University of Virginia Library

Letters To The Editor:

Law Student Clarifies Radar Dispute

As the anonymous law student
who precipitated the debate on the
misuse of radar in Charlottesville, I
wish to clarify several points lest
they lead to misunderstanding.

A "court official" has charged
that I am practicing law without a
license by suggesting that speeders
evade radar simply by not stopping
when flagged down. I have never
suggested that anyone do this, in
fact, I think it would be a very
foolish and risky, move likely to
incur more severe penalties than a
$35.75 fine. The quotation marks
among that paragraph were
misleading because instead of
originating with me, the
information therein came from a
policemen who was operating a
radar set at, the time the remarks
quoted were made. The officer
made these statements in response
to several questions put to him by
University students. He went on to
show them how the needle on the
radar's speed gauge could be
"locked in" to preserve the fastest
speed reached by an approaching
automobile even if that speed were
attained only a split second.

I have never doubted the
beneficial uses of radar to
apprehend speeders and to make
our streets more safe. It is a
laudable development in the effort
to cut down the nation's
horrendous accident rate.

But it has been misused in
Charlottesville, primarily on Cherry
Avenue, which is cluttered with
very steep hills. The police
repeatedly aim the radar set to
measure the speed of cars when
they reach the bottom of hills. The
chances of slightly exceeding the
speed limit on that street which
descending an incline are rather
great unless motorists are expected
to wear their brakes out. Intelligent
and reasonable enforcement of the
law would not call for the issuance
of speeding tickets for minor
infractions on such an unusually
hilly street.

Finally, it must be said that the
statement attributed to a policeman
in last Thursday's Cavalier Daily,
that no one is arrested at a speed of
less than 40 mph, is totally
inaccurate and is not borne out by
reality, as many students will attest.

Pro Police

I was appalled by the front page
story in The Cavalier Daily on 2
October. An anonymous law
student is given front page space to
lambaste local speed traps, and
these police state devices are held
up to the reader as an example of
Charlottesville's ingratitude to the
free spending students who provide
the citizen his livelihood. Even
worse, the mystery student will
attempt to have the city blacklisted
by the American Automobile
Association, a move which may
economically ruin this fair city.
Further, this young barrister advises
students on how to break the law
and get away with it by using a few
clever legal tricks.

I am the father of three young
children, and I hope the "small
town cops" will nail any driver,
student or otherwise, who exceeds
the speed limit, and that these
drivers will be heavily fined. Speed
kills, but rather than document my
statement with deranged rambling
of the type used by your law
student, here are a few sobering
facts from the "Vital Statistics of
the United States in 1964."

     

Age	1-4	5-9	10-14
Deaths/ 100,000	96.1	44.5	42.0
Accidental	31.2	18.9	18.9

In the age group 1-9, about 13% of
all deaths are due to children being
struck by automobiles. Accidents
are the leading cause of death in
children in this age group, and of
the children in this age group who
do die, one out of eight is run down
by an automobile. The majority of
drivers who kill children with their
automobiles are in the college age
group. I hardly need mention such
peripheral issues as the frequent use
of intoxicating beverages and drugs
by college age drivers.

Your nameless correspondent
uses jingoisms about the "ghetto,"
and suggests the police should be
ingratiating themselves with
Negroes, rather than catching
speeders. Perhaps they should set
up speed traps in the ghettos,
since, presumably due to crowding,
twice as many Negro children
pedestrians are killed per 100,000
population I wonder if this law
student is so concerned about
ghetto dwellers that he would obey
the speed limits in these areas?

The Cavalier Daily is guilty of
irresponsible journalism in printing
the undocumented, irresponsible,
paranoid statements of unidentified
law students. The issue in exceeding
the speed limit is not police
brutality, small town copism, but
public safety, particularly for
young pedestrians. Let me cite
three examples of deceptions in
your article:

1. "...police using high fines
to increase the town treasury."
Your editors could easily
determine what percent of
local revenues come from
speeding fines. The sum is
trivial, and the cost of enforcing
the speed laws far exceeds any
income.

2. The article implies students
are being singled out by the
local police. Convictions and
amounts of fines are published
in the local paper, and local
citizens are fined far more
frequently (and in similar
amounts) than are students.

3. "for his own protection" the
student could not divulge his
name, and The Cavalier Daily
accepts this. I doubt that a
single student at this University
is being harassed or
intimidated by the local police.
If such instances exist, why
haven't you publicized them?

Your article, of course, seeks to
inflame rather than inform, and
facts such as the above would be of
no interest to you.

You publish threats of
blacklisting and economic
retaliation, but where do you
mention a students responsibility to
his fellow man? Many students
seem to think they don't have any.
Speed does kill; it kills young
children, and the driver is often of
college age. I hope the speed laws
will be enforced by the local police,
and I am not ashamed to say so
publicly and sign my name to this
letter.

Chandler Praised

I read Mr. Chandler's article in
The Cavalier Daily of October 3
and was greatly surprised and
impressed to find somebody in this
"University" who really cares
enough to try to work toward its
improvement by standing up
against an apathetic and
"supplicant", administration
Student Council. Mr. Chandler's
efforts to build a truly student-run
Student Council which isn't a
political machine in the hands of a
mindless minority is admirable.

I have noticed several aspects of
University life which I consider
disagreeable and I am sure are
disagreeable to others. I only wish
that there were more students of
Mr. Chandler's caliber on the
Student Council.

Walker's Wisdom

I cannot pass up a chance to
comment on the article by Mr.
Walker Chandler in last Thursday's
Cavalier Daily. It was an extremely
well thought-out presentation of
issues which should concern every
student at the University today. His
analysis of our visitation policy and
the antiquated theories upon which
it is based deserve the attention of
every student truly interested in the
vitality of U. Va. (if there is any
left) and the possibility of any
change in the future. Students
councils tend, as a rule, to slow
down genuinely needed reform
unless continually urged forward by
the students themselves, who are
behind such changes. Phrases such
as "this policy will have to be
worked on for a while" all too
often fall into the same category as
"meaningful dialogue," meaning
nothing but stalling and going
through the motions. If the "spirit
of Mountain Lake" is only going to
produce inertia in the Student
Council and add more brakes to an
already slow train, then perhaps we
should follow Mr. Chandler's
suggestion of destroying such a
council, instead of putting up with
a lot of play-acting.

I urge all students, despite what
they may think "Anarchist"
connotes, to read over and study
seriously Mr. Chandler's article.
Paradoxically enough, a Stud. Co.
of anarchists such as Mr. Chandler
would seem the only effective way
to bring meaningful order to this
university.

Student Council

The articles published in The
Cavalier Daily by Mr. Rosen and
Mr. Chandler have established the
need for the students of this
University to arise from their
lethargic slumber (which is
manifested in the actions of the
Student Council to date). If we
students truly wish to share in the
life of this "academic village", in its
functions both inside and outside
the Grounds, we must act now.

The initial reports on the
discussions at Mountain Lake were
quite optimistic, as the
administration appeared to have
opened lines of communication
with the duty elected
representatives on the Council. But
the following issues remain
unresolved and seemingly
forgotten: the need for more
intensive recruitment for black
students at the University of
Virginia, the issue of visitation
rules, self-control of the Student
Activities Committee funds, and
the persisting gap between the
power structure and the students.

The Council has decided to
shelve discussion on these issues
until December. In doing so, it is
failing its duty to the students; and
unless this Council, or any
representative organization, stops
yammering about the issues and
begins working out solutions, then
it should be replaced at once.

I propose that every individual
who wishes to be represented by a
responsible, progressive Student
Government, come to the meeting
of the Council Tuesday, Oct. 8 at
7:30 (come a little early) at
Newcomb Hall. You can show, by
your presence, dissatisfaction with
its ineffectiveness.

Activism is a phenomenon
which inevitably must come to this
University, if the student body
wished to have effective
management in its collective and
individual lives. Responsible
activism is necessary this year for
two reasons: to show in a concrete
example, the support for a Council
which will not fail to let itself be
heard; and to unite as a group,
those students who wish to make a
constructive impact in the life of
this University, and so prepare for
the society which needs their
efforts.

To those reluctant to step
forward and be counted, Henry
David Thoreau said,

Nat Hentoff, in his Playboy
article, "The Suppression of
Dissent," emphasizes the fact, that
if enough people do nothing, the
system will atrophy. It will hold
true for The University, unless the
silent many let themselves be seen
and heard.

Negro Admission

Mr. Levy, in his presentation of
the "sense of urgency" surrounding
the "action to diminish racial
injustice," made one suggestion
which I believe no solution to the
problem.

He proposed the administration
"experiment" with admissions
standards, obviously implying the
standards be lowered. The academic
level of the University, said by one
graduate student to be ridiculously
low, would definitely suffer from
such "experimentation."

Once these experiments were
begun, what would stop us from
demanding the standards be
changed to please everybody? When
we find an absence of a particular
type of student, we can get a few to
"complete the set" simply by
altering our standards to conform
to their ability. When a student is
admitted whose academic average
falls below the norm undue stress is
placed upon him to "keep up with
his class." This would be true racial
injustice.

Few Negroes attend the
University because few Negroes
apply for admission. It would be
insulting to the average
Afro-American scholar to be
extended a "hand-out" education
in the form of lowered standards or
contrived lures designed to fill a
desired quota. Perhaps one of the
problems plaguing this nation is
that Negroes are becoming tired of
"free tickets" or "special
standards." They want to compete
with the white man on equal terms,
and use their own ability to win!

Mr. Levy is being "racially
unjust" when he judges the Negro
race incapable of producing a
sufficient number of students able
to pass the existing admissions
requirements, should they want to
apply in the first place.