| OCR Text |
Show Ve&es&ii Korenber IB, 1S33 TbeDaliyUtaHQroDlcic-- S Plan to cBose Zion's Canyon will benefit visitors Chronicle Editorial ridlock is a problem that stifles America's VJj partisan system of government, as well as our public freeways. But one government agency has proposed a plan to help curb this destructive trend in Utah. And guess what? It's not the State Legislature. The National Parks Service has proposed a plan to end the traffic gridlock that currently congests a portion of Zion National Park morning, noon and night This plan is ideal for the park because it will simultaneously protect the park's environment, natural resources and visitor enjoyment. Zion's Canyon, a scenic seven-mil- e drive within the park, has seen the number of drivers on its road increasing steadily with the park's visitation from 1.4 million people in 1983 to 2.9 million this year. V,V Ifnii The! uonicle 60-passen- in the park's staff housing and maintenance facilitiesis projected to cost $30 million, with a $250,000 annual increase in operating costs. Despite the estimate's exorbitant appearance, the plan's implementation is well worth the cost. The suggestions of increased congressional appropriation and increases in visitor's fees to enhance the visitor's aesthetic experience. fund the plan are both warranted. The natural splendor of the park will cease to Currently, noise and exhaust fumes detract from the scenery. exist if the current trends of pollution and abuse Furthermore, the immense number of automo- continue. And with an number biles traveling through the canyon often occu- of yearly visitors, Zion's needs to take steps now two is the to insure the pied by only passengers polluting pleasure of its visitation for years park's environment and depleting the area of nat- to come. ural resources. Public comment on the proposal will be The National Parks and Conservation accepted until Dec. 24. Information is available Association has rightly favored the plan, by calling Zion National Park at or the to is it although The projected contain relatively Bureau of Land Management at start-u- p well-bein- g and costs. and expensive of the park depend on operating plan The plan which includes relocation and Utah's willingness to preserve and protect its expansion of the visitor's center and an increase natural treasures. ever-increasi- ng 772-325- 6, 539-401- paperJUmigned editor i IK Mumtnlill The park service's plan would close the canyon to general traffic and allow the growing number of visitors to view the scenery from open-ai- r shuttle buses. These vans propane-powere- d would help end the traffic congestion that is now keeping visitors out of the park. The open-ai- r form of transportation would also . v,v i 0. v V" Letters Wood lacks credibility Editor Many years ago, my mother said to me, "Everyone has two things in common: they ail nave assholes ana opinions, imagine her surprise when I told her about Jason Wood, an asshole with an opinion! While studying at the University of Utah, I enjoyed reading the Editorial section of the Chronicle. Many of the articles g and well written, even the ones with were which I disagreed. It appears, however, that with the installation of Jason Wood as Editor in Chief, the Chronicle has lowered its editorial standards. Jason Wood may not be the bitterest person in the world, but he has obviously had his share of bittennint pie. Thus far, I have yet thought-provokin- OillGU Ul XJ OU1UIJ U1UI IIUU1U jU0U&j iwi tion. His articles have been a steady flow of garbage intended only td offend people. ' Revenge is sweet, Mr. Wood. Twenty years from now, youll most likely be on medication for poor health due to a diet of cheap beer and red meat. My life will be different. After smoking a joint while listening to the Grateful Dead, I'll meet my girlfriends at the Elks Club for a St. Pauli Girl and a salad. And, just Pearl Jam reunion hopefully, we'll have tickets to the sold-oconcert that night. Jennifer Jacobson Alumni . ut " ROBERT GEHRKE Gun control legislation a must while violence still rampant . how the National Rifle Association It's astonishing to cling to such vehement opposition to any form of gun control. No matter how many people are shot, the NRA, the lobbying power they are, fights against waiting periods on hand guns and other mild, yet somewhat restrictive, legislation. What these people don't understand is that merely actualincreasing the number of handguns available doesn't sociA is true. the safer. opposite Actually, ly make people will a has where inevitably be a handgun everybody ety more violent society. I don't want to hear the stock argument that if guns are outlawed, only criminals will have guns. NRA members spew this argument every time any firearm legislation is proposed. Nobody is trying to outlaw guns. Waiting periods don't outlaw guns, but try to prevent criminals from buying guns. There is a common sense aspect to imposing waiting for a gun periods. People who can't wait a mere five days a are generally the people we don't want to have gun in the first plflCG Think about it. Who on earth doesnt know five days in advance that they're going hunting? What is the great urgento cy that somebody can't wait five days go target shooting? the woman back east of the heard Of course I've story who bought a gun and shot her husband two days later in The NRA dredges up this story to combat were enforced, waiting periods since, if waiting periods which may or the woman would not have had the gun, self-defens- e. may not have saved her life. But for that one story, how many more are there that involve criminals getting and using guns at short notice because there wasn't an adequate background check? How many more stories of people who bought and used a gun n because there was not an adequate period? is hands of out these a exactly what people's Taking gun to safeguard effort to do an in are intended waiting periods the community. cool-dow- A society where everybody has a handgun will inevitably be a more violent society. Chronicle Editorial Columnist In a piece in the Nov. 7 Salt Lake Tribune, focusing on the shooting of teenager Monica Vigil, Doug Tapking, a member of the NRA who opposes waiting periods said, "Maybe Monica Vigil needed a gun. People keep saying, A waiting period is worthwhile if it saves one life.' What if it costs one life? What if one person dies because of it?" Well, last year there were more than 10,000 shootings in the United States 1,400 of them were accidental. When put in this perspective it doesnt become an issue of "what if one life is saved" by allowing everyone to have a gun, but how many innocent lives are we willing to sacrifice to save that one life. Perhaps it's a fundamental difference I have with the NRA. My ideal America is not one where every citizen is armed to the teeth and barred up in their own fortress because of fear of violence. My ideal America is where nobody needs a gun for security because they aren't afraid someone who shouldn't have a gun will use one on them. Part of the problem with gun control is reconciling it with the Second Amendment. That amendment states that "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon," and until now the NRA has been successful in maintaining a literal interpretation of that amendment. Any gun control, they argue, is a direct violation of that amendment. However, look at the way courts have interpreted other amendments in the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment, for example, guaranteeing free speech, has had several restrictions placed on it, but as long as the restrictions don't keep people from exercising their right responsibly, they are allowable. Under a consistent interpretation there is no reason that the Second Amendment should be granted an "untouchable" status that no other amendment enjoys. A waiting period does not infringe on ownership of guns, but provides, at most, an inconvenience, delaying their purchase. The NRA needs to concede that waiting periods are what the public favors. A recent poll showed that 89 percent of see "Gehrke" on page six |
