Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online: www.dailyemerald.com
Friday, February 27,2004
Oregon Daily Emerald
COMMENTARY
Editor in Chief:
Brad Schmidt
Managing Editor:
Jan Tobias Montry
Editorial Editor:
Travis Willse
Eugene Police
overzealously
administer
zero tolerance
Editor's note: This commentary is part of the Emerald's and
ASUO Legal Services' ongoing efforts to assist students through
education as well as representation. ASUO Legal Services' attor
neys are licensed to practice in the state of Oregon. Information
disseminated in this article does not constitute legal advice and
does not create an attorney/client relationship. For legal advice,
contact an attorney licensed in your state. You should not make
legal hiring decisions based upon brochures, advertising or other
promotional materials.
As an attorney for ASUO Legal Services, 1 am aware that
the majority of arrests and citations of students are for alco
hol-related offenses. These offenses include minor in pos
session, allowing or furnishing alcohol, driving under the
influence of intoxicants and Oregon Liquor Control Com
mission violations for mishandling a keg. Many students
have expressed frustration over receiving citations for con
__ duct which did not seem, at the
C3* 1 1 jRfcTT time, to violate a law. They are
also frustrated with the aggressive
and sometimes condescending
attitude of the Eugene Police.
The definition of what actions constitute these crimes
and violations is increasingly widened by the overzealous
Eugene Police Department "Party Patrol," which has stat
ed a policy of "zero tolerance on underage drinking." It is
not an exaggeration to state that you act at your peril if
you are present where alcohol is served outside of a com
mercial establishment.
For example:
• A sober designated driver arrived at a party to retrieve
his friends and was cited for minor in possession when he
was seen removing beer bottles from his friends' hands so
he could get them into his car.
• A person who was 21 threw a party with signs posted
stating that those under 21 were not allowed. The "Party Pa
trol" stormed the gates and found a minor who snuck into
the party and grabbed a beer. The host was cited with a Class
A misdemeanor of furnishing alcohol to a minor, which can
result in a $5,000 fine and a year in jail.
• A minor was asleep in bed while her roommates
watched a movie. Police appeared at the door looking for
someone who did not live there. Once the front door was
open, the police insinuate themselves into the house where
the minor was forcibly awakened by the police and cited for
minor in possession when she admitted to having had a
beer earlier.
• A 25-year-old bought a keg and signed an affidavit stat
ing the keg would be at his house. The next weekend, he
took the keg with its remaining contents to another party to
finish the beer. The "Party Patrol" raided the party and he
was dted for the Class A misdemeanor of false swearing be
cause the keg was not at the original address.
While these examples of citations may not hold up in
court (remembering the USA Patriot Act has not yet eroded
the presumption of innocence), the dted parties now bear
the burden of numerous court appearances, possible trials
and the threat of jail and/or fines of hundreds of dollars if
they lose.
In addition to the cost and inconvenience associated
with these experiences, students are reporting increasing
amounts of physical contact from police, induding being
made to stand in the cold for hours in handcuffs and be
ing subject to choke holds, take-downs and other uses of
force. Students come to see me with bruises, chipped
teeth and head injuries. Students are reporting that the
OLCC has begun confiscating personal property associat
ed with the consumption of alcohol, including music
equipment and stereos.
The moral of this story is for students to exhibit extreme
caution around underage drinkers. If you are underage, do
not drink or allow yourself to be around places where alco
hol is served. If you are over 21, do not allow any minors on
the premises and adhere closely to OLCC requirements for
the use of kegs.
Be careful out there.
Laura Fine is an attorney with ASUO Legal Services.
Her opinions do not necessarily represent those of the Emerald.
LEAPING
OVER LOGIC
I've been told that after the University
hands me a diploma next June, I'll look
back with fondness, even longing, at my
undergraduate years. Staying up until 4
a.m. on weekends playing video games
with greats and learning big ideas from sol
id professors.
But there are things I'll be happy to
leave on campus. The 8 a.m. finals, home
work until 4 a.m. on school nights and
everyone who has problems distinguish
ing between the realities of a real world
and the sometimes incestuous, self-serv
ing or just plain loopy rhetoric passed off
as academic or otherwise intellectually
meaningful discourse.
To be fair, the university setting is the
Fertile Crescent of mindless rhetoric. Cam
pus culture is to pseudointellectual flotsam
as dorm shower floors are to bacteria
(again, something I don't and won't miss).
For one, given that most students are just
beginning their tenures in the arena of pub
lic dialogue, unjustifiable zealotry can usu
ally be chalked up to the impetuousness of
youth and novelty. Moreover, I naively sug
gest that students calling for an end to nan
otechnology research because it has poten
tial military applications, or for a stop to
animal research because they believe it has
no material value, do so largely out of con
cern for the quality of the world around
them. (Professors promulgating irrespon
sible rhetoric don't have this excuse.) But
the road to the hell that is philosophical in
coherence is paved with good intentions.
To wit: In January 2001, the University
hosted a conference on social issues called:
"Against Patriarchy: a step toward the abo
lition of male privilege." Designed as part
of "a movement towards the elimination
of male privilege, domination and sexism"
— which I politely read as ending gender
discrimination — the conference's central
questions included: "How does male dom
ination connect to other oppressions, such
as racism, heterosexism, ableism, dassism,
capitalism, government and spedesism?"
Travis Willse
Rivalless wit
Nevermind that advances leading to
the extended lifespans, greater personal
freedom and wider educational opportu
nities that we enjoy today are all conse
quences of the capitalist economic system
(admittedly, among less fortunate effects
associated with the free market that have
more to do with individual ethical flaws
than the system itself). Nevermind still
that "speciesism," however the word
might be defined, probably carries the il
legitimate oratorical baggage of devaluing
human life.
In 2002, a letter to the editor of Eugene
Weekly insisted that "In order to end (vio
lence against women and minorities), we
need to deconstruct patriarchy and all its
forms of violence." While the author clear
ly didn't understand what deconstruction
is, ending violence against all people is im
portant, and there are many things that
people can do to curtail that problem.
However, misusing words and passing off
empty rhetoric isn't one of them.
In 2003, in a letter to the editor of the
Emerald, a concerned citizen wrote that de
veloping a "multiscale materials and de
vices center" in the East University area was
tantamount to "ethnic cleansing" because
it would displace families living there now.
The ethics of the University forcing low-in
come families to move aside, a comparison
to the worst sort of human rights viola
tions is unwarranted and unjustifiable —
it's the same brand of despicable, offensive
rhetoric that PETA used when comparing
treatment of animals to the despicable
treatment of Jews during the Holocaust.
(In the interest of fending off concerns
about disclosure, this letter was submitted
to the Emerald before my tenure as editori
al editor.)
Illegitimate debate does worse than pol
lute the realm of public argument: Laymen
who recognize the fallacies in bad argu
ment might associate the bunk logic or un
civil conduct with a wider movement.
While this in itself is often a logically ten
uous leap, the damage can be very real: Vi
olent religious extremists detract from reli
gious messages of peace and compassion.
Likewise, ecoterrorists self-righteously de
stroying private property divert attention
from the noble aims of responsible envi
ronmentalism.
What's an intellectually responsible stu
dent to do? Take suspect rhetoric with a
grain of salt. If you hear a bad argument at
the lunch table or in the classroom, stand
up and speak for yourself.
Contact the editorial editor
at traviswillse@dailyemerald.com.
His opinions do not necessarily
represent those of the Emerald.