Sunday May 19th 2013

Authors

ASUA Meeting, 16 February 2011

At today’s meeting, your fearless Senate unanimously approved the consent agenda for $3,207.83, heard a presentation on the changing of course numbers, discussed and approved  a Senate fund request from Senator Bilby for $2,117.57, and discussed and approved a resolution on concealed weapons (8-1-0), which can be found along with today’s agenda in this here document. More details of today’s all-too-sober meeting below the fold:


It was the second week in a row the Senate entertained a guest during the Call to the Audience, this time from student veteran, Lamp reader, and current ASUA Senate candidate Robert Rosinski. Mr. Rosinski spoke to the Senate regarding the “facts of concealed carry,” which included actual facts of gun-related incidents at colleges that allow concealed carry and clarifications regarding the restrictions granted by the current legislation. Though he was speaking to a notoriously unsympathetic audience, Mr. Rosinski was articulate in his appeal for an accurate consideration of the issue of guns on campus, a perspective and tone that would be refreshing to see behind next year’s Senate table. The Senate next approved the consent agenda for $3, 207.83, including support to the fencing club (but, notably, a request for uniforms, not rapiers).

Next the Senate heard a presentation from Vice Provost Gail Byrd on the changes to course numbering for general education classes. This will entail each former INDV/TRAD/NATS will be listed in the course catalog to reflect the department that produces that class; for example, TRAD 104 “Sharing A Glass with Hemingway and Poe: Alcoholics Across Literature” would be listed an English Department class (ENGL) instead of under the TRAD heading — though Vice Provost Byrd did assure the Senate listing of each equivalent class would appear under the TRAD listing. The main concern here was that students would not realize or hear of the change, and the Senate indulged the Provost with the best methods to inform students, including such innovative ideas as sending them an email on the change.

In a move that is somewhat unexpected after all the fanfare devoted to her much-reduced fund request last week, the Senate unanimously approved a $2,117.57 Senate fund request to Senator Bilby. In addition to the fund request approved last week, Sen. Bilby’s event has been granted $3,085.64, or around 19% of the total fund. There are 10 Senators, which would grant Bilby around 10% for all her endeavors, not just this event. The trope of Senate project deserves a thorough reconsideration, one with a heavy dose of skepticism f0r what is “effective” in terms of these often one-day events that spend large amounts of this student money.

The Senate next considered the infamous gun resolution, which can be read in full at the above document and, it should be noted, is exactly the same as the previously-considered document except it includes the name of one more bill being considered by the Arizona legislature. The discussion, of which there was not much as this site would have liked, centered around the Senate’s assertion that nearly every student they talked to like, totally already agreed with the resolution. Despite Mr. Rosinski (and my colleague’s) deft evisceration of this assumption, the Senate universally acknowledged that it was safer for students to be told they cannot exercise their basic liberties on campus. The resolution includes a specific passage regarding law enforcement, stating “ allowing concealed carry at The University of Arizona will effectively disarm campus and public safety officers by removing their strategic advantage in hostile situations.” But as our esteemed forebloggers report, dah police are rarely a help in these types of situation. This from way back in aught-six:

News sources now confirm that a 18-year-old female UA student was shot early yesterday in a drive-by shooting.  Some students on Facebook had already started a group entitled “Wildcats Against Violence,” but the group lists the time as the night of the day before.

Time errors notwithstanding, it’s definitely the same party as FIJI is the same fraternity as Phi Gamma Delta.  The Facebook group reports that Theta Tau and Alpha Chi Omega are also within the vicinity.

Here’s what they didn’t tell you:

FIJI, 1801 E First St, is just across the street from UAPD, 1852 E. First St.  This is further evidence that citizens cannot trust police as an alternative to the right to bear arms. This is the second frat shooting this year and the third gun-related incident on university-related property to my knowledge.

Today’s Senate discussion was led by Senator Rising, who campaign with a supposed commitment to “civil liberties”:

3. Educate students about their individual rights. Many students are completely ignorant of the rights afforded them in the constitution

It is worth noting that “civil liberties” are not limited to promoting the trendy political issue of the season, such as gay marriage. Whether or not the Senate likes the fact, “the constistution” happens to include this. The rest of the Senate concurred that the majority of the students they talked to in the two weeks since the last discussion. There are noted limitations to using a SafeRide ride-along, in which a Senator rolls shotgun for an evening while SafeRide chauffeurs freshmen back to campus from a block north of Speedway. This is including but not limited to the fact that SafeRide patrons skew radically to the low end of the spectrum of UA students, they are nearly all students who live on campus or in the areas near it, they are the type of students to take advantage of ASUA services, and so on. Regardless, the Senate passed the resolution with not enough controversy and with only Senator Adams offering a “nay” vote.

The Senate reports included little of consequence except to inform us that the Senate will be entertaining the likes of President Shelton, Provost Hay, and Vice President Vito at next week’s meeting! We’ll be ready.

Share Button

Reader Feedback

3 Responses to “ASUA Meeting, 16 February 2011”

  1. Dan Caldwell says:

    I attended and spoke at the ASU senate meeting where they passed an identical resolution (they basically copied and pasted ASUA’s resolution and actually had to amend it after the 2nd read because it still had ASUA and U of A in the resolution.) The debate was similar and we had two senators openly admit they would vote against it even though they had no evidence that allowing concealed carry on campus would increase gun violence. Basically, they claimed to have students come up to them and say they didn’t support it. Another stated he would vote it against it because he “never understood how the right to self-defense was related to personal liberty”. I know that sounds absurd and if you don’t believe me, Alexander Falkenstein, the West Coast Director for Students for Liberty, can confirm that those disgusting words were uttered by an ASU USG senator. The vote came out to 8-5 for the resolution and we did have several senators stand up for concealed carry on campus. They had empirical evidence to back up their arguments, but it was not enough to overcome the irrationality and emotionalism of the other Senators.

    • Anna Swenson says:

      Thank you for the insight, Mr. Caldwell. Your story only makes the approval exercise appear yet more absurd — one of the UA student senate’s major arguments in favor of passing the resolution was the fact that “other organizations in the state have already come out against it,” and I believe they even cited USG when making that point. Your story calls (yet another of the infinite) question on the presumptions that drive these student-government statements.

  2. Robert Rosinski says:

    The Resolution comes from ASA, down to the Student Governments. This is why they are all identical.
    In short, it is a waste of time in either case. The Student Governments are not going to waste their time actually trying to lobby against the bill (that’s someone else’s job!) nor are they actually going to try ad have a discussion on it.
    As you recall last year, when the floor was open to all, there was “no support” (read concealed carry supporters suddenly appeared) for halting the resolution. So, we wouldn’t want to have that again!

Leave a Reply