LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Send a Message: Press Charges

To the Editor: Let's forget for the moment the fact that the two students threatened were Jewish. It doesn't matter (I am Jewish, so no, I am not saying this because I am an anti-Semite. I am saying it because their is a larger issue at hand). Let's also forget that the gun-toting students began this altercation by shouting ethnic slurs. Yes, shouting ethnic slurs is ignorant, bigoted and wrong. So what? Saying that it's wrong doesn't make something go away. None of these facts are important in the broader view. The one fact, the only fact that should really matter to EVERYONE is that one student at this university pointed a firearm at another student. This is the fact, and it is undisputed. Now, I don't care if the shotgun was loaded or not, I don't care if the student holding it was just trying to scare someone and never had any intention of shooting it, and I don't care if he had a bad childhood being raised by Neo-Nazi parents. The fact is that this student (whose name has been kept from the front page for some reason) (1) owns a weapon which is capable of taking human life, (2) kept it on campus (or near it if he lived off campus, I don't know nor do I care), and (3) pointed it at another student. The first of these is a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Fine. The second is understandable given the fact that we live in a high crime area, but I think most people would agree that it is not acceptable for this University. The third is a criminal act which could be construed as a possible attempt of murder. This should result in an immediate expulsion from the University (whether or not charges are pressed) and the student should be prosecuted as far as lawfully possible. I find it reckless and irresponsible that these two students who were threatened have chosen to take the coward's way out and not press charges (if the facts of the case are as I understand them to be. There could be extenuating circumstances, but if so, I have not read or heard about them). To these two students, I say: do you feel that having your lives being threatened is a trivial thing? No one should have to face the business end of a shotgun simply because they were walking down the street. Your inaction is sending a message to all of those wackos out there that is behavior is acceptable, and that it will go unpunished. To the administration, and to the student body, I say: is this the kind of student that you want at this University? One who comes armed?! We need to send a message out to everyone who sees these articles or heard of this incident: this will not be tolerated. It shouldn't matter who the victims were. It shouldn't matter who the offenders were. No matter what country you come from, what color your skin is, or what God you pray to, no one deserves a shotgun in the face for no reason, and we need to make that perfectly clear to the hard-headed who obviously haven't gotten the message yet. Matthew Taff College '97 Stating the Obvious To the Editor: I am writing in response to your March 28 editorial. I have to question some of the assumptions the editorial made along the way to what should have been a ridiculously tame argument. Who wouldn't find "harassing and threatening students with a shotgun" unacceptable? Instead of making the benign point that this is no way for fellow citizens (or humans to act), you somehow felt it necessary to express particular horror about this incident because the (alleged) perpetrators were University students. "Students are expected to behave in an appropriate, responsible manner suitable for an intelligent young adult. We find it extremely frightening that two students attending an Ivy League institution could act so recklessly." What are you trying to say here? I assume, then, that if you take this argument to it's logical conclusion, then if it surprises you that University students might commit such a crime, it doesn't surprise you that your "average West Philly folk" would commit such a crime. After all, they haven't had the opportunity to experience the sweetness and light that is Penn. And if you still don't think that this was not incredibly elitist (if not racist, there I said it), then let's just ask ourselves how it is the DP is not writing editorials like this every time somebody is robbed or threatened with a gun? How is it that the DP is only appalled when Penn students commit such crimes? Eric Umansky College '95 Simplistic Assumptions To the Editor: What is the purpose of the first two paragraphs of Shawn Klein's recent column ("A Jewish Perspective," DP 3/30/95) Is Mr. Klein trying to say that he must examine his understanding of Judaism as his religion, because he disagrees with some of its beliefs? If so, then he does not need to express his astonishment that anyone would have such beliefs. I understand that Mr. Klein cannot believe religious doctrines that conflict with scientific truth. However an assumption that religious beliefs which seem to contradict scientific knowledge are all simplistic, is in itself a simplistic assumption. Mr. Klein himself points out that some of Creationism's believers know of the fossil record and the radio-active isotope based dating technique. Religious people can be biological researchers, geologists and astrophysicists. Such intellectuals can believe, often using their knowledge of science to reconcile beliefs with scientific facts. Even religious doctrines which blatantly fly in the face of scientific knowledge need not be rejected. Religious texts may be reinterpreted. And ultimately, we must remember that science itself is constantly evolving and adapting to new discoveries. It should not come as a surprise that informed people can be religious. Certain religions have existed for thousands of years with certain unbending doctrines still in full force. Do we dismiss this fact as a remnant of primitive human's simplicity? Or do we consider that the continuing existence of religious beliefs might give some of them a validity that we never thought of? Michael Appel College '98 Slightly Contrived To the Editor: To JeneZ Anzelone's credit, I also perceive the venues of Allison Winn's columns as, if nothing else, trite and unenlightening sentiments of a dowdy adolescent. Ms. Winn may have finally discovered -- or better yet -- contrived a more respectable place in her social climbing niche. However, we are uninterested in reading of the flimsy and cardboard reflections of her displaced social life here at Penn. Perhaps her four years here have lacked an endeavor which was stimulating or challenging. Most certainly her sorority existence offered little of either. Her quest for autonomy and identity remains opaque. Jane Kim College '95 Still Incompetent To the Editor: What can an incompetent, failing, and often-criticized student group do to quickly win itself the long-term support of a significant fraction of the Penn student body? If you are the Undergraduate Assembly, you can hastily vote to award the Greek system over $10,000 to defray party expenses. This action was not simply a failure to recognize more worthy campus concerns or under-funded student organizations, but a blatant attempt by the short-sighted members of the UA to win approval in the face of approaching elections. I commend The Daily Pennsylvanian for taking a stance against the UA's recent funding action. When Provost Chodorow commented earlier this year that students lack the ability to make effective decisions regarding the undergraduate environment, I am sure that actions such as this one were firmly in his mind. If the students of Penn are to expect better from the administration, we must also demonstrate a commitment to serious reforms, which does not include voting to defray fraternity-party expenses. Jon Miller College '97 Dismayed By Discussion To the Editor: One participant at the meeting expressed impatience with "educating black culture to a white person." Yet therein lies the problem; without a willingness to pursue cultural exchange, different people's understanding of each other cannot increase. Since many first impressions and long-standing friendships are formed during one's first year in college, it should surprise no one that a lack of interaction between peoples has led to strained relations between ethnic groups on campus. Perhaps by living with people who are different, Dubois residents might find that they have more in common with people of other races than they anticipated. I am not challenging the existence of programs that seek to create a sense of comfort and togetherness. Yet I do believe that Penn must exert an honest effort to encourage students to branch outward during their freshman year, not retreat inward. Justin Shellaway International Project College '97 Lacking Justice, Again To the Editor: The Committee for Judicial Reform has once again released a recommendation lacking in at least one important aspect: justice. In their blissful fantasies of non-adversarial hearings and student jurors pulling shining truth from the murk of accusations and explanations, the committee did not see fit to allow the accused to be represented by a lawyer or to cross-examine their accuser. It would seem that the committee values an expeditious process over giving the accused every chance to prove him or herself innocent. It is essential that our new code allow students every tool necessary to prove innocence, including legal representation. Strangely enough, a hearing always seems adversarial to the accused. Adam Strunk College '97