The Daily Beacon

Page 1

Issue 6, Volume 122

Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Debate rising around campus gun policy

Vols fall 75-65 to UK; 0-3 SEC McRae leads scrappy effort, Wildcats too strong in the end Austin Bornheim Assistant Sports Editor

File Photo • The Daily Beacon

Members of Faculty Senate converse after their decision to vote against amending the gun bill that would allow licensed faculty members to carry firearms on campus on Feb. 7, 2011.

Emily DeLanzo Managing Editor Senate Bill 239 proposed by Rep. Stacey Campfield (R - Knoxville) in 2011 would have allowed “full-time faculty and members of the staff at any public post-secondary institution in this state who have a valid handgun carry permit ... to carry handguns at all times on the premises of the public postsecondary institution in which they are employed.” University administrators from public universities across the state of Tennessee composed

an official statement for lawmakers expressing their dissatisfaction with the bill. But it’s not just administrators who have concerns with the bill. Students and faculty alike have expressed concerns about the preservation of UT’s learning environment if concealed weapons were allowed on campus. Lisa Dicker, a junior in political science and Asian studies, feels uncomfortable with such a change. She believes guns should only be carried by campus police. “I don’t believe that more guns on campus means a safer environment,” said Dicker. “It allows

for more mistakes and small incidents to occur with no real evidence that it would prevent a large scale assault on a school. Despite high profile events, school campuses, the vast majority of which are gun-free, remain some of the safest places in our country with very few homicides or gun-related incidents.” Dicker feels as though additional weapons would be “a detriment to the learning environment.” She is not alone. Fellow student Tyler Dinwiddie, senior in sociology, agrees with this sentiment. Dinwiddie stated that weapons

should remain “only in the hands of qualified, trained officers.” Many students do not feel comfortable with the idea of students or faculty carrying weapons. UTPD Chief Troy Lane relayed the gun policy that UT espouses. “The University of Tennessee is opposed to allowing any type of weapon to be carried on campus with the belief that these items are not conducive to a positive learning environment,” Chief Lane said. See GUN CONTROL on Page 3

Tennessee battled to the final moments in a hostile Rupp Arena Tuesday night but came up short, 75-65, to the Kentucky Wildcats. Junior Jordan McRae led all scorers with 23 points – his fourth-straight 20-point game – but it wasn’t enough to catapult the Volunteers to victory. “We definitely went into the game knowing that we could win,” McRae said. “Down the stretch our team has to make key stops and better decisions.” The Vols (8-7, 0-3 SEC) took a 54-53 lead with 7:19 left to play on the strength of a Derek Reese 3-pointer, but the Wildcats regained the lead for good less a minute later after a three-point play. “I thought it was a wellplayed game by both teams,” head coach Cuonzo Martin said. “Both teams competed and played hard. I thought both teams executed.”

The two SEC foes were neck and neck going into the locker room – 10 lead changes in the first half – with Kentucky (11-5, 2-1) leading 34-31. With the help of a rowdy home crowd the Wildcats went on multiple runs in the second half where it looked like they would run away with the game, but Tennessee refused to go away. Kentucky extended their lead to eight twice in the second half, but both times the Vols responded with a basket of their own. “I thought we did a good job,” Martin said. “Guys took care of the ball, moved the ball and we had spacing. The key was trying to get those big guys off the blocks and force those guys to play on the perimeter.” At the 12:42 mark in the second half the Volunteers began cutting into the Kentucky lead, and over the next two minutes were able to knot the game at 47-all. See GAME RECAP on Page 3

Student group takes equal benefits campaign to chancellor Justin Joo Staff Writer The Benefit Equality Campaign has continued into the spring semester, with the student group Friends with Benefit Equality delivering a letter on Monday to the office of Chancellor Jimmy Cheek about the issue. The issue is a pursuit for benefits provided to spouses of UT faculty to be available to homosexual and heterosexual domestic partners of UT faculty, who for whatever reason are not married either by choice or because they have no legal means to. The campaign’s roots go back to April 2012, when Faculty Senate unanimously passed a resolution to pursue benefits of some kind to domestic partners of faculty. Then in September, Cheek and Agriculture Chancellor Larry Arrington sent a threeparagraph letter to the Faculty Senate stating that they could not extend any benefits. The chancellors’ reasoning was that the university is a state institute and that the benefits Faculty Senate suggested to be provided were “inconsistent with the public policy of our state outlined in constitutional and statutory provisions.” Since then, Faculty Senate and other groups have taken a variety of action to express their dissatisfaction with the chancellors’ brief response. Toward the end of the fall semester, Cheek said at another Senate meeting that he was working on a second, more detailed response, which would be released in a few weeks. With still no response from Cheek, Friends with Benefit Equality drafted and delivered a letter to the chancellor encouraging either a response

Justin Joo • The Daily Beacon

The Friends with Benefit Equality delivered a letter to Chancellor Jimmy Cheek’s office requesting a response about providing benefits to the domestic partners of UT faculty. or, ideally, a move to provide some benefits. They also delivered a poster board that said, “New Year’s Resolution Benefit Equality.” This is not the first letter that the group has given to Cheek. The first one was taken to the administrative offices of Andy Holt Tower last semester. Part of this second letter’s intent is to try and get Cheek to not only respond to that first letter also to get some sort of response to the equal benefits campaign as a whole. Robert Naylor, sophomore in global studies and primary writer of the letter, said that

he hopes that this time around the chancellor will provide a response. “I feel like this time since we gave him a larger thing to look at (the poster board),” Naylor said, “he’ll be more apt to read the letter because I doubt he even read the first one, because he didn’t respond.” Friends with Benefit Equality is a student conglomerate group that represents several other student organizations, including All Campus Theater, Amnesty International, the Beatitudes Society, the Harry Potter Alliance, the Lambda Student Union, the Progressive

Student Alliance and Students Promoting Environmental Action in Knoxville (SPEAK). Naylor said that there are several other student organizations that are thinking about joining. Both the first and second letter were written to get a response from Cheek on the equal benefits issue. Friends with Benefit Equality are hoping to set up some sort of meeting to have further discussion on the issue. Ideally they want the chancellor to begin the process of providing equal benefits, but at the very least, they would be somewhat satis-

fied with getting some sort of official response from the chancellor. Jennifer Dobbins, senior in political science, edited Naylor’s letter. She said that another aspect of the letter is clarification of the chancellors’ first response from September. “There is a goal for us to making this letter,” Dobbins explained. “We really just want some sort of a response from the administration of UT explaining their response to the UT Faculty Senate.” Dobbins and the Friends with Benefit Equality’s issue with chancellors Cheek and

The Daily Beacon is printed using soy based ink on newsprint containing recycled content, utilizing renewable sources and produced in a sustainable, environmental responsble manner.

INSIDE THE DAILY BEACON: Page Page Page Page Page

2 3 4 5 6

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . In Short . . . . . . News . . . . Opinions .Arts & Culture . . . . . Sports

Arrington’s response was that the reason they cannot provide some sort of benefits to domestic partners is because it doesn’t comply with the state’s policies. Friends with Benefit Equality want Cheek and the administration to explain which state policies are being referred to and how exactly they clash with a new benefit policy. Cheek was not in his office, but the letter was to be delivered upon his return. UT administration did not have an immediate response to the letter or the Benefit Equality Campaign as a whole.

utdailybeacon.com

‘We Back Pat’ raises awareness on page 6


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.