Draft registration shouldn't be a reality for either sex
I'm responding to the Wednesday letter by David Behrens, which argued for the involuntary conscription of women into the military on the basis of gender discrimination against males.
Behrens' logic is completely backward. Forced conscription should be abolished, not made to include women. If the government is having a hard time getting enough cannon fodder for its war, then they have either failed to explain the threat or Americans recognize that the war in question is fundamentally unjust. In our current situation the latter applies.
The war in Iraq is illegal and constitutes a grave war crime. The pictures of Abu Ghraib and the destruction of Falluja give adequate proof of this contention. Furthermore, the longer the war in Iraq continues the larger the magnitude of the war crime committed. No one should be forced to prop up this insanity with his or her life.
Behrens' argument that equal rights for women should carry with it the requirement that they be forced to register with the selective service, and that failure to do so is discrimination by women against men is also wrong-headed. Formal equal rights does not equate with true equality. In a society where, according to RAINN, one in six women is the victim of an attempted or completed rape and more than 17.7 million women have been victims of these crimes, to speak of equality is hollow.
It is not women who are making the decisions to go to war. In fact it is not even the vast majority of men who are making these decisions. It is the government, a government in which women are still terribly under-represented.
Finally, in a military where, according to the Pentagon, sexual abuse of women is rampant and increasing, it is ridiculous to call for their registration and forced conscription.
Dustin McDaniel
political science senior
Physics behind global warming argument don't make sense
Over the years we've all learned of the risks of global warming. An often-heard consequence is that if the ice caps melt, the rising ocean levels will devastate coastal regions of the globe. Looking strictly from a physics standpoint, this theory is flawed.
We all know ice is less dense than water, thus ice floats. Ice also displaces water. If you fill a glass with water and add ice cubes, the water level rises as the ice fills volume previously occupied by the water. As the ice melts, and becomes denser, the water level recedes. A majority of the earth's ice caps are submerged below sea level, displacing water. If the bulk of the ice caps are submerged, how would melting of this ice cause the ocean levels to rise?
In no way am I saying that global warming should be ignored. I am also looking at only one popular consequence and ignoring the complex effects of climate change. The physics simply don't make sense. If you melt a less dense solid into a denser liquid it will occupy less volume, not more. Thus if the ice caps melt one could expect ocean levels to fall. Granted, water expands when heated, but this thermal expansion is minimal and would only occur near the surface as water temperatures drop rapidly with increased depth. Shouldn't the transformation of solid, less dense ice to denser, liquid water offset the thermal expansion of water? What is being overlooked or is this theory/scare tactic scientifically flawed?
Brian Danker
UA alumnus
Campus bookstore employees 'pleasant, helpful' in rush
Did anyone make a resolution to do more praising than criticizing in 2005? I did, and I was able to practice it at lunchtime today. I went into the UofA BookStore to purchase a textbook for a class that I am auditing, having totally forgotten how busy the place would be at midday. I thought, oh well, there goes my lunch – I'll be standing in line for an hour. What a surprise! There were employees all over the place directing us to the books and the checkouts. What appeared to be long lines ended up being very quickly navigated. The employees were all so pleasant and helpful. I think we should all take time to thank these hard-working and cheery people. Wouldn't it be nice if they could go to Wal-Mart and Fry's and train their employees in efficiency and customer service? Once again, bookstore employees, good job!
Patricia L. Baldewicz
UA entomology employee
Taser support letter ignores weapon's inherent problems
How nice that the Vice President of Taser International wrote in to "balance" your story. Tuttle mentioned that there was a reduction in police shootings. This is not the real measure of success. Whether or not Tasers reduce the death of suspects is questionable. They have claimed, directly or indirectly, more than 80 people's lives so far. Saying Tasers have never killed anyone is like saying Elvis died of a heart attack.
Reducing police shootings is obviously a positive thing, but the question remains at what cost. While shootings may be down, tasings are steadily climbing. Rampant abuse is already evident since cops are more likely to use these weapons at inappropriate times. Take for example the dozens of football fans at ASU who were tasered to "protect the grass." This is unacceptable. There are also numerous reports from prisoners being tortured with these devices. Cities adopt these devices to reduce shootings but end up promoting abuse. If Tasers are to be used as tools to protect the citizens, they need to be labeled as "potentially lethal," not "less-than," and a system of punishment needs to be in place for officers that abuse them. Other cities have already taken such steps to protect their people. I urge people to call the Tucson City Council (791-4700) and demand the same.
Mike Sousa
art education senior