7
The
Skyline View
December 1, 2011
Less than lethal force CHRIS KORP
T
here is no denying that the use of pepper spray, Tasers and rubber bullets by police on protesters in America has increased enormously recently, so much so that we may have become desensitized to the point of not even questioning why it is happening. When police administrators and cities started outfitting their police officers with “less-thanlethal” weaponry, it was intended to be used in situations in which the only alternative was for the police to shoot the suspect with a conventional gun. Now look at the recent pepper spraying of the sitting and passive UC Davis protesters, or the 84-year old grandmother in Seattle. Would you say that the only alternative for the police officers involved in those incidents was to shoot these people dead? Assuming you are not a sociopath, you most likely answered, “No”. American police departments employ weapons that were initially developed for military use and were intended to see action only in war. The year 2009 marked the first time American citizens were subjected to this new breed of military weapon. The Pittsburgh police deployed a Long Range Acoustical Device, or sound cannon, to help disperse crowds protesting the 2009 G-20 Summit with a deafening wail that made protesters run for cover in pain. This complaint does not stop with the chemical agents and military hardware the police are using lately: Sometimes they just rely on good old-fashioned beatings to get their job done. On Nov. 9, police were sent to roust a camp of protesters on the UC Berkeley campus. When some of the protesters did not comply with the vacate order, they linked their arms and stood their ground. The police responded by lining up and
Coming of the anti-Christmas
repeatedly thrusting their batons into the bellies of the peaceful protesters. These protesters were breaking trespassing laws and should have been given their day in court. Instead, the police once again switched the branch of government they worked for and started decreeing judgments. Once again, those in charge, in this case UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau, had no problem with police conduct on that day. “We regret that, given the instruction to take down tents and prevent encampment, the police were forced to use their batons to enforce the policy,” Birgeneau said. The police should have been under instructions to clear the plaza in a manner in which no one person would be injured—protester or police. Nevertheless, in this case, the police were told to physically punish the protesters into submission. It should be noted that the intention of this article is not to berate police officers but to question the authorities who put these policies in place and armaments into the hands of the cops on the street in the first place. Police have to protect themselves; that much is understood, but these officers are an arm of the executive branch and should not be urged to perform a function of the judicial branch by rendering punishments on the spot to protesters and bystanders alike. In 1994, when an 18-year old American in Singapore was arrested for theft and vandalism, the Singaporean judge opted for the traditional caning as punishment for his crimes. Americans stood up in outrage when this judgment was made. Where are the Americans of 1994 now? This form of corporal punishment is alive and well in America, and it even skips the legal proceedings the young American in Singapore was afforded. The American people need to evaluate what is happening in our country in a non-hypocritical way. We love to cheer on the protesters in Tunisia, Egypt, Syria and Libya, but when it comes to our own fellow citizens, we turn a blind eye.
Dear Johnny
Dear Johnny,
My boyfriend of two years is constantly hitting on women behind my back. Sometimes I don’t even think he is attracted to me because he’s nicer to these girls who are unattainable. How do I make him realize that what he says to other women reflects on both of us? –Playa Lova Dear Playa Lova, First thing’s first—why don’t you make it clear that talking to other girls is simply not acceptable behavior? You need to talk to your boyfriend and actually take a stand. Say to him that you will not be in a relationship with someone that can’t put you first and all other
Opinions
MATT PACELLI
A
s a society, we often use the misdeeds of the past as a watermark against which we measure our moral progress. We might tell ourselves, “We used to accuse people of witchcraft and burn them at the stake, but we’re more civilized now;” or we might say, “Gladiator fights were barbaric, but people are smarter nowadays.” Wrong! You’re wrong if you think we as a society have advanced beyond the caveman days of bludgeoning each other over the head for a scrap of raw meat. My proof for such a claim lies in a single word: Christmas. Nothing summons forth the evil in your fellow man quite like the giving season. Our collective eggnogdrenched descent into madness commences every year with the torrid spend-o-rama known as Black Friday. Sure, the name “Black Friday” traditionally refers to the financial boon the surge of
women second or last for that matter. What needs to happen is change and lots of it. You need to evaluate your relationship to see why it is still ticking when you are obviously so unhappy; you have to demand the respect you deserve. Pull your boyfriend aside and really talk to him. See why he feels he needs attention from other women. If he doesn’t feel the same way you do, then you really need to move on. I know it’s hard to let go of someone when you love them even if they are mistreating you, but you have to push through it and stick to your guns. If he can’t appreciate your beauty and feelings, there is someone out there that can. Tell your boyfriend how he is making you feel, and that you are not willing to be in a relationship with a man that cannot make you feel great about yourself. –Johnny Email Dear Johnny at advice.johnny@gmail.com
holiday shoppers provide to businesses, but it could also be argued that “Black Friday” is referencing the color of people’s souls on that day. Stores become impromptu Thunderdomes, where people may literally battle, sometimes to the death, for savings. Recent bouts of yuletide mayhem have been numerous: The “Waffle Maker Riot” in Arkansas saw a scramble for twodollar Walmart waffle makers quickly turn into a one-way ticket to hell; there was also a woman in a southern California Walmart who took it upon herself to pepper spray over twenty people, all for a sweet, sweet Xbox (the authorities, when describing her, actually used the term “competitive shopper”); and then there was the East Bay shooting of a shopper in a Walmart parking lot in an attempted robbery of the victim’s merchandise. Walmart seems to pop up more than enough times to merit having blame thrown
The View From Here with Stephen Benoit
This semester is drawing to a close for us: This is our last edition of the paper for the semester, but you can expect new content being broken online until the semester officially ends! I have to say, as I’ve been an editor I’ve noticed my other classes suffer as I pour all my energy into working on this paper and bringing home awards. So, as a freelancer I shouldn’t have that problem as much anymore. Don’t let me scare you away though, as the paper is
in its direction. It is definitely satisfying because Walmart is one of those big, faceless corporations that are easy to hate, with its loathsome blandness and discount ruthlessness. The corporation is definitely a facilitator to the Christmas carnage, but people are what really make the whole thing a special time of year. Walmart merely sets the table; holiday shoppers are the ones that throw their food and then ask for seconds. In an odd way, it seems fitting for us as a society that our attachment to the free market turns into, at least once a year, a donnybrook (old-school term!). We are constantly pumped images from the media compelling us to spend, telling us that the nature of our character is based on material goods. It strikes me as apropos that this should come to a head, culminating in our beating each other stupid and using any and all unscrupulous means at our disposal to screw our fellow citizens over, just so that we can buy new things, wrap them in shiny paper, and give them to recipients, who will probably rarely use what we buy (except, possibly, the lady who Maced her way to an Xbox).
probably the best thing that ever happened to me. While I may not be editor in chief after this semester, I fully encourage all of you reading who might have an interest to come scope out the newsroom. You could even come in during our remaining weeks and check it out. Our lecture period is typically 12 to 1 p.m., Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays in room 8-110, which may not be the most interesting time to come in, but a lot of us are there for a while afterward, either working or relaxing. Maybe you’ll fall in love with journalism too if you give it a chance.
HURT & HEAL by JJ Valdez New coffee shop in the foodcourt
HEAL
HURT
“The food court is small. There isn’t a lot of room or a lot of options. With the new coffee shop built there, students will feel more comfortable in the food court since it will be larger.”
“I don’t really think it’s necessary. That’s money that could be used for something else. Especially when the school says it’s out of money and that they need to raise our fees.”
–Khanh Tran
– Antonette Reus
HURT “Well, it’s probably a waste of money; money that they could use for anything else. I get what I need from the cafeteria and the current coffee shop.”
–Megan Coomans
HURT
HURT
HEAL
“We already have a coffee shop, so I think it’s pointless to make another one. It would be too much.”
“It seems unnecessary because the cafeteria is just fine, and we already have a coffee shop. It just seems like a waste of money.”
“The new coffee shop would be more convenient for students and teachers since it’s closer to the cafeteria, and we’ll probably get more options because of it.”
–Frances Gonzales
–Wolly Navarez
–Beatriz Millare