Concealed weapons on college campuses dangerous

What kind of place did I move to? I read the article on House Bill 615 on the front page Monday and my first thought was “Thats so ridiculous! I’m going to write a letter.”

I’ve said that a lot, but this is the first time I’ve followed through.

(Other letter writing threats include being charged $9 for a baked potato, a &7 well cocktail, my last town’s rubber duckie fundraiser/race being rigged, and running out of mac and cheese at an all you can eat buffet. I clearly could have eaten more) I’m that astounded by State Representative Tim Bearden, and that anyone would let that guy represent them.

Great idea. Lets get more machismo dbags with guns on campus. Then we’ll have to increase the public safety budget (on campus and throughout the state.Obviously this guy doesn’t think clearly.

Justin Klocke
Graduate Student,
Audubon, Iowa
Jewelry and metalsmithing

Campus not a place for guns

We are outraged at the hypocrisy and dangerous potential of allowing concealed weapons on the UGA campus.

Last year a Georgia Basketball player was punished severely for possessing a utility knife in his kitchen drawer at ECV.

How did guns suddenly become more acceptable than pocket knifes?

In light of recent school shootings, we should be taking progressive steps against violence. More guns equal more gun violence.

Do we want guns allowed in the hands of wasted fans on game day? How about in the hands of cracked out, adderall fueled exam takers? What impact will this have on our already unacceptably high rates of rape and robbery?

According to the Violence Policy Center, concealed weapons carriers in Texas from 1996-2001 accounted for an 81% increase in the crime rate.

Guns are already acceptable for all members of society.

Case in point: billboards for gun shows advertising “NO BACKGROUND CHECKS.”

We do not need to bring more gun tolerance to our campus.

Catherine Mencher, Kara Slavik, Vanessa Guzman
Seniors

Taxpayer money not for Christmas

I find it frustrating that Michael Fitzpatrick manages to be bothered by the “Holiday tree” intruding into “the spirit and magic” of Christmas, while simultaneously chastising non-Christians for their inability to “get over it” concerning the pervasiveness of Christian symbols.You cannot have it both ways.

The separation of church and state does not condone the use of taxpayer money to promote a religion, which is exactly what is occurring in your town’s Christmas tree celebration.

Placing a menorah next to it fixes nothing, as the town now just supports two religions, ignoring the thousands of others.

Calling it a holiday tree is just a cheap way for the town to circumvent this separation.

It was a shrewd political maneuver in order to avoid a lawsuit or the cancellation of the ceremony.

Additionally, wishing someone “Happy Holidays” is just far more sensible, more inclusive, and not specifically religious. How can this be a problem?

This is not a declaration for a War on Christmas.The freedom of religion allows you, Mr. Fitzpatrick, to practice whatever religion you wish. I just shouldn’t be forced to help fund its promotion.

Alan Reese
Junior, Savannah
Music Performance and music theory