UF tasing incident unfounded, unjust

Editorial

Since University of Florida police tased student Andrew Meyer at a John Kerry speech, outlets like YouTube, CNN and Fox News are all poking fun at the student's cry for help in incident: "Don't tase me, bro."

Meyer was tasered after asking Kerry about his involvement in a secret society at Yale University - a question that UF's Student Government, the organization sponsoring the speech, deemed inappropriate.

After his microphone was cut off, Meyer continued his question and was consequently manhandled by the university police. Meyer's pleas to be let go went unheard as five officers held him pinned to the ground.

Meyer was captured on video saying, "If you let me up, I'll walk out of here." Police tased him anyway and pandemonium erupted in the lecture hall.

As millions of viewers replay the tasing incident in jest, Meyer faces third-degree felony charges for resisting an arrest with violence, and he could get up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.

The charge will be on his record as he searches for jobs after college, and the humiliating video will probably haunt him for years to come.

If the police were trying to avoid a disturbing situation, they failed miserably.

Meyer could have been easily ushered out with little interruption, but instead the police caused a larger scene by using brute force in their attempt to quiet him.

He might have been overbearing during his time on the microphone, but the situation went much too far, and taser use was unwarranted.

The UF police should be embarrassed by their irresponsible weapon use - a behavior that has humiliated a student and evidently initiated distrust of on-campus authority.

Furthermore, UF's Student Government, an entity that should stand for students' rights, should be ashamed of denying this student his right to free speech at a public event.

News outlets and commentators are only fanning the flames by belittling Meyer.

Some have even gone so far as to make music videos from footage of the incident.

The event leaves a chilling uncertainty toward what might follow a student's choice to speak out in the future.

Students who preferred to remain silent in the past usually did so out of fear that their ideas and questions might be ridiculed.

Now it could be the fear of being tased. There was no need for violence. The first amendment guarantees an individual's right to ask questions.

If Bill O'Reilly gets to go on air and belittle people as he does, certainly a student should be able to ask questions at a student event.

PERMALINK -- TOP OF PAGE

Federal Reserve's actions lead to overconfidence

Editorial

In case you haven't noticed lately, your wallet is getting lighter.

The Federal Reserve System's Open Market Committee lowered the federal funds rate Sept. 18 from 5.25 to 4.75 percent.

This sends a bad signal to the market and will have long-lasting repercussions on everything from the ability for college graduates to find jobs in the future to how much your dollar is worth today.

Since the beginning of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's term in January 2006, he has fought to keep the federal funds rate (a rate that sets the tone for the rest of the economy) stable.

His latest move will likely undo all of his work to this point.

The most immediate effects of this concern the value of the dollars in your wallet. Since the rate cut, the dollar has fallen compared to almost all major currencies around the world, and the price of gold has shot up - both clear indicators that your dollar is worth less.

A history of the Federal Reserve's actions can be illustrated in this way: Imagine the whole economy exists entirely out of building brick houses, and the Federal Reserve is responsible for making all the bricks.

Every month and a half they tell the economy how many bricks they are going to make, and builders can lay foundations and hire workers accordingly.

Imagine for several years the Federal Reserve constantly increases the number of bricks it is going to make.

The economy's response is to lay more foundations and hire more workers and things look good. But the only way the Fed is able to increase the number is by watering down the clay in the bricks. Now imagine the Federal Reserve suddenly realizes they are making too many bricks at a time and they are becoming brittle and unsound.

The Fed's response is to drastically reduce the number of bricks they make. The economy expected an increased number but is left with many empty foundations and a lot of out-of-work builders. This is a recession.

The latest manifestation of this tendency is in the housing market. Everyone remembers the good times of 2004 when the effective federal funds rate was 1.35 percent, a far cry from the recently stable 5.25.

For some students, the tendency could manifest itself just when it's time to graduate, and they might be headed once again toward empty foundations and workers with no work to do. If this happens, recent college graduates aren't going to look very attractive in the job market.

When the Fed raised the rates in 2005 and 2006 (and wisely so, think of the value of the dollar like the value of the bricks) the economy felt the pain and the housing bubble burst.

Today we still have a lot of empty foundations and people are clamoring for more bricks.

The Fed is left with a choice between unsound money and investments - due to the inability of businesspeople to accurately predict the long term actions of the Fed - or something that could be called a happy medium.

If Bernanke continues to cut rates, he will be abandoning this happy medium.

PERMALINK -- TOP OF PAGE

St. Johns diversion a costly, impermanent measure

Staff Opinion

By Laurel Wright
ASSISTANT FEATURES EDITOR

Central Florida's ground water network might not be able to handle population growth beyond the year 2013, and as a result, utility managers are looking to other areas of Florida for help with the water supply.

The demand for water in Central Florida was brought home to Duval County when Central Florida utility managers and the St. Johns River Water Management District announced a potential plan that could take up to 262 million gallons of water daily from the St. Johns River and the Ocklawaha River in Marion County.

Construction costs for this proposed project range from $8 million to $1.2 billion, and processing and treatment fees of river water cost three to four times more than processing groundwater. But money isn't the only thing that will be sacrificed by diverting some of the river's flow.

Some environmentalists say this reduction could also have an adverse affect on the biological composition of the river.

The removal of the St. John's fresh water will cause more salt water from the ocean to flow into the river basin, thus increasing the river's salinity.

This change could kill off many freshwater plant and animal species that inhabit the river and force other animals like the manatee and blue crab to relocate.

Water management district officials claim that the 4.9 percent reduction in river's flow will not have a significant impact on salt levels and sea life, but other government officials are questioning the plan.

In a letter to the St. Johns River Water Management District, the Marion County Commission expressed disapproval of the plan citing concerns that it does not take a deep enough look at potential environmental harm and other long-term solutions.

The proposal to relocate one of our most precious resources is daring to say the least. If the state plans to spend a large amount of taxpayer's money to establish a source of drinking water for Central Florida, it should institute a plan that is more permanent.

Eventually, the fresh water that makes these North Florida rivers so valuable will run out, and desalination plants will have to be built. It seems logical to skip the step of depleting the rivers' resources and go straight to pumping ocean water, a recourse that we may eventually have too much of, to permanently quench Central Florida thirst.

Contact Laurel Wright at discourse@unfspinnaker.com -- PERMALINK -- TOP OF PAGE

Letters to the Editor

Debit IDs not a compelling idea for some

Dear Editor,

I have some concerns about the idea of converting our Osprey cards to debit cards, which was the subject of "SG taking early strides toward meeting goals" in the Sept. 19 Spinnaker. The main concern I have is that I will be compelled to open another account at a financial institution separate from the one my husband and I prefer. I would rather not.

My situation is somewhat different from most University of North Florida students. I am a "nontraditional" student, meaning I'm an oldster who has returned to college.

My husband and I already have debit cards from the credit union he and I have done business with for decades. I believe there are other nontraditional students who would prefer not to be included in the new plan.

I hope those who are considering the mechanics of this change will understand there will be some of us who would prefer to "opt out" of the arrangement and will take our needs and preferences into consideration.

We should be allowed to have a choice.

Karen Rhodes
Junior, Spanish

Bored Americans frame trivial incident as legitimate outrage

Dear Editor,

After watching the continually publicized video of University of Florida police tasing journalism student Andrew Meyer at a political forum last week, I was shocked. Though I thought the media frenzy surrounding the incident would subside in a few days, I was even more appalled with the events that transpired afterward.

Given equal to greater media coverage were the marches and protests dedicated to Meyers, decrying the alleged "brutality" used to restrain him at the speech by Sen. John Kerry. These protests appeared strangely similar to 1960s civil rights marches, attracting hundreds of participants, yet this situation was not met with the same type of active dissidence.

Any objective onlooker would agree upon further investigation that Meyer's actions blatantly incited the use of force against him.

Yet it was baffling to witness the school student body's overwhelming outrage with what happened - so much so that there arose a necessity for a school-wide revolution.

Living in the most affluent, copiously wealthy country in the world, young Americans have become anxious to condemn authority, regardless of the reasoning for doing so. This anxiety has materialized and become purchasable revolution wear, fitting American citizens with mass-produced Che Guevara T-shirts and Mao Zedong purses. These worn sentiments exemplify the idea that our country's citizens feel the need to exclaim they too know the pain of governmental victimization.

We are too embarrassed to admit that Americans - especially college students - while well-intentioned, yearn for a taste of the cultural revolutions our parents and grandparents experienced. We are willing to equate Meyer to some type of civil discourse hero, even though the facts indicate otherwise. The idea that we live relatively painless lives in comparison to those who actually encounter oppression is even more painful.

Instead of protesting actual police brutality, we cry injustice at an incident obviously provoked by the alleged victim. In the end, because legitimate acts of police brutality go unnoticed throughout the world unable to be uploaded to YouTube or the nightly news, we consider minute incidents such as the tasering of Meyer to be absolute injustices.

Andrew Meyer has become the poster boy for American victimization, provoking an unnecessary situation, exaggerating its injury, and then declaring no fault, even in the eyes of the glaring truth - available 24 hours a day by way of YouTube.

Fatima Hussein
Junior, English

Illegal immigrants a burden for Americans

Dear Editor,

In response to Kay Guerrero's "Instead of building fences, walk in immigrant's shoes" column in the Sept. 19 Spinnaker: Let's talk. America has always welcomed immigrants. This "melting pot" has a tradition of embracing people of every walk of life. In fact, no other country has paid so much respect to individual rights like America has. Immigrants - who came in through the front door - built this country knowing they were paving their own way to earn their citizenship.

To better understand this issue, one has to realize that illegal immigration poses a burden to Americans. Taxes that are not paid by undocumented aliens are paid by municipalities, states and the federal government.

The Federation for American Reform Web site states that educating illegal immigrants comes at a high cost. In states like California, for instance, the annual bill for educating children of illegal immigrants is $7.7 billion. In Texas it's $3.9 billion, and in New York it's $ 3.1 billion.

American society is built on work. Longsuffering middle class members often have a hard time making it through the month. The earnings one American would usually make with a job are now paying for two or even three jobs.

To feed a family and pay for the taxes not all are paying, someone has to come with the money. Guess who? Americans do -- not undocumented aliens. Where do their earnings go? Outside American borders.

Reality in countries in South America is nothing but a reflex of a culture that is, unfortunately, based on corruption and a total lack of community awareness. Corruption is such a part of their lives that no one questions anymore if half the cost of a bridge is used to bribe officials and make through the right channels existing in municipal, state or federal levels.

Should America be responsible for that as well? Should America take those who, in the search for a better reality, start their lives with a false social security number and driver's license because that is the only answer they found for a better life? Does the mean justify the end?

Legal immigrants today come to this country with a stereotype. Most of the legal immigrants that have contributed with their sweat and even lives know they would not have it another way. They would not have done it otherwise. They do not only oppose the practice of those who are more than 12.4 million, but have already voiced their opinion.

Even though a fence is the answer most do not agree upon, one thing is certain: American borders have to be secured one way or another. The sad reality that comes with a fence is the gap that capitalism has deepened through history. This gap has been observed not only outside that fence, but inside as well. Ask the American medium-class citizens of this country, they know it better.

While America has been notoriously recognized for building this fence, the world seems to forget the amount tons of donations America has sent to catastrophes all over the world such as the Tsunami area and many others.

The American Red Cross has done more for the world than any other organization out in the world has done for America ever. Do all countries help America in times of need?

The government is doing what it can to make sure that a bipartisan policy on the issue is reached. The answer to such an issue can only come as a comprehensive law that will attend everyone's needs. Americans should not pay for illegal immigrants bills and take the burden of their presence in silence.

Mostly important, to understand what a society is about, we should stand together as one and not sit from a comfort place and see what one side of the parts involved is doing. Yes, it is their responsibility to do so but no one is exempt to step out and help. Now that we have taken a look on the other side of the story, all of us can have a better understanding of this issue.

One last thing: since we opened the channels of communication and offered the other side of the story, why don't we all sit and talk? And as we do it, out of respect and out of courtesy, why don't we all speak English then?

Joao Bicalho
Senior, Communication

PERMALINK -- TOP OF PAGE