Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
PO. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@daiIyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Tuesday, May 21,2002
Editor in Chief:
Jessica Blanchard
Managing Editor:
Jeremy Lang
Editorial Editor:
Julie Lauderbaugh
Assistant Editorial Editor:
Jacquelyn Lewis
Editorial
Take some
Help those
in need
board was leaving Gerlinger
JL JL Annex a little after 10 p.m.
Saturday when she saw a woman
lying on the ground near Knight Li
brary and two men standing above
her in what appeared to be an as
sault. One of the men yelled at the
gathering crowd to leave, and stated
that everything was “under con
trol.” Most onlookers obeyed and
began to walk away, but a few
stayed and called the Department of
Public Safety.
Even though DPS arrived and de
termined the event was not an at
tempted assault, it is startling that
most of the witnesses, apparently
not wanting to get involved, walked
away. Perhaps they felt that getting
involved would have seemed nosy,
or maybe they just figured that
someone else in the crowd would
call the police.
Whatever their reasons for walk
ing away, the situation could have
been an actual assault and it would
have been a terrible thing to not of
fer assistance.
It may seem uncomfortable to get
involved, but if a situation appears
suspicious at all, it is important to
not walk away. This doesn’t mean
witnesses to possible crimes must
get involved physically; just calling
DPS is important. Even if the inci
dent doesn’t turn out to be a crime,
reporting it is worth the potential
embarrassment of being wrong, be
cause bringing attention to suspi
cious behavior could possibly save
a fellow human from becoming a
victim of assault, or worse.
Taking action in these situations
is important any time, but especial
ly now, when assaults and attempt
ed assaults have become more fre
quent on campus. It’s true there
hasn’t been an attempted attack re
ported on campus in many weeks,
but that doesn’t mean we should be
reassured or lulled into a false sense
of safety.
Anyone who witnesses a threat
ening situation on campus should
realize it’s important not to just turn
away. It’s imperative to notify DPS
immediately at 346-5444 or 6-6666
from a campus phone. It could save
someone’s life.
initiative:
'member of the editorial
Editorial Policy
This editorial represents the opinion
of rd.
Responses can be sentto
lfeiters#dai!yemerald.com. Letters to
the editor arid goes! commentaries are
encouraged, letters are limited to
250 words and guest commentaries to
550 words. Please include contact
information. The Emerald reserves
the right to edit for space,
grammar and style.
Nothing
is certain but
death in
Texas
n May 8, two men were executed for
raping a woman in Saudi Arabia. The
rapists were beheaded in public with
a sword, as is the Saudi custom. They were
the 12th and 13th individuals to lay their
heads on the chopping block so far this year.
The justice system in Texas is falling be
hind. They’ve only killed 11 people so far this
year. Last year the number executed reached
only a paltry 17. The Saudis whacked 81 in
comparison. But fear not! Tis an election
year. Gov. Rick Perry, Dubya’s former lieu
tenant, is trying hard to set things right. Seven
men are set to die this month alone. Seven
more will feel that final prick of the needle by
the end of July.
An explanation for the comparatively tiny
number killed last year on death row, as cited
in a New York Times article, is the “rhythms
of the appeals process. ” It seems the Texas
Court of Criminal Appeals stayed a “handful”
of cases last year while considering whether
or not inmates have the right to “competent
council” during habeas corpus appeals. They
decided that, while defendants have the right
to a lawyer, they don’t necessarily have the
right to a competent one. So the slaughter
house, err, death row facility in Livingston
(right next to the soccer fields where I used to
play away games) is chugging along at full
speed once again.
So, by the end of July, 25 men will have
died in Livingston. That’s 25 men in a little
over half a year. Only 17 died during the
whole of 2001. The difference here is a little
more than a “handful.” During 2000, Dubya’s
last year in office, 40 people got the needle.
The next most execu
tion-happy state was Ok
lahoma, with 11.
The only thing I can
determine from this gob
of information is that
Texans want a hard
assed mo-fo in the gov
ernor’s mansion, and,
so far, Perry is coming
across as soft on crime.
The solution is obvious,
and it appears to have
Columnist already been set
- in motion.
Here’s where the moral dilemma arises for
me. I don’t have a problem killing people who
deserve killing. The opening paragraph of
fends me not in the slightest. The Saudi system
of beheading is quick, efficient and cheap,
three things the American criminal justice sys
tem most certainly is not. Furthermore, rape is
a crime so base that any perpetrators, in my
opinion, forfeit their humanity and the rights
that go with it.
No, my problem is the fact that the number of
people being executed in Texas magically goes
up in an election year. Surely crime didn’t actu
ally go up, at least not in those proportions.
Criminals don’t change their behavior based
oinve Ddyy» uiicidiu
on who’s governor. No, there must have been a
conscious decision within the administration
to step up the rate of execution, to appear
tough like George. Texans like toughness.
And now for my tirade. No one’s life
should depend on the whims of a politician,
especially not a Republican one. While some
crimes are definitely worth dying for, like
forced child-molestation or murder in some
especially cruel or unusual way, giving the
government the power to kill its own citizens
is just plain irresponsible on the part of the
public. These people are influenced by so
many factors not related to the good of the
community (or state or nation, as the case
may be) that there is no way they should ever
be entrusted with such a high power. The
very fact that the rate of executions fluctuates
depending on the political climate is testa
ment to this.
I’ll leave you with one last factoid. Gov.
Anne Richards, Perry’s and Bush’s democrat
ic predecessor (and a grand old lady), signed
off on only three executions in 1996. That
was her election year. In 1997, the number of
dead reached 37.
Columnist Aaron Rorickcan be reached
ataaronrorick@dailyemerald.com. His opinions
do not necessarily reflect those of the Emerald.
Letters to the editor
Kulongoski can
get the job done
There are a number of candidates run
ning for governor, but Ted Kulongoski is the
most qualified for the job. He is endorsed
by many of the leading Democrats across
the state, and has a common-sense plan for
Oregon’s recovery.
Kulongoski can get the job done in Salem.
He has served the state well as a legislator, at
torney general and an Oregon Supreme Court
justice. In addition, he has been endorsed by
Oregon’s past three governors.
Former Governor Neil Goldschmidt says,
“Ted can persuade people to work together
when nobody else thinks it can be done.” Ku
longoski has the character attributes neces
sary to succeed as governor. He is willing to
work with the legislature in order to avoid po
litical gridlock and make sure that substantive
work is getting done for the people of Oregon.
A wide variety of groups and newspapers
have endorsed Kulongoski, including the
Sierra Club, Oregon AFL-CIO, The Oregon
ian, The Salem Statesman-Journal and
many others.
Kulongoski is the only candidate who has
the common sense to get things done, and do
them right. He has an extensive plan to cut
down government bureaucracy in the area of
education, to make sure more money is given
to classrooms and teachers. This plan alone is
estimated to generate an additional $80 mil
lion for school funding.
Kulongoski is willing to find a long-term so
lution to solve Oregon’s budget problems. He is
by far the most qualified candidate for the job. I
encourage you to vote for Ted Kulongoski.
Eric Bailey
junior
planning, public policy
and management
Wash your laundry — vote!
Maybe you vote as often as you do your
laundry — not as often as you should. To
day’s college students hold within their grasp
a phenomenal power — the power to vote.
As a student, I know too many other stu
dents who choose to forgo empowerment by
not voting. Many college students are neglect
ing to participate in our democracy. A wash
ing machine without quarters will not work,
just as a democracy without voters will not
work. Voting is the greatest form of interest ar
ticulation, one which is very easy and afford
able for all college students.
Voting is an investment in the future of not
only our schools, but our community, state and
nation as well. The 2002 Oregon Primaries will
come to a fast close on Tuesday, and you will
have missed out on the opportunity of affect
ing Oregon’s future political makeup.
Until college students put forth the effort to
show their concern for decisions that could
have tremendous effects on higher education
and their quality of life, elected officials will
continue to feel little obligation to listen to
college students on other important issues.
Today is laundry day — it is time to vote!
Mena Ravassipour
freshman
• -.- * pre-rbusiness^
Stop with the false charity
Does the mascot resolution really help
American Indians? One view claims that
passing the resolution will help show cour
tesy toward American Indians. The other
view claims that not passing the resolution
will help honor American Indians
(“Point/Counterpoint,” ODE, May 8). Both
views of helping American Indians amount to
nothing more than false charity.
False charity is an attempt to help with
out truly changing the unjust social order
that perpetuates helplessness. In this case,
students have attempted to help American
Indians by supporting or not supporting the
mascot resolution.
The end result is that these same students
who claim to help American Indians instead
maintain helplessness, because the passing or
not passing of the mascot resolution does
nothing to change death, despair and poverty
in American Indian communities.
False charity means doing nothing substan
tive, which is the foundation of the mascot
resolution. Courtesy will not help American
Indians pay for college; honor will not im
prove the substandard living conditions of
American Indian reservations. Both propo
nents of helping American Indians do noth
ing to end the unjust social order that oppress
American Indians.
Let us stop pretending that supporting or
not supporting the mascot resolution will
help American Indians. Enough with the
false charity.
* M
Javier Ayala
Eugene ,