y j ' y y .v' " ' ' t ? $ .
r
edibrio
fat M 'w
IS
in
Hell-met on wheels
Bad news for motorcyclists: LB795, introduced by
State Sen. Blair Richendifer of Wai thill, would make it
mandatory that all cycle drivers and passengers don
helmets before mounting a bike.
It's difficult to understand why legislators persist h
reintroducing this legislation. Their shortsightedness is
even more bewildering when reports indicate that in
most cases helmets are more dangerous on than off.
A helmet is more of a hazard than people realize.
According 'to one source, if a cyclist is involved in an
accident while 'traveling at more than 15 m.p.h., the
helmet offers virtually no protection and is worse than
worthless.
Additionally, almost all helmets are constructed of a
Fiberglas-like substance, which bounces if dropped on
pavement. If a person wearing a helmet is thrown from a
cycle onto his head, the exacerbated bounce easily
could cause a broken neck.
Fiberglas is an extremely poor material for helmets
because it deteriorates with age and temperature,
resulting in often invisible cracks in the helmet. If a
person wearing a cracked helmet is thrown headfirst
onto the pavement, the helmet is likely to break apart
and itself cause more extensive head injuries than if not
worn at all.
. Adequate protection from a helmet involves covering
the back of the head, forehead and temples. But a
negative side effect of such protection is that hearing
and eyesight are handicapped. Peripheral vision is
seriously hampered, and it's difficult for a cyclist to
hear automobiles creeping up or behind him.
It's true that nearly all motorcycle deaths are caused
by head injuries, but so are nearly 85 per cent of all
automobile deaths. The law (or attempted law) should
not single out only one phase of . motor vehicle
transportation. If the legislators believe helmets would
indeed protect cyclists, helmets also would protect
drivers and passengers of cars.
A better solution would be to require by law that
Heu ,- ."tji"CSwS5fd as mandatory safety equipment on any ;
tnOfSfclST'fts is now the case;, Tilth seat belts in cars, r
the responsibility of wearing the helmet would rest with
the individual.
Mary Voboril
MM ft US : i
&m si fJ-
- - --- .JfH '
V.-4 .-w-iwwv
"Jerry Ford's a nice guy, but he's played too many games without his helmet.
LBJ.
ASUN prognosis poor; restructure prescribed
Although the ASUN Senate
elections are more than a month away,
rumblings of the coming political
season have begun. But before the
speeches and promises start, it would
be well to take a hard look at what
student government is and what it
ought to be.
ASUN Senate is experiencing hard
times. It has been trapped in a vicious
spiral of decreased support, then
decreased effectiveness, md even less
support.
Obtaining public support is itot a
new problem. Each new
administration comes up with its
secret plan to end the apathy, and
each administration seems to leave
feeling cynical, somehow betrayed by
the lack of support it received from
students. These feelings certainly are
not lessened by comments from the
regents and chancellor, who
continually cast ciou&i on any nai
proposal because they say it doesn't
represent anyone.
Many of the senate's difficulties can
be traced to its structure. ASUN
Senate is designed as a governing body,
ohn michoel
dsheo
3rfi44 lie
blunder
but for this kind of organization to
work it must have" power. Without
power, it cannot function.
The concept of student government
. ...... .. . 1 . ? 1 . i. ...,.
1 ittoisau'iiy. ti i"ii'c mat iuuiim
have some inherent governmental
power. But they do not. ASUN Senate
must draw from branches of the
administration for any of the power it
claims. The problem with this is
obvious.
ASUN Senate enters a kind of
parent-child relationship with the
administration, in which the parent
rewards the student government by
giving it more authority when it's
mature and responsible. The price of
becoming mature and responsible
often means selling out studait
concerns, often w'th justification that
"it will be worth it in the long run,"
though it never h?s been.
It is becoming eirifully clear that
ASUN Senate, as now structured, no
longer can even hope to be effect! in
representing students. It is no lo..jer
simply a matter of one administration
or another.
Cjinsta
is to return to the concept of a student
association and realistically define its
objectives. It will require the
acceptance of ASUN Senate as an
office of student advocacy within the
University, rather than as a mythical
government. It also will demand
radical structural changes. Vestiges of
the student council approach must go
in favor of open ended research and
advocacy committees. This approach
could cure ,many of the most
frustrating problems now facing ASUN
Senate by adjusting its goals to fit its
abilities.
When the aspiring politicians do
arrive with glowing promises in hand,
don't be fooled. It will take more than
glowing promises and getting off your
apathies to forge a new student
association. What is needed now are
candidates on the right road,
candidates who will indeed lend their
Religion policy
discriminates
against Christians
Editor's note: This guest opinion is in reference to
a story in fust Thursday's Daily Nebraskan that
detailed the Board of Regents' policy statement
about religious activities on NU campuses.
By A. Frank Thompson
I wish to thank the Daily Nebraskan for allowing
me my right to express my ideas. At the same time I
acknowledge that in staling my beliefs I may be in
violation of the Board of Regents policy on religions.
Webster's New World Dictionary defines religion as
"any specific system of belief, worship, conduct, etc.,
often involving a code of ethics and a philosophy."
Currently, the University facilities are extended to
the Young Americans for Freedom, Transcendental
Meditation, Young Republicans, Young Democrats
aid Women's Resource Center, not to mention many
other organizations with specific ideals. It appears
that the University is singling out Christian
organizations as those with religious backgrounds.
The cartoon accompanying the story also indicated a
desire to protect students from someone with
unorthodox views. I always thought the University
provided a forum where adults could listen to
differing views and decide wfut they wisheU to
believe.
Yes, I am a Christian; however, I am also an
American citizen and have always supported the
rights of others to speak their beliefs. Under the
mom.
i II ' i I
Christian philosophy as given in the second book of
James, faith goes together with works in determining
your spiritual being. Works are the evidence of one's
faith. My ability to have fellowship with other
Christians is being restricted, Doe3 this mean I can no
longer perform good works? If so, I assure you I
intend to continue. I have attended college for five
years at four universities. I hold that the most
important event was not obtaining the two degrees I
now have; but rather, becoming a Christian. Why does
the University wish to deny every student the
educational opportunity to decide what he or she
believes'
page 4
monday, february 4, 1974