I feel a need to reply to an editorial article that was posted in the Opinions section of the Oct. 22 College Times. The titled "Incriminated by our Culture," by Eleanor Cleverly-Takahashi caught my attention as I am particularly interested in discussions on firearms in our culture, and I have to say the article was laughable. All political leanings aside, I largely agree with her statement of the obsession with violence in our culture, this is true and unfortunate.
However, the article went WAY off track in the last two paragraphs by her biased, unfair, and emotionally driven association with gun violence to the war in Iraq. I pose this question to Mrs. Takahashi: was there no gun violence in this country before the war started?
It is never acceptable to "desire the killing of police officers or US soldiers," and any rational person knows and believes this to be true. However, I cannot fathom how you can reasonably associate such a desire and cultural problem with the war in Iraq, especially by saying the oval office is "telling us it’s okay."
To be totally fair, using your reasoning, the shootings in Jonesboro, Arkansas, Paducah, Kentucky, and Columbine were a result of Bill Clinton taking us to war in Bosnia in 1995, correct? I wonder if Mrs. Takahashi would have made the same association had she been in the position she is now during Clinton’s administration. Personally, I doubt it.
Also I take issue with the reference to Kiddus Yohannes as a "silent victim." What exactly is he a victim of? A victim of having to live by rules that we all have to follow in an organized and safe society? Poor Kiddus, must be so hard to conform.
I realize that the liberal approach is to blame society and all other factors for criminal behavior, rather than focus on personal responsibility for our actions-the usual victimization mentality.
I read the College Times regularly and realize that the newspaper is a platform for aspiring journalists and future movers and shakers to have a voice and develop their skills before they enter the world, as it should be. But in order to have any shred of legitimacy, there needs to be some sort of rational middle ground and less emotionally driven bias, or you will have no hope of any professional credibility.