The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 67, No. 9, Ed. 1 Friday, October 5, 1979 Page: 2 of 20
twenty pages : ill. ; page 20 x 14 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Beyond the sixties
So where do we turn these days for moral intensity?
Jerry Rubin, sixties' media star and theatrician par
excellence, spoke in the RMC last night As I write this, I
must admit I feel curiously let down, disappointed that a
voice from a decade which claimed a coherently moral
radical movement failed to present much more than an
entertaining string of common sense perceptions and laxly
defended cultural imperatives.
I was ten when Rubin was leading the Yippies to Chicago
in 468. For some reason, I've been under the impression since
then that the protest movements of the sixties suggested
programs for reforming the system they were criticizing.
But listening to Jerry Rubin describing the movement, I
began to wonder—unhappily—if what fueled it was simply
the same joy of belonging which fuels all sorts of mass
activities: fundamentalist church revivals, "spirifat winning
football games, national pride when an American wins the
Decathalon.
"In the sixties there was something beautiful," said Jerry.
"When you got up in the morning you had a feeling that
what you would do that day would matter."
Of course he's right. We talk about it all the time; "I wish I
had been born ten years earlier."
But this "something beautiful" lacks moral force. Aggies
at football games feel they are a part of a greater whole, but
their "movement" has no particular validity or invalidity.
We cannot look back to this part of the past for
inspiration in our present situation. The problems
discovered by the sixties activists are familiar to us now. The
"fun" work, the easy work which encouraged a sense of
grand crusade, is behind us. We are left to look for answers,
quite likely difficult and ambiguous ones, to familiar
problems which just won't go away.
So where do we turn for the moral intensity to work with
real and stubborn problems? Tonight, the only answer I
seem to have is a negative one: somewhere besides the myths
about the "sixties."
—Matt Muller
RMC director Marty Vest passed
along the following to the
Thresher:
MEMORANDUM
September 28, 1979
TO: Ms. Marty Vest
FROM: Russ Pitman
SUBJECT: Thefts
A theft last night of a chair from
the Rice Memorial Center, in
addition to the previous loss of a
couch and two chairs necessitates a
change in the building access from
the door on the west side during
the evening hours. Please secure
this door at dark (currently 8:00
pm) and post appropriate signs so
the users of the Center will be
aware of this new procedure.
1 have discussed this matter with
John Cockerham and Greg
Woodhams and they understand
the necessity for this action. We
llMtiHUliiltllbt*'
r-svVflVvNWA-'-
f
UJOC, MAJE "
Spanning the hedges
may, at some future date, find an
alternative solution, but at the
present time it seems the prudent
course of action to prevent
hopefully, future thefts.
To the editor:
Why would anyone object to the
naming of the streets on campus? I
ask this question sincerely hoping
for an answer.
For year the Cashier's Office has
seemed to attract most of the off
campus visitors and we have
wrestled with the problem of trying
to tell them how to find various
buildings only to be asked why
more buildings weren't marked or
why no streets were named. We
had been so pleased to see that
finally someone took the time to
do Just that only to find that for
some reason many students found
it objectionable. Why?
Dorothy Eason
Assistant Cashier
by David Dow
Very few of us object to the
stipulation that a person's right to
extend his fist ends where a second
person's nose begins. This
principle appeals because the
concept of liberty holds that
individual freedoms should
expand until they endanger others'
freedoms. We should extend all the
privileges which benefit the
individual as long as they cause no
offsetting damage to society.
Allowing free access to
handguns damages society. No
matter how hard anyone searches,
reasons for allowing individuals to
possess handguns elude us.It isn't
hard to figure out why. Nearly
one-third of all murders,
robberies, assaults, and rapes
which involved weapons in 1977
were committed with handguns.
Handguns were used for almost
half of all murders in that year;
furthermore, this figure does not
include the thousands of
accidental killings and the
thousands of suicides which would
not have happened had the means
for a quick, easy death not been so
readily available.
The responses of gun enthusiasts
I'UNeVGR
DMPKUP
$ TSPPV5 PAST.
WAT&RUNWR
TH& BRlWft.
/
BUTIW,
y CUT TBP
3NK0R
MM
ONTH&
issues.
pxmcAuv.
irwpeHARt)
5URe.
„nv, 0TM5
MAY 60
OFFTttS
/ABOUT
CHAPPA-
QtltPPICK,
BUT..IUCRQ8
mmm
WHfiNI „
COMMIT.
tf?k>
to these statistics take two forms.
One argument is that households
need guns for protection. Another
is that criminals will still get guns
or find substitutes for them despite
laws restricting handguns.
These typical objections
iconveniently ignore two very
interesting statistics. First, almost
two-thirds of all murders are
perpetual against family
friends, or acquaintances. The
murder victim usually knows the
killer. Grisly, sensationalized
stories of marauding mystery
killers are reports of rare
occurrences. Second, well over
half of murders committed occur
suddenly during violent
arguments. Claims that most
murders result from premeditation
or during the course of felonies are
incorrect.
These figures tend to indicate
that deaths often result solely
because guns are so convenient.
Pulling a trigger is a quicker and
easier way to end an argument or
eliminate a problem than, say,
beating someone's head with a
baseball bat. Indeed, the ease and
efficiency with which handguns
kill actually lure angry people into
killing before they have a chance to
calm down.
The gruesome brutality and
unnecessary death spawned by
handguns should shock you, as
they do most people; in 1978, 84
percent of the U.S. population
favored handgun control. Despite
this consensus, the National Rifle
Association continually frustrates
efforts regarding handgun
legislation. Handgun Control,
Inc., is trying to counter the mighty
NRA, but Congress still refuses to
ban handguns— these remnants of
barbarism in our presumably civil
society. The NRA controls a lot of
money and a lot of votes.
Ironically, the NRA wants to
save 'liberty' but not life. So by this
time tomorrow 24 Americans will
be murdered, nearly half because
of handguns. Even the NRA, I
presume, approves of keeping
hydrogen bombs out of the public
domain. Yet like bombs, cheap
handguns serve no useful purpose.
Banning handguns will not end all
murder, since we are not reforming
the environment which breeds
insane killing. By restricting access
to handguns, however, we would
remove an element in the sordid
setting which makes killing
routine, easy and commonplace.
MATTHEW MULLER
I | Editor
JAY OLIPHANT
1EJDCQLJCD Business Manager
Richard Dees Managing Editor
Geri Snider Advertising Manager
Rolf Asphaug News Editor
Wayne Derrick Photography Editor
Franz Brotzen Fine Arts Editor
Greg Holloway Sports Editor
Bob Schwartz Back Page Editor
David Butler Associate Editor
News Staff Anita Gonzalez, Michael Trachtenberg,
Kathy Mitchell, Amy Grossman, Bill Bonner, Sarah Herbert, R.B. Johnson, Lela Smith
Margaret Schaurte, Sutapa Sur, Anita Mangold, J.C. Puckett, Pat Campbell, Eugene
Domack, Ron Stutes, Rawslyn Ruffin, Augusta Barone, Rick Gerlach, Russ Coleman
Fine Arts Staff Steve Sailer, Jim Fowler,
Thomas Peck, Nicole Van Den Heuvel, Scott Solis, Carol Owen, Thorn Glidden
Gary Cole, Gaye Gilbert
Sports Staff Norma Gonzalez, Mich Rucker
Tom Samuels, Alison F. Whittemore
Art Staff John Lemr, Harold Nelson
Photography Staff Bruce Kessler, Jeff McGee
Advertising Staff John Szalkowski, Jason Hadley, David Hou
Production Staff John VanderPut, Gaye Gilbert
Ann Betley, Heidi Clay, Joe Bartoscek, Dianne Frome, Vikki Kaplan, Ruth Hillhouse,
Autry Ross, Allison Foil, Laurie Koch, Debbie Davies Huffman
Circulation Rob Rogers
The Rice Thresher, the official student newspaper at Rice University since 1916, is published
weekly on Thursdays during the school year, except during examination periods and holidays,
by the students of Rice University. Editorial and business offices are located on the second floor
of the Rice Memorial Center, P.O. Box 1892, Houston, TX 77001. Phone 527-4801 or 527-4802.
Advertising information available upon request.Mail subscription rate: $15.00 per year. The
opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of anyone except the writer.
Obviously
©Copyright 1979, The Rice Thresher. All rights reserved.
The Rice Thresher, October 5, 1979, page 2
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.
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.
Muller, Matthew. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 67, No. 9, Ed. 1 Friday, October 5, 1979, newspaper, October 5, 1979; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245415/m1/2/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.