First off, single sanction works about as well as the penal code of Revolutionary France did. They have proven--again and again--that the more severe the penalties for crimes, the more likely people are to commit crimes of higher ranking. Think about it: if you got punished the same for stealing gum and stealing a car and you were going to steal something (I have to throw this bit in there for the people who would opt for nothing), would you go for the Big Red or the Jeep? Better yet, if criminals got the same punishment for murder that they got for robbery, how many victims do you think would make it to court? I'm thinking not so many. Now, I'm not saying that cheating on a test is murder, but it's damn close socially. If found guilty, you're out of the University irrevocably. Who wants to do that to someone? I've seen over a dozen people cheating, and I can't bring myself to turning them in. Yes, the University basically has one rule, and they're breaking it, but dammit: I'd turn them in if I knew what they'd get was a zero in the course. Or a semester suspension. C'mon; this system doesn't work. Who wants to be responsible for someone's expulsion? Only a nazi like that one who turned in the 4th year over a simple paper would opt for a trial over a rules revision.
Onto the court system, or as I call it, the Kangaroo Court. Why? There are zero checks and balances, and I've met the students here. Sure, the majority are great, but what if you get a rotten pick? Swallow your pride, and let the professors onto the jury, too. God, I hate it whenever people here flip out about letting older, wiser, more experienced people help out and call it a destruction and decay of student leadership. Happens so often with the Cavalier Marching Band. What people fail to see is that the CMB is more orderly, has over 50 student leaders, and is all around for better than the drunken, insulting Pep Band who got themselves banned from several stadiums. Good job, team!
But seriously, I've seen over a half dozen articles about trial misbehavior: jurors falling asleep or acting uncouth. Then, to make it worse, the Honor Committee refuses to release information on it. Yeah, that's transparent.
Finally, how about those peppy saps singing about how the students always favor not changing the system. Well, let me break it to you bluntly, it ain't because the system works; it's because the proposals are radical and unreasonable. It's a set up, basically. Would you vote yes for a Constitutional amendment that sought the death penalty for any crime or would you opt to stay with our current Constitution despite it obviously needing revision? You'd keep your ass out of crazyville is what you'd do, but then someone's going to take that vote data and say, "WOW! 92% of our citizens voted to keep the current Constitution. They must love it SO MUCH!!!" Yeah, no. It needs changed. Get rid of single sanction, add intermediate penalties, and keep the triviality clause. It's not that hard, people. It doesn't need a complete overhaul. Fix one issue at a time, and right now, just cut out single sanction and replace it with maybe a two or three step system: first time you get a zero in the course, second time you get a suspension, third time you're out. Or skip step 2 and proceed to 3. I don't care; just don't expel over a one page reflection paper. That's asinine and leaves a bitter taste on everyone's palate.
And don't talk to me about ubiquitous honor until some flake returns my laundry basket, god dammit.
No comments:
Post a Comment