. As the USPS issues the new stamp, Americans should consid er implications of such a limiting statement in a country that prides itself on tolerance and acceptance, and disassociate patriotism with unquestioned allegiance. Levi Strom junior political science, sociology People have insurance rights After the grief following a disas ter comes another disaster—the re ality of insurance claims and a pub lic left in the lurch. The public deserves access to in formation about their fundamental insurance claim rights and the rules that govern insurance compa ny behavior, but policyholders will demand that information only if told they have the right to it. Ask yourself if you have been provided with such information, and then imagine having to file claims after a disaster without it. Tony Braga Fall River, Mass Stupid driver, sudden stop ■ spend large portions of my life driving up and down Interstate 5 in order to visit my husband, who lives in Seattle. As a driver and a graduate student in physics, I am struck that my fel low drivers are often quite ignorant about basic physics concepts such as velocity, deceleration (how fast something is slowing down), slid ing and momentum. I play a game with myself: Is the person in that car up there weav ing back and forth, going way too fast and tailgating because they are a) asleep at the wheel, b) stoned, c) a jerk or d) not too bright'? There are, of course, other options. The driver could be not paying atten tion, distracted or ignorant about the physics of driving. I think a little attention to physics would improve the driv ing of most people. So, here are two examples of scary things I have observed. • Tailgating: When someone follows so closely behind another car that if the other car brakes sud denly, the reaction time of the fol lowing driver is not swift enough to brake completely before run ning into the lead car. Our reac tion time is basically constant, no matter how fast we are traveling. Recently I was driving down Guest Commentary Sasha Tavenner Kruger 18th Avenue with wet roads and heavy traffic and a tailgater right behind me. A stoplight turned yel low, I braked, and the car behind me braked so hard that I couldn't see the headlights in my rearview mirror except while the car was still bouncing up and down from the sudden stop. If you run into a heavy, stopped vehicle your car will stop before you do. Your whole body will continue moving at 30 mph until parts of it are stopped individually: your torso by your seatbelt and your head by your neck. This is why neck in juries occur in this situation. You have momentum, and your car has momentum. Momentum is mass times veloc ity; since you mass'about 10 per cent of your car's mass, your car has the greater momentum. Things with momentum which are suddenly stopped have to transfer their momentum. For in elastic collisions, some can be lost as heat and crumpling of the car body itself. Or, the momentum can be transferred to people in the car (this is how people get thrown through the windshield). • Sliding without rolling: It is winter and has recently rained. Overnight the temperature has dropped and the bridges (being in contact with more air than ground, and the air temperature being lower than the ground tem perature) are a little icy. I'm near Centralia, Wash., and there is a lit tle slowdown half a mile ahead. The car ahead of me hits an over pass going about 70 mph and while on the bridge tries to brake in anticipation of the slowdown. The car begins to turn sideways while not slowing down. The driver panics and hits the brakes hard and turns the steering wheel too much. He gets off the ice and because he has overcorrected with the steering wheel manages to drive off the road and off the shoulder and only barely suc ceeds in driving back onto the shoulder without sliding down the bank on the side of the road. Moral of the story? Don't over correct your steering and don't hit the brakes hard while in puddles or on ice. Drive safe, folks! Sasha Tavenner Kruger is a graduate teaching fellow in the physics department. Peter Utsey Emerald FR.€t>, w«''*r cunttlC ooK wip &g-r you tws Ft-Atf, wc Act 6or To STICK Yoo K^oW,"