Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Nov. 11, 1993)
OPINION Nebraskan J £ I J I Y y J Thursday, Hovambar 11,1993 Nebraskan Editorial Board University of Nebraska-Lincoln Jeremy Fitzpatrick.Editor. 472-1766 Kathy Steinauer.Opinion Page Editor Wendy Mott.Managing Editor Todd Cooper.Sports Editor Chris Hopfensperger.Copy Desk Chief Kim Spurlock.Sower Editor Kilev Timperley.Senior Photographer Arms down Americans ready for stricter gun laws Legislation to regulate the purchase of firearms is long overdue. And now that American public is lining up behind gun control legislation, it might become a reality. A poll released by EDK Associates on Wednesday found 44 percent of adults would be less likely to re-elect their representa tives in Congress if he or she voted against the Brady Bill. The Brady Bill would impose a waiting period for handgun purchases so the buyer's background could be checked. President Clinton is pushing the Congress to pass it this year. The EDK poll found 76 percent of the respondents thought controlling the sale of handguns would be effective. An even greater number said they thought inner-city job programs would help reduce violence. “They’ve bought locks, they’ve bought guns. And now they’re saying there’s not a lot more I can do myself,” said EDK presi dent Ethel Klein, who conducted the poll independent of any interest group. The EDK poll clearly shows the American public is ready for the regulation of handguns. In a country where murder is com monplace, the time has come for stricter gun control laws. Now, Congress needs to take the people’s lead and pass the Brady Bill and other measures aimed at getting guns out of the hands of criminals and those who will use them irresponsibily. Gun control is not the only answer. But it is a first step that should be taken. Safe at home? System penalizes sexual assault victims The man whose wife cut off his penis was found innocent Wednesday of sexually assaulting her. Looking at the facts presented by the media about the case, it seems the jury did not come to a fair conclusion. It is very difficult to believe a woman would do this without being provoked. The prosecution pointed out the fact that Lorena Bobbitt went to a court counselor five days before the infamous attack seeking protection from her husband, John Wayne Bobbitt, because of sexual and physical abuse. The counselor testified in court that he feared for her safety based on what she told him. A problem in cases like this is that the man’s version of the story is pitted against the woman’s. It becomes a case of one person’s word against another’s. Also, victims of rape, sexual abuse and assault are sometimes reluctant to press charges be cause they are often subjected to intimidating, prying questions in court, as if they arc the ones on trial. By finding John Wayne Bobbitt innocent, the jury has added to victims’ reluctance to press charges. In the future, women think ing about pressing assault, abuse or rape charges might look to this case and realize that there were hard facts showing Lorena Bobbitt was frightened of her spouse; she was scared enough that she sought court protection. This case was not simply a case of one person’s word against another’s. Yet Lorena Bobbitt did not win the case. Lorena Bobbitt is going to trial at the end of the month on charges of malicious wounding. More than likely she will be convicted because what she did to her husband is physically obvious. The court system needs to look at the way it handles marital abuse and sexual assault cases and set a good precedent that is fair to victims. Obviously this ruling is not a good exam ple. SUfT editorials represent the official policy of the Fall 1993 Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by the Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board, editorials do not necessarily reflect the views of the university, its employees, the students or the NU Board of Regents Editorial column* represent the opinion of the author The regents publish the Daily Nebraskan They establish the UNL Publications Board to supervise the daily production of the paper. According to policy set by the regents, responsibility for the editorial content of the newspaper lies solely in the hands of its students The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the editor from all readers and interested others Letters will be selected for publication on the basis of clarity, originality, timeliness and space available. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject all material submitted Readers also arc welcome to submit material as guest opinions. The editor decides whether material should run as a guest opinion. Letters and guest opinions sent to the newspaper become the property ofthe Daily Nebraskan and cannot be returned Anonymous submissions will not be published Letters should included the author’s name, year in school, major and group affiliation, if any Requests to withhold names will not tie granted Submit material to the Daily Nebraskan. 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St , Lincoln, Neb 6X588 0448 -------AKRDH mCON OOORHAV.© stwintawBi. \ ^fC. shk m». J |lh Capital Punishment There seems to be some prevail ing confusion over the purpose of the judicial system of the United States. Put simply, our judiciary is designed to exact equitable and appropriate justice on those individuals found guilty of committing crimes. This method of justice should serve a two fold purpose: To impose punitive measures on the offender, and to com pel society’s lawful behavior through recognizable consequences. With that in mind, the subject of capital pun ishment should not be a matter of debate. Ideologues who believe that life sentences are justice-enough for con victed killers are purposefully ignor ing tho^e states, Nebraska included, that do not have a life sentence with out parole provision in their sentenc ing guidelines. Murderers, such as Charles Manson, need only exhibit “rehabilitation” to an overburdened and understaffed parole system to gam freedom to roam our streets in unre stricted freedom. I he current trial ot Roger Bjorklund has sparked new debate on this matter. It is easy, given the unbelievable atrocities committed against Candice Harms, to fall prey to the “string 'em up” justice of old. Fortunately for Bjorklund, that’s not the way our existing system works. If found guilty, he should receive jus tice that meets the criteria elucidated above. His punishment for Harms’ torture, rape and murder should be sufficient to communicate our soci ety’s intolerance of, and repugnance for, that type of criminal behavior. Library privileges, cable television and three squares-a-day, even if con fined for the rest of his life, is posi tively NOT appropriate or equitable justice for a crime of that magnitude. Thomas K. Eads junior political science and English Christianity I feel it necessary to respond to Robert J. Tobin’s assertions (DN, Nov. 8). Tobin unwittingly illustrated the major, tragic flaw in people’s con ceptions of what it means to be a Christian, especially living in a time when so many alternatives are chal lenging those things usually associ ated with Christianity. He points out that Jesus used harsh words in dealing with the pharisees. True enough. But then he follows by saying, “This sounds like a judgmen tal, intolerant person, not a loving, accepting one.” To love a person or a group of people docs not mean that one must accept and love their ac tions. Never docs Jesus say, “I hate you pharisees,” but rather, he assaults their deeds and conceptions —justi fiably so, because no less than their eternal security was on the line. It is my belief that Jesus spoke these words out of love, even though it was not the easy thing to do; it ultimately led to his crucifixion. They were words that needed to be said, and Jesus loved them enough that he was willing to die to get that message across. Brian Schwarz junior English Michele Tilley/DN Improvement? Mr. Sink, I read with respect and interest your response (DN, Nov. 10) to my letter (DN, Nov. 8). 1 disagree. What do we know about the mes siah? Only that things will be better after he comes. Have things improved so much since your Jesus came? To the extent that they have, science has improved them — along with the collective political will of decent common people. To what extent has the church helped? To put it another way, what was the crime of Galileo? Pursuing science in opposition to the church, right? The messiah has not come; my reasoning tells me this. Robert J. Tobin graduate student geology Cruelty I recently learned the University of Nebraska’s zoology and biology departments use organisms purchased from Carolina Biological Supply Company for use in laboratory test ing and dissections. I understand that Carolina Biological Supply is the na tion’s largest distributor of organ isms used for this purpose. I am angered and appalled our university would purchase materials from a corporation that has cruelly and inhumanely prepared organisms for laboratory use. Documented re ports have surfaced linking Carolina Biological Supply to countless thefts of domesticated dogs and cats in the community surrounding their plants. Numerous other animal rights abuses have been documented by animal rights groups, including shocking footage of Carolina workers brutally killing a dog to be used for class room dissection. Workers savagely beat the dog with a shovel and laughed and taunted the creature as it attempted to struggle to its feet. Carolina workers also have been captured on film spitting and extin guishing cigarettes on frogs gasping for their last breaths after being in jected with chloroform while still alive. It is also common policy at Carolina Biological Supply to starve dogs, cats and rabbits while placing them into overcrowded cages where 1 they are often crushed under the weight of other animals awaiting a cruel and inhumane death. With all this knowledge of the wrongdoings of Carolina Biological Supply, can’t we take our business elsewhere? Nick Myers sophomore social sciences, speech ‘Their job’ In response to William Ogden’s letter to the editor (DN, Nov. 11), 1 agree with Ogden in one respect: the idea that Bjorklund’s trial is impor tant to many students here at UNL. However, I disagree with his idea that the Daily Nebraskan’s coverage is too graphic. Granted, what hap pened to Candice Harms in her last few hours of life is disturbing. It’s tragic and awful to imagine, but it happened. It’s a fact. People need to be aware of this. By making people aware, hopefully people will be more cautious and watch out for their safe ty because even here in Lincoln, not everyone is safe. Whether or not we like what is or will be written is not the press’ con cern. The press has a right to keep the public informed. In fact, it’s their job. Lisa Palmer senior human dcvelopmcnt/child studies Denny trial In response to Sam Kepfield (DN, Oct. 27) and Chad W. Pekron (DN, Oct. 28), great job! Both stated very nicely the problems of today. It’s nice to see at least a couple of indi viduals with enough common sense to see through the whole farce of a trial of Henry Watson and Damian Williams. I also find it interesting how liberals and minorities arc so quick to cry racism, then turn around and claim that Watson and Williams’ beating of Denny was somehow jus tifiable because of the past. It just makes no sense to me. Mark D. Mercer freshman general studies