Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
Email: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dcdlyemerald.com
Tuesday, May 6,2003
--Oregon Daily Emerald
Commentary
Editor in Chief:
Michael J. Kleckner
Managing Editor:
Jessica Richelderfer
Editorial Page Assistant:
Salena De La Cruz
Editorial
Forshame:
Why did it
take 10 years
to get VINE?
In late April, Lane County gave crime victims
a new tool for staying safe. The VINE system,
or Victim Information and Notification Every
day, is a phone network that connects victims
in communities throughout the United States
to vital inmate information, such as charges,
bail, location, transfers, release dates, court
dates and more.
VINE was created in 1993, in response to
the murder of Mary F. Byron, a Louisville, Ky.,
woman who was lulled by her ex-boyfriend.
He had been arrested a month earlier for kid
napping and raping Byron, but she wasn’t told
when he was released. A few days after his re
lease, he shot and killed her.
The VINE system is a fantastic tool for sur
vivors of domestic violence, and all crime vic
tims, to stay informed and safe during the ad
judication process. Many victims can reap the
benefits of VINE, but none more so than sur
vivors of domestic violence, who regularly are
re-assaulted by their attackers. VINE was
brought to Oregon in February 1992, and we
applaud Lane County for putting the system
in action to protect people locally.
The only question is, what took so long?
According to the Lane County Sheriffs Of
fice, VINE took longer to implement here be
cause it operates through the county’s jail
management system, which was being up
graded at the time VINE first came on board.
Our problem isn’t with Lane County,
though. It’s completely rational that a new
system without centralized direction would
be implemented in a haphazard fashion
across the country.
And currently, it is haphazard: Some 40
states and 900 communities across the United
States and Canada are using VINE. That leaves
a lot of communities — and a lot of victims of
domestic violence — without any notification
system.
How many women have to be murdered by
their partners or ex-partners before America
takes this issue seriously? Are women’s lives
really just not that important to politicians?
It’s interesting to note that in late Febru
ary, the Transportation Security Administra
tion awarded its first contract, worth $12.8
million, to begin implementing the Comput
er-Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System
II. This system, which supposedly will magi
cally screen out terrorists as they attempt to
enter airports, was authorized by Congress
after the Sept. 11,2001, attacks.
In other words, it only takes two years to
implement a program that Congress cares
about. It could have implemented VINE that
quickly, but instead, it has taken 10 years and
everyone still isn’t hooked up.
In those 10 years, according to Department
of Justice statistics, approximately 13,000
women have been killed by their intimate
partners. Forshame.
Editorial policy
This editorial represents the
opinion of the Emerald editorial
board. Responses can be sent
to letters@dailyemeraid.com.
Letters to the editor and guest
commentaries are encouraged.
Letters are limited to 250 words
and guest commentaries to 550
words.
Steve Baggs Emerald
Countdown to graduation
By the grace of God, I graduate in June.
Although I am ecstatic about finally having
a degree and having had some excellent ex
periences along the way, I find myself prac
tically jumping out of my skin to get out of
here. Now that the glorious day of com
mencement is only a few weeks away, I
thought it might be therapeutic to compile
my gripes into one comprehensive, efficient
invective instead of
assailing my friends
with intermittent
tirades for the next
39 days. I hope you
find it cathartic, too.
10. Nontraditional
students.
By “nontradition
al,” I mean old. Hey Qj p(j||gf
— iust because J
you’ve been treading holds barred
the earth longer than
the rest of us com
bined doesn’t mean
you have the right to commandeer the
class with your relentless stupid questions.
I know you haven’t been in school for a
while, but try to shake off the rust before
you get here, capiche? And please, no
more anecdotal wisdom! You remember
when you thought old people were wet
blankets? Guess what — now you’re the
wet blanket!
9. People who park incorrectly.
Yes, there is a wrong way to park. And
that would be to leave half a car-length be
hind you and half a car-length in front. If
there are tickets for parking in the wrong
place, why aren’t there tickets for this?
8. People who say “like.”
Like, we’re in college now, so, like, learn
how to talk, ‘kay?
7. Bicyclists.
In a way, I’m sort of grateful that be
cause of these people, my children will
Jj^ve slightly less carbon pionoxide to
choke on until the mass extinction we’re
causing takes out all complex life. But that
doesn’t mean they’re so high and mighty
that they can ignore the rules of the road.
6. The textbook scam.
New editions every year, vacuum-sealed
editions that can’t be returned if opened,
course packets that cost #4 to produce but
#54 to buy because of copyrights — blah,
blah, blah. It all makes me want to puke.
5. Homeless people.
Don’t get squeamish now, because this is
an equal opportunity diatribe. I know that I
am supposed to feel sorry for the downtrod
den, but when I can’t go three hours without
someone asking me for money, my patience
wears thin.
Yeah, they could be victims of the system
— but they could also be entitled, no-good
punks who had their chances but opted to
pilfer from their mothers’ purses to get
drunk under an overpass instead and are
now merely suffering the consequences of
their decisions. Not everyone who is in a
tight spot doesn’t deserve it.
4. Salespeople.
Why is it considered appropriate for a bunch
of charlatans to clog campus with their booths
full of second-rate shit? Does anybody actually
apply for credit cards to get those chintzy, in
sulting T-shirts and generic sunglasses? “Hey,
look at me, I’m wearing a shirt that promotes
smoking weed — I’m subversive! Never mind
that a mega-corporation used it to lure me into
perpetual financial slavery! ”
3. Stupid people.
Don’t get me wrong — I don’t question
stupid people’s right to exist; without them,
the world would be much less interesting.
But why do they have to go to college? I read
somewhere not too long ago that some legal
firms now have to teach recent law school
graduates how to write things like simple in
ternal memos. Damn it, if you can’t write a
memo, how did you graduate high school,
let alone law school?
2. Girls who wear makeup at the rec center.
Need I elaborate?
1. Jerk professors.
What else could be No. 1? Any rant
about college has to end here. I’d have
thought that the stereotype of the
pompous, didactic, self-obsessed professor
was prevalent enough that aspiring aca
demics would avoid falling into it at all
costs. Not so. This one is for every student
who has been ignored, shut down, openly
derided or otherwise frustrated for not
bending over backward to congratulate a
professor for his or her inestimable genius
— in other words, all of us.
Contact the columnist
at djfuller@dailyemerald.com. His opinions do not
necessarily represent those of the Emerald.
Letter to the editor
‘Pro-life’ pictures show
‘crimes’ of abortion
Many people’s responses to the Sur
vivor’s pro-life demonstration on April
30 that depicted with pictures of
aborted fetuses were, “Eww,” “gross”
and “I don’t want to look at that.”
It was gross and disgusting — be
cause abortion is a gross, disgusting,
horrible thing. The abortion debate
comes down to this — is the fetus a
baby? No pro-life activist denies a
woman’s control over her body, and
no pro-choice activist contends that
said control trumps a human life.
The solution is not the pro-choice
activists’ answer — reduce those mil
lions of babies to statistics and scien
tific, impersonal words. The solution is
not to hide the pictures. The solution
-is to the-end the crimes. «»»*•••*«
Not a baby? Take a good, long look
at those pictures, and then come back
and tell me they are not babies. The
emotional response to those pictures
is a deep instinctual recognition of
those babies’ humanity. The moment
you lose that response is the moment
you lose your own humanity.
And women, please look at those
pictures before you choose to have an
abortion. Too many don’t, and then
see them after it is done. The Sur
vivors are full of these women, who
have been deceived by the impersonal
portrayal of a growing baby. That, my
friends, is a tragedy. Both to the moth
er, who realizes too late the humanity
of her baby, and to the baby, who de
serves the shot at life that is taken
from him or her.
Dan Johnson
sophomore
.philosophy - *
Abortion language policy
in our quest to provide as much opportunity as
possible for fair and equitable discourse, the
Emerald has chosen the following policy In
regard to the terms used in the abortion
debate:
In Emerald news stories, editorials and
columns, we will abide by The Associated
Press standards, which use the adjectives
"anti-abortion”instead of “pro-life" and
“abortion rights" instead of “pro-choice."
The Emerald regrets that these terms were not
used correctly in the May 1 article “Anti
abortion group repulses students," but they
will be adhered to in the future.
However, in the interest of open dialogue,
letter to the editor and guest commentary
writers may use the terms they wish for their
arguments. As with any language, if it is
libelous or a personal attack, the Emerald
reserves the right to edit the submission.