j
EDITOR
Erin Gibson
OPINION
EDITOR
CUff Hicks
EDITORIAL
BOARD
Nancy Christensen
Brad Davis
Sam McKewon
Jeff Randall
Bret Schulte
• Our
VIEW
Decision
time
Supreme Court needs
to settle gun debate
Got guns?
A new system began last Monday that
would allow Americans to buy a gun right
away, no waiting involved, because the
background check would take place almost
instantaneously. The second phase of the
Brady Bill, making thorough background
checks necessary, began Nov. 30.
Laws have come up regarding assault
weapons and concealed weapons. People
have debated them. Some of them have
passed, some of them have failed.
And so far, the Supreme Court hasn’t
said anything.
It’s time the Supreme Court takes a long
hard look at the Second Amendment. Most
people know it gives people “the right to
keep and bear arms,” but what does it really
mean? That’s a question the Supreme Court
should have answered a long time ago.
Every tew decades, a law comes up that
seems to conflict with the Constitution.
Eventually, it is challenged and brought all
the way to the Supreme Court, which makes
the final decision. As of late, however, the
Supreme Court has avoided dealing with
the Second Amendment. '
When the right to freedom of speech
was challenged, the Supreme Court had no
hesitation in passing judgment. Just ask
u: Larry FlynJ.
.-rorj The Supreme Court has an obligation to
deal with legal issues as they arise. Just
because the two opposing forces have a lot
of influence doesn’t mean the issue can be
avoided.
The court’s hesitation is understandable,
of course. The National Rifle Association
has a lot of financial power to flex. Gun
supporters are very vocal.
That doesn’t necessarily make them
right or wrong, though.
The U.S. Constitution was left open
ended so it could be interpreted as time
changed. It wasn’t written with ground
rules set in stone, but more as a collection
of guidelines to help keep the United States
on track.
It’s the job of the Supreme Court to do
that interpretation. It has the final word
when it comes to determining the current
interpretation of the Constitution.
But for it to interpret the Constitution, it
has to hear the cases around the issue. It
can’t pass over cases that could hold long
term impacts on not only the Americans of
today, but the Americans of the next several
generations.
Now is the time for a new interpretation.
No more avoiding the showdown.
The NRA vs. the Brady Bill.
The right to bear arms vs. the right to not
be shot.
Let the court decide.
Editorial Policy
Unsigned editorials are the opinions of
the Fall 1998 Daily Nebraskan. They do
. not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, its
employees, its student body or the
Ureveisity of Nebraska Board of Regents.
Acoiumn is solely the opinion of its author.
The Board of Regents selves as publisher
of the Daily Nebraskan; policy is set by
the Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. The
UNL Publications Board, established by
the regents, supervises the production
the regents, responsSty forthe edrtonal
content of the newspaper lies solely in
the hands of its student employees.
Letter Policy
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief
letters to the editor and guest columns,
but does not guarantee tneir publication.
The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to
edit or reject any material submitted.
Submitted material becomes property of
the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be
returned. Anonymous submissions will
not be published. Those who submit
letters must identify themselves by name,
year in school, major and/or group
. affiliation, if any.
Submit material to: Daily Nebraskan, 34
Nebraska Union, 1400 R St. Linooln,
NE. 68588-0448. E-mail:
letters@unlinfo.unl.6du.
- - Mook’s
VIEW
*
* tui? niu.sem
gnHtoniwm,
mww«fj
“—i iiPjL~
crBBR^
___ <d* mm
-- -tteBACft> .-/
DN
LETTERS
Finding the right roles
I appreciated Adam Klinker’s col
umn (“Male-order pride,” Tuesday)
about the difficulties men are experi
encing as they strive to define them
selves. As women’s roles continue to
expand, it is apparent that men who
define “masculinity” as “anything not
feminine” will find their identity
shrinking. I propose that instead of con
tinuing to define our differences as a
“war between the sexes,” we declare a
partnership and vow to help each other
defme relationships and roles that are
healthy and positive for all of us.
I will facilitate a gender issues dis
cussion group next semester through
the Women’s Center. If you are explor
ing the kinds of questions Adam wrote
about, I hope you’ll consider participat
ing.
Jan Deeds
assistant director
Student Involvement
Right on, Rutgers!
It is amusing and somewhat ironic
that Tony Smith (“Rutgers 0000,”
Tuesday) accuses Rutgers 1000 of not
doing its research when he obviouslv
hasn’t done his own.
Suspecting misinformation, I went
to Rutgers’ home page: http://mem
bers.aol.com/rutglOOO/colonial.htm.
Rutgers 1000 is not at all against
collegiate athletics, as Mr. Smith
expertly asserts; they are against
involvement in the IA division. They
want Rutgers to be part of a non-athlet
ic scholarship division, namely the
Patriot League or some other IAA divi
sion conference. They want athletics to
be at an appropriate level. They don’t
want to eliminate it
Mr. Smith thinks academics come
first here at UNL. I disagree. When I
work during the summers and tell
fact, three, and also an orchestra, which
is like a band, only with stringed instru
ments.)
Or, you can look at our own DN,
which offers maybe one story of nation
al importance every day, and then two
pages of local drivel and two, three,
sometimes four pages of sports. If the
DN caters to student’s interests, what
does this tell us about the students? Or
even look at the way Mr. Smith refers to
himself—as a track athlete who goes to
school here. Does he mention he is a
geography student? Nope.
Mr. Smith thinks the university
doesn’t make it easy and there exists a
dedication to Excellence. I’m sorry,
sport, but this isn’t true. Need I mention
my CSCE 230 class, which, after the
first exam this semester, put the profes
sor on a public trial because he gave a
question on the test he didn’t explicitly
cover in class (Gasp - the students had
to THINK!). Or, perhaps, my 400-level
math logic course, where the professor
felt it necessary to slow down the rate he
covered material because the students
weren’t “getting it.” Or, peihaps, my
CSCE 156 course, where the professor
had to adjust his grading scale TWICE
so less man nan me class vvouiu ran.
These were all great professors. It’s
just that academic rigor is lacking.
While I don’t necessarily agree with
Rutgers 1000 that professional sports
programs and lower academic stan
dards are causally related, I do think
there is a correlation. Maybe if the state
weren’t so focused on the Huskers and
the absurd trips to children’s hospitals
and other PR events, they would be a bit
concerned we’re pumping out a bunch
of students who don’t give a
#damn about learning anything.
So why, you may ask, am I
/ ; still here? Because I want to
start a tradition of excellence.
Doing so will make it harder
for me, I know. I might actu
ally have to start studying
and maybe even drop a major, but I
think it can be worth it And then maybe
we won’t be so concerned about those
skyboxes that cast a shadow over the
university.
Jacob Glazes ki
junior
music and math
Shame on you...
I was disappointed to read in the
Tuesday DN that someone would stoop
so low as to steal a Christmas tree by
going out and cutting one down on the
UNL campus. That disappointment
turned to infuriation, however, when I
went on to read that the culprits were
two UNL fraternity boys.
Even more insulting was the
response of Chi Phi’s President Jason
Hardy when he had the gumption to say
the fraternity did not give permission
for such an action. Yeah right How stu
pid do you take the general student body
to be, Jason? How can a tree just appear
in your house, and you, the president,
have no way ofknowing how it got there
or where it came from? If anyone is stu
pid, it is he members of your fraternity
for what appears to be the second time
police were led right to your front door.
It frustrates me that the university
allows actions such as these to happen
with little or no punishment
Fraternities break into and destroy the
property of sororities, and they are still
here. Fraternities get caught with
minors drinking on their property, and
they are still here. There are secret
racist greek societies, and they are still
here. Fraternity boys fall out of win
dows because of hazing, and they are
still here. Fraternities are caught burn
ing crosses, and they are still here. And
now a fraternity gets caught cutting
down a tree on campus, and it is still
here. When is it going to be enough to
make the university realize the greek
system needs to be either altered or
done away with entirely?
r Jason, your fraternity reflects
J O poorly on the character of the uni
y/ versity. The student body doesn’t
want or need you or your house. Your
fraternity’s actions are just another
example in the already too long
list of reasons why the univer
sity should do away with
you, your fraternity and the
entire greek system.
. Ben Wolfe
MattHaney/DN
.2.V* '***.,/*-«. ’• -ri'i.
