Situation
justifies
police
shooting
As a former police officer, I was
dismayed after reading Jan Tobias
Montry's commentary on July 1 ("A
deadly mistake," ODE) criticizing
Portland police officer Scott McCol
lister's fatal shooting of Kendra
James. Montry seemed to portray
police officers as gun-slinging rene
gades who
shoot un- 1 I m™* miym
armed civil- i-P ill 53 8
ians at their COMMENTARY
leisure. He __
character
ized McCollister's actions as "inept,"
and went so far as to imply the inci
dent was a "police execution."
To the contrary, it appears the
shooting was not only lawful, but
fully justified. In fact, a grand jury
on May 19 unanimously cleared the
officer of any wrongdoing, and al
though McCollister remains on
administrative leave, his actions
were entirely reasonable under
Oregon law.
Police procedure and state law au
thorize officers to use deadly force to
protect themselves from what they
reasonably believe to be an immedi
ate threat of death or serious physical
injury. In this case, James climbed
into the driver's seat of the car, put it
in gear, continually ignored directions
to turn off the engine and attempted
to drive away with McCollister hang
ing partially outside the car. McCollis
ter truly and reasonably believed that
his actions were necessary. He
thought he might have been killed, or
at least dragged down the street and
critically injured.
It is easy to second-guess the deci
sions made by officers in such situa
tions. But it is important to recognize
that officers have the right to use
deadly force when reasonably neces
sary to prevent serious harm to
themselves or others. Unfortunately,
Montry's criticism was misguided
and does a disservice to the thou
sands of police officers who risk their
lives protecting the safety and welfare
of the public everyday.
Andre Ahuna is a student
at the School of Law.
Today's crossword solution
Commentary
Illegal aliens would up tuition cost
I would like to respond to the editorial "SB 10
Will Help Needy Students" (ODE, July 1). It blows
me away that this is even under consideration and
is the Emerald's stance, though it is par for the edi
torial board's overt political beliefs.
GUEST
COMMENTARY
the cost of higher education. It is in this case.
Why incur more cost?
You may respond that this will increase diversity
and that is why the cost is worth it. I must tell you
that I am sick of this paradigm that the color of
one's skin is what makes diversity. It is one's
thoughts and beliefs, no matter what the color of
their skin. Besides that, we should realize that we
are already, as an institution, more diverse (in eth
nicity) than the state of Oregon.
First, if this is going to
cost us money, why do
it? I don't care if the Leg
islature has never
demonstrated care for
Furthermore, these people are illegal. Their pres
ence in this state or any other is against the law. Re
gardless of one's feeling on immigration, as of
now, that is the law. If you don't like it, fix that law,
do not make a loophole. Also, in-state versus out
of-state tuition is based on the premise that an in
state person is contributing funding through tax
es. If you are illegal you cannot legally work or own
property, thus you are not paying taxes. Also, the
three other states mentioned that have this system
all border foreign countries. There is the potential
that the people attending schools near the border
are crossing the border to attend those schools.
That is not the case in Oregon. Even if that isn't
likely, illegal residents in Oregon are several hun
dred miles from a border. They are here to take ad
vantage of our country. I don't mean that in a
mean way, though "taking advantage" often
sounds that way.
Also, the argument that Oregon will have a
more highly educated population is even suspect.
We very much lack industry and as such it is more
worthwhile to go to another state after graduation.
Thus we are helping to provide other states with an
educated work force.
Lastly I am disappointed with ASUO and OSA
for taking on this cause. I am a student: Fight for
my rights, that is what 1 pay you for. Why don't you
go fight to expand the university system employee
tuition discount to the whole education system. Or
at least don't fight to increase costs that will be felt
by students.
I'm happy to give them in-state tuition if they
become legal residents. They illegally came here
because they felt that, even as an illegal alien, they
would have better opportunities than in their own
country. They have stayed because they do have
better opportunity. Leave it at that. If they want
more, become legal.
Gregory McNeill is a senior majoring in political
science.
Locals must eye research development plans
Before over-hyping the yet-to-be-decided-on
basketball arena, The Register-Guard ought to ana
lyze its motives for failing
to put news of the up- -——
coming development of |J|
the University's Multi- rAUMCMTADV
scale Materials and De- wUmlYILIl I fill I
vices Center on its front
page. The MMDC would be a one-of-a-kind facility
developed by the University, likely to conduct de
fense-related research.
The site for the proposed facility is the contro
versial Riverfront Research Park area along the Uni
versity greenway by the Autzen footbridge. Eu
gene's City Council is now quiedy enlarging and
extending corporate welfare tax breaks to develop
the area (Eugene Weekly, March 6).
The plan to build the MMDC was written
about in the Emerald on May 5 ("Scientists to
explore world of the 'nano-sized,'" ODE, May
5) after I gathered information and gave the de
tails to a reporter.
Any institution whose massive, state of the art
facility siting schemes have to be uncovered by
community volunteers must be immensely scruti
nized regarding future land deals. The MMDC
project is likely related to the University Senate's
failure to pass a resolution against the war in Iraq.
A resolution calling for peace could have alienat
ed University research development partners.
Top University officials are now busy securing
more power to install cell towers (The Register
Guard, June 14). A 120-foot University/Sprint tow
er now threatens the Fairmount neighborhood,
the south University historic district and the Hay
ward Field area. The project was also publicized by
information I gathered and presented to the me
dia, not by the University announcing a cell tower
deal was under way.
For a new basketball arena, only two sites would
not result in massive new traffic impacts. They are
the existing site — demolish Mac Court — or de
veloping the Autzen Stadium parking lot to in
clude a parking garage.
A large, open, meaningful debate should occur
to evaluate whether any new stadium is built at all
due to library cuts, tuition spiraling higher and
continuing University Housing demolidon of
state-owned, low-income housing (The Register
Guard, December 2002).
A more conservative plan might be to divert
these millions to replacing the existing, dismal,
Meningitis-friendly dorms in which residents are
more likely to contract the deadly disease due to
their room's sub-standard square footage. Post
poning the replacement of these dorms surely will
result in more deaths.
Zachary Vishanoff lives in Eugene.
Editorial ignores Thomas' dissent; lacks coherence
I write in response to the editorial ("Supreme
Court sodomy ruling reaffirms rights," ODE, July
1) on Lawrence v. Texas, a rather confused piece
that closely resembles Justice Kennedy's opinion
in its lack of coherence and seeming lack of famil
iarity with the American system of governance.
Firstly, the editorial board unreasonably asserts
that the decision is a "triumph" for gays and les
bians and that "homosex- _
uals deserve the same ||J| jgZ
rights as heterosexual
America." The latter
clause, besides being
rhetorically ill-advised, certainly cannot have
drawn its warrants from this case: Justice O'Con
nor is the only justice to use equal protection as a
basis for her decision; the majority opinion even
goes so far as to say, "As an alternative argument in
this case, counsel for the petitioners and some am
id contend that Romer provides the basis for de
daring the Texas statute valid under the Equai Pro
tection dause. That is a tenable argument, but we
conclude the instant case requires us to address
whether Bowers itself has continuing validity."
Further, you contend that "three members of the
Supreme Court were ready to pass moral legislation
that discriminate (sic) againts (sic) those with differ
ent traits and beliefs from them ? (sic)" This is surdy
a misguided figure of speech, as all the world knows
that American courts do not pass legislation. What is
most appalling is that you seem not to have read Jus
tice Thomas' dissent in which he forcefully dedares
the opposite of your statement: "I write separately to
note that the law before the Court today 'is ... un
commonly sillyf If 1 were a member of the Texas Leg
islature, I would vote to repeal it.... Notwithstand
ing this, I recognize that as a member of this court 1
am not empowered to help petitioners and others
similarly situated. My duty, rather, is to 'decide cases
agreeably to the Constitution and laws of the Unit
ed States'" As Justice Scalia and the Chief Justice are
only two people, I am unsure of the basis for your
above remark about "three justices."
I am not so unreasonable as to insist the editorial
board should read all of the decisions issued by the
Supreme Court this term when the office is so short
staffed that metatheses such as "againts," previously
unattested idioms such as "in the sheets" and "tout
one's laurels," and the use of "contend" as a transitive
verb are published, but the board ought at least have
skimmed the opinion in question before producing a
commentary that, besides being ill-indited, suggests
things that are constitutionally impossible, arithmeti
cally unjustified and factually incorrect.
Heath B Hutto is a senior majoring
in English.
Mad
DuCkLing
TChildren's
heatre
With Support from the Cultural Forum,
the SummerSeseion Office, and the ASUO.
Join us on the lawn of the Robinson Theatre on the
UO Campus! Limited free parking is available.
Discounts are available for groups of 10 or more.
All shows begin 11am
$4 tickets for all ages
Winnie
the
Pooh
July 8-11 and 15-19
For information
and reservations
call O
346-4192
ft*-***#
v' Clubhouse w/ game room
Fitness center
Ample resident and visitor parking
Resort-like swimming pool
Lighted volleyball and basketball courts
Outdoor gas grills & bbq
Decked out kitchens
Cable/internet hookups
Emergency alarm buttons
Individual leases
Roommate matching service
On bus route to campus
GOT A
11) E A ?
GIVE THE ODE A CALL! 340-5511