Issuu

AVIATION

LETTER

REGULATIONS

TO THE

EDITORS

he column “No More NASCAR” in volume 92, issue 6 of The Triangle is overly snide and largely based off misinformation and a lack of information about the event. I’d like to point out certain holes in his case and attempt to root out inaccuracies that appear so readily in the column. To begin, Roth rants about whether NASCAR is a sport for nearly half of the column. In looking for a definition to the word, (dictionary.com was particularly relevant), I realized that it didn’t matter! It appears that Roth is incredibly bothered by racing being considered a sport, which I found trivial. I admit, entertainment value is very subjective, however, I think that Roth should also embrace this point. He claims that we shouldn’t idolize professional racers, because so many people drive, and the pros only do it at a higher level. Couldn’t this be applied to all sports like track and field, or the sports he mentioned such as baseball and basketball? Unless Roth has an issue with professional sports in general, I found his logic flawed. On whether racing is exciting, I think that depends on the person. But Roth saying “I have a problem with seeing the entertainment value in NASCAR.” is hardly a reason to condemn the sport! There are many different channels of television. Also, Roth says that the most exciting part seems to be “if there is a wreck among drivers and whether or not they survive the crash.” Wrecks are certainly exciting, however claiming that even some of those who view racing want to see deadly crashes is very inaccurate and morbid; certainly that wasn’t what was being implied. Finally, there were several parts of his column that were wrong, or raised doubt to the strength of his case. He refers to “the driver (sitting) on his butt for hours on end,” but he failed to include Danica Patrick, who is a female driver in racing. He frustratingly claims that “the whole thing is one constant commercial with a few minutes of racing” before saying “to watch NASCAR would be one of the worst ways for me to spend a Sunday afternoon,” implying he has never seen a full race. Having seen a race on television several times, I can tell that the event is multiple hours long, and has a similar commercial structure to football. The difference is that while football stops and starts, NASCAR is constant action for the full time. I personally don’t like to watch NASCAR. I find it not very interesting. However, there are clearly people who enjoy racing, and as this article clearly was written without a grasp of the nature of the sport, I felt it necessary to present a counterpoint. Guesswork and conjecture shouldn’t be enough to form an opinion.

junior Gregory Haegele

Ramya Vijayagopal

The TSA has recently loosened up on their rules as far as what is allowed on an airplane. Read on to decide for yourself if allowing small knives and miniature baseball bats, among other things, on board is a good decision

hen I first heard about TSA bringing changes to what is permitted on an aircraft and that these changes included small knives and miniature baseball bats, I rolled my eyes and asked myself what the point was. I can’t take my eye make-up remover in my carry on, but I’m allowed to have a pocket knife that is still very capable of hurting someone? How does that make sense? (Yes, people, I realize that the existence of powerful explosives in liquid form make this a concern.) I read a CNN opinion piece about the issue and agreed with the author’s point against the decision because although “the TSA claims this policy will benefit passengers, citing the 850 pounds of banned goods that are surrendered at checkpoints each month,” passengers and flight attendants are still at risk if someone is wielding a knife. Just because “sharp objects can no longer bring down aircraft,” according to former TSA chief Kip Hawley, that doesn’t mean

that they don’t pose a threat at all. But when you think about it, the security at airports really has gotten ridiculous. I agree with author Tiffany Hawk that we need faster and easier checkpoints, but I ceased to concur with her other points after further research. According to tsa.gov: “The decision to permit certain items in carry-on luggage was made as part of TSA’s overall risk-based security approach and aligns TSA with International Civil Aviation Organization Standards and our European counterparts.” So this isn’t some crazy far-fetched decision. We are just coming down from the fear-induced hyper strictness of the post-9/11 era to match up with the rest of the world when it comes to restrictions and regulations. The phase was totally understandable and the decision was a thoughtful one, but we are at the point where we are capable of moving on. And I don’t think that’s anything to be afraid of.

INFURIATING

INDIVIDUALS With all the people that we encounter every day, I took a look at the ones that bothered me the most and what it was that made them so unbearable Roth Lovins

elcome back to the second installment of my “Nothing Held Back” column series. In this series, I discuss some of the things that bother me about my surroundings. Whether it’s a group of individuals, an activity, or a place, I will discuss why I am bothered by them. For this column, I made a list of a few individuals that bothered me throughout my daily routine. The first group of people that I want to talk to are the individuals that throw their cigarette butts onto the ground. Not only have you just hurt yourself by smoking said cigarette, but you have also taken no consideration about the damages you could have towards the environment. I realize you are only concerned about satisfying yourself, but please stop and take the time to properly dispose of your cigarettes. Nobody likes an inconsiderate smoker. Next, I want to talk to those people who chew with their mouths open while they eat. It’s one thing to

have to see your food while you’re eating, but to have to hear it as well is something that makes me lose my appetite almost instantly. I find your lack of manners disgusting, so please stop smacking your lips before I smack you across the face. Lastly, I want to have a chat with those people who are unable to park their cars correctly and force me to find another spot on the other side of the lot. If you can’t park, drive or reverse it as it was intended to be used, then you probably shouldn’t be driving it in the first place. Also, once you get out of the car and notice that you have parked in two different spots, you probably should not walk away and act like it didn’t happen. If you can’t park it in the lot properly, then you probably shouldn’t be allowed to park in the lot in the first place. I know this column makes me seem like I am not a big fan of people, but in al reality, as long as you don’t get on my nerves, I don’t have a problem with you.

APRIL 5,