Opposite Day
Usually, we hear of UT football players getting special treatment. Today, we learn they get harsher penalties for violating school weapons policies:
The new, zero tolerance policy says if a student-athlete is in possession of a weapon, he or she faces automatic dismissal.
The athletics department’s policy is more strict than the university policy for all students, which simply says, “Possession of a weapon is not allowed on campus or at university sponsored events.”
February 17th, 2010 at 10:07 am
Guess they don’t have a biathlon team at UT huh?
February 17th, 2010 at 10:25 am
Ah the intolerance policy. How exactly does being intolerant toward me encourage me to be tolerant of others. Americas schools spreading hate and intolerance will the irony never end. Sounds like the segregation never died just changes victims and spreads. Makes me wonder what would happen if they started a zero tolerance rule toward fags; but its a lifestyle. Well so is gun ownership and this one is a constitutional right when the government feels like it is. ‘Shall not be abridged’ means what to you?
February 17th, 2010 at 10:26 am
The following is my e-mail to Uncle from yesterday afternoon:
As you would say, Facepalm.
This is quite rich coming from the guy who hired Lane Kiffin fifteen months ago and then hired his replacement (who thought it was a joke
when he received a text message from UTAD re a head coaching job) in a period of 72 hours.
Why don’t we take away the athletes’ other rights, like the right to vote and the right to drink alcohol?
UT is pathetic.
All it does well is mow down green space and build ugly buildings in its place.
February 17th, 2010 at 10:27 am
I would kinda think that the whole “possession of a gun on campus being a felony” thing would equal automatic dismissal. You know, cuz it’s kinda hard to go to class when you’re in prison.
February 17th, 2010 at 4:31 pm
Hmmm. If UT is similar to a lot of schools, then athletes are probably disproportionately black. Therefore, the policy would have a racial impact even though neutral on its face. Wonder if someone could sue?
February 17th, 2010 at 5:04 pm
That’s yet another example of what I’ll call “freaking out as social policy”.
If you’d been raised by people who freaked out every time they saw a (fill in the blank) then chances are you’d be pretty skiddish every time you saw one yourself.