October 16, 2000
Linksters Take 15th
| October 16, 2000
The Cornell golf team traveled to Bethlehem, Penn. this weekend for the Stabler Invitational at Lehigh University.
It did not come home with the results it desired.
The Red finished 15th out of 17 teams, shooting a two day total of 635. Princeton won the event with a stellar 596. Pennsylvania and Colgate were tied for second at 603.
Junior Ross LaFleur shot 80 on the opening day, following that with 78 for a 158 total, leaving him tied for 48th in the tournament.
Senior Conor Brownell and newcomer Justin Watzka were just a shot behind LaFleur, both carding 159 for 36 holes. Watzka shot the lowest 18-hole score for the Red in the event, with a 75 on Saturday. These two were part of a group tied for 54th at the tournament.
Junior Dave Nayak, who has been a stalwart for the Red thus far, shot 80-82 for a 162 total. This left him in a tie for 68th position.
Junior Tim Roth rounded out the scoring for Cornell, as he posted a 163, with rounds of 84 and 79.
Bryan Derdenger of George Washington and Ken Kosteva of Bucknell both shot 145 for the 36 holes of regulation, and Derdenger won the playoff to take home the individual title.
Nat Hoopes of Princeton, the Ivy Champion last year, shot 148 and was tied for sixth. Mike Russell of Penn also carded a 148.
“This tournament gave us a chance to size up our Ivy League competition, and it gives us a lot of motivation to practice harder for the upcoming spring season,” Nayak said of what the squad took from the event.
Archived article by J.V. Anderton
We are an independent, student newspaper. Help keep us reporting with a tax-deductible donation to the Cornell Sun Alumni Association, a non-profit dedicated to aiding The Sun.
October 17, 2000
Two experts engaged in a heated debate regarding “Gun Control: Do guns create or inhibit crime?” last night in the Anabel Taylor Hall auditorium. Prof. John Lott, law, Yale University author of “More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control” spoke first, stating the benefits of guns in preventing violence, citing examples of citizens using them to stop crime. “These stories rarely get local, let alone national news coverage,” he said. “We have to be concerned about not only the newsworthy bad events, but the events that weren’t able to become newsworthy because they were stopped.” Lott attacked popular “myths” about gun use, beginning with the belief that passive behavior is the correct response when confronted by a criminal. “For women and the elderly, by far the safest action is to have a gun,” he said, adding that most do not have the strength to punch an attacker as a form of self-defense. The idea that the high rate of gun ownership causes a high homicide rate is also a myth, according to Lott, who explained that Switzerland, where all males between 18 and 52 are required to own a machine gun, has a lower homicide rate than the U.S. He also disagreed with the concept of safe storage laws, which would require a gun to be locked in the home. “If you pass these laws, what types of households are likely to obey them?” Lott asked, pointing out that criminal households will not change their behavior. He advocated getting rid of old laws, such as registration requirements, which are ineffective because criminals “virtually never register their guns and virtually never leave their guns at the crime scene.” Richard Aborn, former president of Handgun Control Inc., a member of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence and a Brady Bill lobbyist, responded to Lott’s arguments, asserting that guns create crime and should be controlled. “The issue of gun control is not about the choice of everybody having a gun or nobody having a gun,” he said. “It’s not how to stop citizens from having guns, but how do you stop criminals from getting guns?” Aborn explained that drug traffickers within the U.S. buy guns in bulk amounts in southern states with weak gun laws and drive the guns to states with stronger laws. He called the Brady Bill, which requires background checks on all gun buyers, an “effective intervention,” but not enough. As part of his “Four P’s” of prevention, policies, process and punishment, Aborn advocated safe storage boxes and the “one gun a month bill.” “If you limit the number of guns to one every 30 days, you cut the heart out of the economic project,” he said, noting that bringing one gun from the south to New York City is not worth the gas money. “I do firmly believe [gun control] is beginning to succeed,” Aborn said, citing that the overall rate of violent crime being committed with guns is dropping. “The challenge is to keep that drop permanent.” In his rebuttal, Lott asked Aborn, “Can you point to one academic study that shows a relationship between the Brady Bill and reduction of violent crime?” Aborn replied that he could not relate the bill to the crime rate, but that he did have a study relating it to drug trafficking. “The question is, you take each regulation at a time and you try to see what’s the cost and what’s the benefit,” Lott concluded. Following their speeches and rebuttals, the panelists fielded questions from the audience. One student asked, “If someone wants to kill another person but doesn’t have a gun, won’t they just find other means?” “It’s no doubt that guns make crimes easier to be committed, but they also make it easier to defend [oneself],” Lott said. The core issue, Aborn concluded, is not whether we are allowed to carry guns, but that criminals should not be able to obtain them. “I think people were entertained and informed,” said Joshua Farber ’02, mediator and president of the Cornell Political Forum, which sponsored the debate. “I thought Lott had more convincing statistics, and unbiased statistics, than [Aborn],” said Lansing resident Lew Gentsch. “I have my own opinion, but it’s really nice to sit down and see both sides at once,” said Aaron Stupple ’02. “It seemed to be an equal amount of facts for both sides.”Archived article by Heather Schroeder
October 17, 2000
At a time of major technological advances for food production, millions of people remain malnourished. This global concern was broadcast to economics and nutritional sciences graduate students in Martha Van Rensselaer auditorium yesterday, for the 17th annual World Food Day teleconference: “Poverty and Hunger: The Tragic Link.” The event was organized by the Food and Agriculture Organization, the largest specialized agency of the United Nations created to help alleviate these problems, and aired by George Washington University Television. The featured speaker was Amartya Sen, Master of Trinity College in Cambridge, England and the 1998 Nobel laureate in economics. Jennifer Wilkins, the senior extension associate of the Community Food Systems Program, Division of Nutritional Sciences, and Jim Haldeman, associate director of the International Agriculture Program of the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, organized the event at Cornell. The University was among over 1000 sites hosting the conference, which was also broadcast over the Internet. “The entire event is to increase awareness of not only hunger and poverty in the world, but also of various activities and projects at Cornell and in the local community addressing food insecurity,” Wilkins said. To get an idea of the hunger and poverty problem, Haldeman referred to a summary report of world statistics from 1995, which stated that if the world’s population shrunk to a village of 100 people, 50 people would be malnourished, 80 would have substandard living, one person would get to go to college, and 70 would not be able to read. Currently, 1.3 billion people exist on less than one dollar per day and that number will rise to 1.9 billion dollars by 2015, according to one World Bank estimate. Two-thirds of these people are women. Wilkins pointed out that even in the industrialized world, 100 million people live below the poverty line. “In 1999, 31 million Americans were food insecure, meaning they were not assured access to food at all times for an active and healthy life,” Wilkins said. Sen brought up numerous issues dealing with poverty, hunger and the overall state of the world today, with women and children being the main topics of discussion. “The decrease in the rate of infant mortality is due in part to women’s empowerment,” Sen said. “Increasing women’s voice in family issues effects the children. Women are the agents of change on which the future of the world depends.” Sen was unhappy with the lack of media coverage of these issues, however. “I’m disappointed that they are not coming up at all in the debates,” he said. “After the president is elected, I hope that these issues get more attention.” “What struck me the most in listening to him [Sen] was his explanation of the true problem. He has a pretty good understanding of it,” said Chris Peters grad. “I think what Sen is trying to do is to push for organizations, governmental or not, to help the worldwide poverty and hunger issue.” In addition to the video conferencing, about 25 to 30 representatives of organizations promoting attentiveness and aid for the malnourished and the poor were invited to make their literature available to the public. Some of these organizations included the Cornell Cooperative Extension, Cornell Food and Nutrition Program and Peace Corps. “Other organizations such as the Institute of African Development and the Center of International Studies have their own events on this subject,” Haldeman said. “Our goal is to have only one major World Food Day event on the Cornell campus with these organizations, including a panel of Cornell faculty and members of the community.” The Ithaca broadcast of this teleconference was sponsored by Cornell’s Division of Nutritional Sciences Community Food Systems Program, the IAP and the Cornell International Institute for Food, Agriculture and Development.Archived article by Ritu Gupta