OCR Text |
Show School disruption law unclear, premature manner, either in speec,. 'fi twns around the sT" g these terms to bPr 8oWjf 9 e police ma Dfr?: 1 mg for school offiei J? ? complaint. Does th taraa folate the proper ce;y J university? 1 a Such questions horf,,ii be considered by Ct i Commission. The t Commission would dolL f heed ol the hearini held in Washington 4 tain some recommendations on effective enforcement procedures which the Salt Lake City Commission Commis-sion might profitably take into consideration. The ordinance as passed raises many questions and leaves many points unclear. What constitutes "disruption"? The law prohibits interference with a student or employee em-ployee of the school on school grounds. What constitutes "interference"? "inter-ference"? It is against the ordinance ordin-ance to conduct oneself in an obscene, ob-scene, lewd, wanton, or lascivious BY BRIAN MASON Reacting to the threat of the disruption of classes by "agitators," "agitat-ors," the Salt Lake City Commission Com-mission unanimously passed an ordinance Tuesday which makes it illegal to disturb the orderly conduct of regular scholastic activities. ac-tivities. The Salt Lake City Board of Education had requested the ordinance. At the same time, hearings have opened before the President's Commission on Campus Unrest in Washington. The Commission was . established by President Nixon to explore the causes and effects of campus unrest and to recommend ways of assuring peaceful dissent. dis-sent. Has the Salt Lake City Commission, Com-mission, along with the Salt Lake County which passed a similar ordinance last year, taken matters mat-ters into its own hands and decided de-cided it is going to assure peaceful peace-ful dissent their own way regardless regard-less of the causes of dissent? Is this ordinance a classic case of violence or even the threat of violence vio-lence fomenting repression on the part of the "establishment"? Should not the City Commission have at least waited to hear the conclusions of the President's Commission before issuing any ordinance? In answer to the first question, the causes of dissent are not directly di-rectly related to the problem the City Commission is trying to solve The President's Commission Commis-sion will serve an important and useful function in attempting to get at the root causes of campus unrest Alienation from American Ameri-can society is deeply felt among many students. Some of these vent their feelings violently. Talk of "the revolution" is heard too often to be taken lightly. The sources of this discontent must be found and dealt with if our society so-ciety is to be strengthened and improved rather than destroyed in chaos or repression. The Salt Lake City Commission's Commis-sion's concerns are not this broad, however. They do not have the power or the resources to search out and deal with the causes of dissent. Rather, they have taken the step of recognizing the fundamental fund-amental right of students to get what they paid for, namely classroom class-room instruction. There should be nothing in the Presidential Commission's Com-mission's report which denies that right to students. That is to say, regardless of the causes of dissent, dis-sent, the remedy for the unrest cannot lie in denying the right of students to attend classes without with-out interruption. Therefore, to say the City Commission is ignoring the causes of dissent by passing the ordinance is to twist the facts, for the causes of dissent are not involved here, only the rights of students. To say the Commission is being be-ing repressive would also be twisting twist-ing the facts. It is not repression to pass a law against house-breaking. Similarly, it is not repression repres-sion to pass a law prohibiting disturbances dis-turbances on school grounds. Rather, Ra-ther, the ordinance is an attempt to restrict the repression of those attending classes by those who would disrupt them. It is repression repres-sion to be denied that for which one has paid. Basically, therefore, I believe the idea behind the ordinance is a good one. On the last question raised,, however, on whether the City Commission might not have waited until the President's Commission Com-mission makes its report, I have several reservations. The report will not be ready until after school is well under way next year. Nevertheless Nev-ertheless the report should con- |