Our View: Its not even about guns anymore

In regards to your comments towards my article, I never stated my opinion about whether or not Chick-fil-A sandwiches should be sold on campus. My article was directed towards the USG senate, or, more appropriately, Senator Nagy. The issue brought to the senate (including Nagy, of course) dealt with the LGBTU trying to petition for Chick-fil-A sandwiches to stop being sold on campus. The article I wrote was a response to Nagy’s response to this petition.

–Beau Brown
Arts and Life Editor

First off, you seem to be completely disregarding the fact that Beau’s article showed up in the opinion section of the paper. Therefore, his statements were merely opinion-based. The editorial staff followed suit by also stating their opinions on the policy, which is why many of the comments began with “I feel” or “I think.” The fact that you took what one of the page designers said and then tried to correlate it with the issue of rape came completely out of left field. Also, your rant about how she mentioned “leveling the field” was distorted, probably because that’s not what she believes or feels. She was simply quoting the original statement about “leveling the field.”

–Alexandra Didato
Copy Editor

I want to focus on your attack of the editorial staff. You mention that we have a responsibility to “get it right,” which we try to do to the best of our abilities. You may have forgotten, though, that Beau’s piece was published in the OPINION section of the newspaper. The editorial policy at the bottom of the page clearly states, “The opinions expressed on this page are those of the individual writers or the editorial staff and do not reflect The University of Akron, its administration or any members of the university community.” And you say that the paper represents “the university and its stake owners”? An opinion article holds only the representation of the writer himself, even if he
is a member of our editorial staff.

–Katelyn Freil
News Editor

Hey! Ease ‘er back, there, Tolstoy!

–Kevin Kane
Copy Editor

Aside from the fact that you took my previous comments completely out of context and made assumptions about my beliefs on the unrelated topic of rape, you also misquoted me. In regards to your story about the victim of rape in a parking deck, the first question that comes to my mind is: where on earth is a young lady supposed to keep a gun? Have you seen the skinny jeans that women are squeezing into these days? Even as I write this, I’m anticipating your retort: “You carry a purse, don’t you?” To that, I ask: Have you ever tried to find something in the abyss of a woman’s bag?

–Katie Soinski
Page Designer

I am well-informed on how to properly construct an unbiased article; however, the rules of an op-ed seem to be a little unclear to you. The entire purpose behind an op-ed is to provide the writer an opportunity to give the reader a fresh perspective on an given issue. They don’t necessarily have to present both sides of the issue. In news articles, both sides of the issue must be properly presented, but in an op-ed it is the writer’s opinion.

–Heather Beyer
Editor-in-Chief

Rather than rebound off of every point that the writer makes, I will choose to focus on the remark concerning our founding fathers and the reference to the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment to the Constitution says this: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” It seems to me that the founding fathers were providing a constitutional right to bear arms because a state militia was necessary. Having just fought for freedom in the Revolutionary War, the founding fathers clearly saw the need for such a force. It was not based on the idea that criminals would acquire guns and use them against the common man, who thus obviously needed to have a gun of his own to protect his land, love and life.

–Andrew Krigline
Page Designer

Thank you for reaffirming my fears that the majority of people with time to spare to share their opinions are typically small-minded and feel the need to tear down others’ ideas. The point of having those special individuals mowed down in a neighborhood shooting is that NO ONE should be the victim of gun violence. I never even hinted at the idea of gun-related crimes being committed by law-abiding citizens. That doesn’t even make sense. If you are going to try and make someone look bad, I suggest you learn how to form intelligible sentences and remember what your kindergarten teacher told you: just because someone thinks differently from you doesn’t make them wrong. Now add in what I think: it just makes them smarter.

–Abigail Chaff
Opinion Editor

Everyone has a right to their own opinion when it comes to gun control, and clearly this man has a very strong opinion and isn’t happy at all with most of our responses. However, I definitely think he could have disagreed with us in less of a “Wow, I can’t believe you actually think that” kind of way.

–Matt Sympson
Sports Editor