Collegian (Hurst, Tex.), Vol. 4, No. 11, Ed. 1 Wednesday, November 20, 1991 Page: 3 of 15
fifteen pages : ill. ; page 15 x 12 in. Scanned from physical pages.View a full description of this newspaper.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Wednesday, November 20,1991
News /Collegian 3
-----------------------Student poll -----------------
Smoking areas discussed
By Susan Reger
Reporter
What is your opinion on having
no smoking areas inside buildings
on campus?
“Great! Smokes bothers me.
It makes me cough and smell.
Smokers should have their closed
in room. But, the school may be
sued for (the smokers) bad health
because they had to stay in an
enclosed room.” — Susan
Trotters, 44, Business, NW
Campus, Night (reformed
smoker)
“It is okay for them to smoke,
but not in building.” — Sandra
Trebost, 24, Secondary
Education, NW Campus (non-
smoker)
“I feel the smokers should
have a room, maybe in the
cafeteria.” — Debra Myers, 42,
English NW Campus, Night
(non-smoker)
“Smoking should be banned.
TCJC should have smoke-free
campuses.” — Sylvia
Bustamante, 42, Elementary
Bilingual Education, NW
Campus, Night (non-smoker)
“Great! Smokes bothers me.”
— Bendra Richerson, 20,
Business, NW Campus (non-
smoker)
“Fine. Smoke makes me
sneeze and get red eyes. ”—Debra
Briseno, 19, Pre Pharmacy, NW
Campus (non-smoker)
“Great. It bothers me (and)
makes my hair stink.”—Lenn King,
19, Sociology, NW Campus (non-
smoker)
“Fine. It doesn’t bother me. I
can smoke outside anytime as long as
it is not too cold.”—Jolin Petit, 32,
Physical Therapist, NE Campus
(smoker)
“I feel smokers should have a
place to smoke in a well ventilated
room.” — Evon Reina, 21,
Elementary Education, NE
Campus (smoker)
“There should be no smoking
inside at all. Outside is okay. lam
allergic to smoke.” — Lou
Davenport, 21, Office Operations,
NE Campus (non-smoker)
“I don’t really care. But I feel
they should stay in one room. I am
concerned that I may be allergic to
it.” — Debbie Easley, 37,
Elementary Education, NE
Campus (reformed smoker)
“I think it is terrible. There
should be some place indoors. NE
Campus has no cover outside to
smoke under when it rains.” —
Edward Wills,18, Legal Assistant,
NE Campus (smoker)
“It is okay. I understand it
bothers people, but feel we should be
able to smoke in the cafeteria.” —
Elizabeth Smyth, 35, Graphic Arts,
NE Campus (smoker)
“Fine with me. Maybe it
would save money. Smoking inside
could be a fire hazard, and the
insurance may be high.” — Jill
Droubie, 25, Social Worker, NE
Campus (smoker)
“I think it is good. They
could have their own room shutoff
from the rest of the campus with a
door on it.” — Ladonna Jenkins,
18, Computer Science, South
Campus, Night (non-smoker)
“I feel smokers should have
their own room.” — Claudia
Davis, 19, Marketing, South
Campus (non-smoker)
“Great! There should be no
smoking at all.”—Randy Moore,
19, Electronics Technology,
South Campus Night (non-
smoker)
“Doesn’tmatter. lean smoke
outside. It doesn’t take that long to
smoke a cigarette anyways.” —
Doug Laughlin, 20, Engineering,
South Campus, Night (smoker)
“I think that is fine. Maybe
they could have a little room
somewhere that has a door on it.”
— Jason Moss, 23, Computer
Science, South Campus, Night
(non-smoker)
“It is okay to smoke and
maybe have their own room.” —
D. Roykovitz, 23, Undecided,
South Campus (non-smoker)
Grief hits home
even for students
(CPS) - College life, most would
agree, is hardly the smoothest of life’s
transitions. According to a Kansas
State University professor, it’s not
the happiest for many, either.
David Balk says he was
surprised to find that many college
students are grieving the deaths of
family members and friends.
When Balk surveyed Kansas
State University students about their
lifestyles in 1990, he discovered that
28 percent of the students reported a
family member had died in the
previous 12 months.
The professor of human
development and family studies was
so astonished by his findings that he
ran a second survey - this time, with
a different set of students. The results
were the same. Further, 45 percent of
those surveyed reported losing a
family member in the previous 24
months.
Both of Balk’s surveys also
reflected that 44 percent of the
students said a friend had died in the
previous 12 months, and a whopping
66 percent reported the death of a
friend in the previous 24 month.
The professor believes the
unspoken reality of grief is a hidden
problem on most U.S. campuses. “I
would be very surprised to find that
KSU had a much higher, or lower
incidence than other campuses.” he
said.
Balk, who received a grant to
conduct a two-year study through the
National Institute of Mental Health,
said he is interested in finding out
how college students cope with the
death of a family member or friend,
and how the grieving process can be
made easier for them.
Many students don’t believe
they have an outlet to sort through
their feelings, he said.
The professor, surprised at the
number of students who responded
to an advertisement placed in the
school newspaper, formed several
support groups, run by graduate
assistants, that met twice weekly for
four weeks.
The groups were so successful
that students requested that they
remain together after the project study
was completed.
“The group seems to have a
positive effect. They said they
appreciated the experience, though
it is very painful,” Balk said.
“One of the things is that they
learn they don’t have to keep such
tightcontrol. It’s okay to start feeling
and get upset.”
Other students who have not
experienced loss and are separate
from the bereavement study also are
being studied. The control group has
been evaluated on stress, and the
results are compared with those in
the bereavement group.
===;^================== Letters -
Gun control infringes on Second Amendment
Push crime control,
not gun control
Dear Editor,
In response to the editorial on
“Buyers could wait for gun
purchases,” I would like to make the
following comments.
With the current high rate of
crime, stiffer sentences with no parole
or early releases is needed. Why
punish an unanimated object?
The argument that the second
amendment is only for the police and
the militia is not right It is for the
free people. Why don’t you ask
some communist China students why
they may disagree with you?
The gun safety course is a good
idea, something the NRA has been
doing for a long time. Would TCJC
like to help?
The mention of the Chicago
Housing Authority (CHA) and the
propaganda Time article was in poor
taste and had nothing to do on the
waiting period. Also, the cartoon
was in poor taste.
California has a 14-day waiting
period, but it did not stop Patrick
Purdy from purchasing a rifle and
killing people. The waiting period
has no effect. The man should have
been locked up prior to the incidence,
but the system set him free. California
went after gun control instead of
solving the system problems. What
a joke.
Also, the NRA is made up of
individuals who wish to protect their
rights and do not wish to practice
socialism.
So, gun control is not the answer
to crime control, and no way is it
constitutional to have gun control in
a free country. In my opinion, I
believe if you can solve depression,
you can solve crime. Think about it.
David Taylor
NE Campus
Media viewpoint
on guns criticized
Dear Editor,
Why is the press so quick to
attack the validity of the Second
Amendment while riding on the
wings of the First? Don’t you realize
that the demise of any single
Amendment will surely lead to the
destruction of them all?
In your interpretation of the
Second Amendment, you focused on
“a well-regulated militia” and defined
“militia” as being the police and U.S.
Armed Forces.
Title 10 of the United States
Code, Section 311 (10 USC 311)
defines the militia as consisting of all
able-bodied male citizens aged 17-
45. 10 USC 312 states that members
of the Armed Forces are exempt from
militia service. The New Webster’s
Dictionary, for sale in the student
bookstore, defines “militia” as the
“citizen’s army” (as opposed to the
government’s army).
Furthermore, if our forefathers
truly meant to imply your
interpretation, then why did they use
the words “the right of the people?”
These words also appear in the First
and Fourth Amendments. If we are
to believe your interpretation that the
Second Amendment does not apply
to us as individuals, but rather, is a
collective right, we must al so be ready
to accept that we “the people “ don’t
have the right to peaceably assemble,
nor are we free from unreasonable
search and seizure.
According to the most recent
FBI Uniform Crime Report, “no gun
law in any city, state or nation has
ever reduced violent crime or slowed
its rate of growth.” This is why you
couldn’t give us any facts or statistics
proving that waiting periods or any
other gun control legislation can have,
or ever has had, any positive impact
on violent crime.
Whereare the facts? How many
people are shot with weapons within
a week of their legal purchase? Has
California seen a decrease in any
gun-related crime since the inception
of its two- week waiting period? How
many times a year do law-abiding
citizens use guns to protect
themselves or their family?
Here’s a fact: between 1976
and 1982, violent crime rose twice as
fast in Washington, D.C. as it did in
the rest of the nation. This, following
a virtual handgun ban passed in 1975.
Sixteen years later, with the handgun
ban still well intact, D.C. leads the
nation in homicide.
I agree that we have a serious
problem in society today.
Unfortunately, not only will this and
other similar legislation fail to solve
the problem,itsdivertingourattention
from the real problem—the criminal.
Laws are made for law abiding
citizens only. Criminals pay no
attention to them. If you truly want to
get their attention and reduce the rate
of violent crime, lock them up for life
if they use a gun in the commission of
a crime. Make them pay with their
life if they shoot someone. Why
should we reward criminals with
lesser sentences simply because the
victim does not die? This may seem
drastic to you, but infringing on my
Second Amendment right is beyond
drastic.
LEA Student/ NRA Member
Name Withheld
NE Campus
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Matching Search Results
View seven places within this issue that match your search.Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Collegian (Hurst, Tex.), Vol. 4, No. 11, Ed. 1 Wednesday, November 20, 1991, newspaper, November 20, 1991; Hurst, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1183186/m1/3/?q=Lamar+University: accessed June 7, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Tarrant County College NE, Heritage Room.