Taser column off the mark

I think the writer completely missed the mark on this one [“‘Don’t tase me, bro!'” Nov. 27, Zach Howard]. Americans are basically good, law-abiding people and the risk of being Tasered at random by some psychopath is probably nil. What I take issue with is police officers carrying Tasers.

Let’s think for a moment. Why do police officers carry guns? Presumably, those weapons are carried for protection — self-defense, the protection of victims of crime and as a last resort against violent criminals. Keeping that in mind, a Taser can only be seen as an instrument used for the sole purpose of ensuring compliance.

Their use is virtually unrestricted because of the fact that Tasers are viewed as a harmless, nonlethal means of incapacitating a person. But what that means for anyone who gets confronted by a police officer is that if you do or say something the officer doesn’t like, you’re at risk of being Tasered. And when every few days a new Taser death gets reported in the news, it becomes more and more apparent that the risk of being Tasered also carries the risk of being killed.

The use of Tasers by law enforcement needs to be very carefully re-evaluated. In fact, the United Nations just declared the use of Tasers a form of torture. But anyway, at the risk of sounding dramatic, if I get stopped by a police officer carrying a Taser, I will be afraid for my life.

Schuyler Wilsonsenior, chemical engineering

Response to: ‘Course and professor evaluations must be public’

I could write a novel on the depressing lack of accountability that instructors have shown to students during my college experience, but instead I’ll share with you an example of an atrocity that happened this very semester:

I’m in a sociology class wherein the class was assigned to read a book, split into groups, and each presented a chapter in said book. While we read and worked on our presentations, the teacher took an international vacation for a week. When the teacher returned, we gave our presentations and were subsequently tested on the material. Please explain to me why I paid tuition money to buy a book, read it myself and explain material to my classmates? Why is the teacher even being paid in this case? The sad fact is that things like this happen all the time, we’ve all been victims. So yes, at the VERY least, evaluations should be public, or our education should be free.

Jordan ParsonsSenior, Sociology

Smoking editorial wrong

In response to Monday’s unsigned editorial [“Extinguish campus-wide smoking,” Nov. 26] as well as Mr. McCauley’s [“Smoking editorial disagreement, Nov. 27] reply, I have to ask, “Why is it the University’s place to hinder or dissuade individuals from smoking?” Frankly, I prefer to make my own decisions rather than have a bureaucracy determine what’s best for me. While I can understand the desire to ban smoking indoors and around entrances to protect nonsmokers who may be sensitive to the smoke, it should not be the place of a public institution to place limitations on an individuals personal liberties for the sole purpose of protecting them from themselves.

In the United States, a person is considered responsible enough at the age of 18 to make decisions for themselves on many issues, including the use of tobacco products. Although many people such as myself have decided not to smoke based on health, financial and other considerations, others should not be unfairly and excessively hindered from their own decision to smoke, even though the Technician or the University may think that they can make a better decision for them.

Phillip RoscoeSophomore, Chemical Engineering