Students should always wear bike helmets

This is a letter to all UA students and staff to encourage them to wear bicycle helmets when riding bicycles. I am a graduate student in the School of Architecture here at the university. On Jan. 31, I was struck by a car while riding my bicycle. I spent the following three weeks in the hospital and in rehabilitation to recover from the brain trauma I received.

Luckily I always wear a helmet and it at least prevented me from suffering terrible brain damage, and at most saved my life. I am very grateful that I was wearing it. The helmet is the only reason I am able to even write this letter. I don’t recall the accident, but the police gave a ticket to the person that hit me and indicate that I was not at fault. It disturbs me to walk around campus and see so many people riding around without a helmet on. I never thought it would happen to me either, but it did. You don’t wear a helmet because you think you are going to be in an accident, but because you never know what might happen. I just want to encourage everyone to wear helmets whenever they ride their bikes; it really does make a difference. Thanks for taking the time to read this, and good luck with the rest of the semester.

Hassan Adams innocent until proven guilty

I’m having a difficult time determining which part of Adam Gaub’s column about Hassan Adams is most absurd. Is it the presumption inherent in calling his words “”gospel””? Is it the earnestness with which he throws around platitudes about “”higher standards””? Nope. I know what it is. It’s the part where he equates Lute Olson’s decision to suspend Adams to a hypothetical situation involving members of his own newspaper.

Let’s overlook the fact that if an Arizona Daily Wildcat staffer got a DUI, the entire campus community wouldn’t be reading about it on the front page. Gaub wraps up his comparison with this gem: “”I would argue it is our duty as community to cry out that we care and that we are not hardened and calloused against the seriousness involved with drunk driving.””

Hold on a second here – wasn’t Gaub’s column printed in a newspaper that once employed an editor in chief who was being prosecuted for his third DUI? Wasn’t he in a work-release program while at the helm? Didn’t he write a column about it in the June 25, 2003, edition of the Daily Wildcat?

But Olson’s decision to suspend Adams – who has been charged with one DUI, and has yet to be convicted of anything – for only the Pac-10 Tournament sends a “”dangerous message””? What was that about double standards?

The truth is, basketball players are not held to a higher standard by society. The law treats them exactly the same as it would treat me, you or Wildcat staffers. It doesn’t preclude them from continuing to work, or go to school or play basketball while facing DUI charges. Believe it or not, Hassan Adams is even innocent until proven guilty, although the Wildcat sports desk seems to have forgotten that. The only people who really hold basketball players to a higher standard are sanctimonious sportswriters.

Hard to say who gets to single out porn

I was surprised to see Mike Morefield’s column in yesterday’s paper claiming that the library should further regulate what Web sites users are allowed to view. In this case he was talking about – you got it – porn. (Please note that the library already does regulate the viewing of child pornography because it is illegal.) Morefield claimed that allowing users to view porn would “”debase or injure the morals, health or welfare of a child.”” He also claimed that because of this, the library should do something to make sure that underage children were not “”exposed”” to these influences.

This makes me wonder if there might be other sexual influences that should be banned to anyone under the age of 18. The most obvious of these are Shakespeare’s plays, which are filled with suggestive material. How about the Bible, which describes not only sex, but several cases of rape in the Old Testament? On a more reasonable note, there is the question of who exactly defines what porn is. To some the Victoria’s Secret ad that appears on the Wildcat Web site next to Morefield’s column would be considered soft porn, as would all the ads that the Wildcat publishes for the Bunny Ranch. If you are going to request that the library “”do something”” to keep minors from seeing porn on the library’s computers, what are you going to do to keep minors from seeing it in your newspaper?

Yesterday’s Wildcat political cartoon offensive to Iraqis

Oops … they did it again. This time, the Iraqi people are the victims of the Wildcat’s irresponsible and immature “”journalism.”” In yesterday’s political cartoon, the Wildcat portrayed the Iraqi people as war-loving, bloodthirsty people who are in a hurry to indulge themselves in an endless civil war.

Or maybe I am wrong – after all, the paper is simply exercising one of our most beloved basic principles: freedom of speech. And as long as advertisers don’t pull their ads from the paper, the Wildcat will always lead the fight for free speech.

I guess that’s why, sometimes, freedom of speech starts playing hide and seek.