OPINIONS

Tuesday, noveMber 30, 2021 OpiNiONs

PAGE 10

Aimee Galaszewski, Executive Director Benjamin Wells, Managing Editor of The Marquette Tribune Skyler Chun, Managing Editor of The Marquette Journal

ediTorial board

Alexandra Garner, Executive Opinions Editor Hope Moses, Assistant Opinions Editor

Megan Woolard, News Executive John Leuzzi, Sports Executive Randi Haseman, A&E Executive Lelah Byron, Projects Editor Eleanor McCaughey, Copy Chief Grace Pionek, Design Chief Izzy Bonebrake, Executive Photo Editor Kate Hyland, Social Media Executive

STAFF EDITORIAL

Andrew Amouzou, Station Manager of MUTV Reese Seberg, Station Manager of MURadio Alex Rivera Grant, Editor of Diversity and Inclusion

University must take COVID-19 conscious action

While 94% of Marquette University students and 93% of faculty and staff have submitted proof of COVID-19 vaccination, as of Nov. 24, it is necessary that the university continues to be flexible with the future uncertainty of COVID-19.

Although the majority of students have submitted proof of COVID-19 vaccination, the COVID-19 pandemic is still ongoing, and the virus is still spreading. Between Oct. 18 and Nov. 24, there were 79 reported cases of COVID-19 on campus, according to the Marquette University COVID-19 Dashboard.

The university announced Aug. 16 that it would require all individuals to wear face masks in public indoor spaces regardless of vaccination status in order to stop the spread of COVID-19 starting Aug. 17.

However, now that COVID-19 vaccinations are more readily accessible and the majority of the Marquette community has submitted proof of COVID-19 vaccination, many of the safety protocols on campus have been relaxed or removed altogether.

Unfortunately, there is often little to no enforcement of these requirements across campus buildings; sometimes students are seen improperly wearing masks or not wearing masks at all when they’re walking around campus buildings. Additionally, the university is not requiring social distancing protocols in classrooms and indoor spaces that were put in place last year. In spaces like residence halls, dining halls and classrooms where there is high foot traffic, there are no longer social distancing requirements, despite the risk of spreading COVID-19 being much higher. Additionally, dining halls also no longer provide to-go containers for students like they did last school year, causing a greater possibility of spreading COVID-19. Not having more socially distanced spaces and stricter face mask enforcement may likely increase the spread of COVID-19 among students. Being more mindful of COVID-19 safety measures on campus is especially important as the World Health Organization labeled the new COVID-19 variant, Omicron, as a “cause for concern” Nov. 29, in addition to four other variants: Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta. Although no Omicron variant cases of COVID-19 have been detected in the U.S. yet, there needs to be safety measures in place as it is likely to spread.

Having some reported COVID-19 cases on campus is likely because not all members of the Marquette community have submitted proof of COVID-19 vaccination; but Marquette needs to make sure it is taking necessary action to protect everyone’s health and well-being. This could include improving the enforcement of properly wearing face masks in indoor public spaces, as well as implementing more social distancing spaces.

Another way to respond to the changing COVID-19 pandemic is to improve the availability of on-campus COVID-19 testing.

As of now, the Medical Clinic only offers COVID-19 testing appointments Monday through Thursday between 7:10 am and 11:00 am in the Helfaer Recreation Center, according to the Medical Clinic patient portal.

Providing COVID-19 testing on campus is a necessary resource for students to monitor their health, and the testing time slots offered may not be accessible for all students.

Students with conflicting classes or extracurricular activities may not be able to make the four-hour window. This may leave them to try and find COVID-19 testing elsewhere near campus. However, if students don’t have accessible transportation, they may not be able to get tested for COVID-19 near or off campus.

The goal should be monitoring COVID-19 cases on campus, which means increasing the availability of testing times.

Marquette should also consider offering COVID-19 booster shots for students.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced Nov. 19 that it expanded the eligibility of COVID-19 booster shots to people who are 18 years of age and have completed the primary COVID-19 vaccination series for Pfizer or Moderna at least six months ago. Before its recent announcement, the FDA only approved COVID-19 booster shots for individuals who are at least 65 years old, as well as individuals between the ages of 18 and 64 who are at “high risk of severe COVID-19” or “frequent institutional or occupational exposure” to COVID-19.

The Marquette University Medical Clinic currently distributes the primary COVID-19 vaccine series.

The university recently announced that the Marquette University Medical Clinic would not be distributing COVID-19 booster shots. However, it said that those who were interested in getting the booster shot could register through the Wisconsin Department of Health Services to receive it at a nearby health department or pharmacy.

Taking action with the most recent information regarding COVID-19 is necessary to provide the most adequate resources and care for the Marquette community.

Although the Marquette community is adjusting to a “new normal,” it is imperative that the university continues to make decisions regarding COVID-19 safety that will benefit and protect the health of students, faculty and staff.

Considering structures may prevent further mass tragedies

Krisha Patel

CONTENT WARNING: This story contains sensitive content related to the recent Waukesha parade tragedy and mass shootings.

People should have the freedom to live their lives and do things they enjoy without the possibility that their lives could be in danger.

Senseless tragedies occur more frequently across the United States in public spaces where people shouldn’t feel afraid for their lives.

While concerts, movie theaters, grocery stores, schools and now parades seem to be more high-risk areas, they shouldn’t be places people have to avoid, and oftentimes they can’t. There should be a societal mind shift from viewing these events in isolation to treating them as related results of failing justice and social services systems.

Recently near Milwaukee, a man drove an SUV into the annual Waukesha Christmas parade, harming over 60 people and killing six people, the youngest being an eight-year-old.

The man was charged with a dozen criminal charges over the past 22 years, the most recent because he allegedly drove over a woman three weeks ago Nov. 2. He was charged with obstructing an officer, second-degree recklessly endangering safety with domestic abuse assessments, disorderly conduct with domestic abuse assessments and misdemeanor battery with domestic abuse assessments.

While he was arrested and charged Nov. 5 for the alleged incident of running over the mother of his child, he was released from the Milwaukee County Jail on Nov. 16 after posting the $1,000 bail Nov. 11. The low bail has come under scrutiny by the Milwaukee County district attorney’s office, which is now conducting an internal review of the decision.

The individual was also charged with bail jumping from a previous incident from July 2020. He also currently has two open court felony cases in Milwaukee County.

The Waukesha parade tragedy may have been prevented if the individual was not allowed to make bond for the incident earlier this month, as he was a clear threat to the safety of the community. The justice system severely failed the Waukesha community by not looking more into the individual’s history and criminal record.

Another tragic event was the school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Parkland, Florida in February 2018. The shooter intentionally killed 17 people and injured 17 others.

The Parkland shooter had a history of mental health issues, which he received treatment for at Henderson Behavioral Health. However, the facility was accused of failing to give the individual a proper diagnosis and the necessary care, as well as notify police that he was a threat to others. Additionally, the police failed to follow up on several reported incidents that were red flags leading up to the shooting Feb. 14, such as the shooter posting in an Instagram groupchat that he “planned to shoot up the school” and making comments about buying a gun.

If social services and police enforcement had been more diligent with providing care and treating every incident as a legitimate threat, the Parkland tragedy may have been prevented.

The perpetrators of these crimes should not take away from these tragedies, and the people who lost their lives and were affected. Their voices cannot be lost when talking about these incidents. But unless we take a closer look at the possibly influential systems behind these individuals that may have led them to make these decisions, we won’t get the whole picture of these violent tragedies.

In incidents where police officers do address and communicate safety concerns, it is imperative that people heed their warnings. At the Travis Scott festival in Houston, Texas Nov. 10, which resulted in the deaths of 10 people due to a crowd surge, officers warned Scott before the concert that the crowd of people may have been difficult to control, especially since it was coming out of the height of COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, officials made comments that Scott should have stopped the concert sooner.

While there has not been a singular perpetrator identified for the crowd surge at the Scott concert, many individuals followed others as they pushed forward toward the crowd, engaging in a type of mob mentality; people were “willing to do whatever to be in line for merch, food, shows, you name it. A lot of fights broke out throughout the day,” a witness at the event said to Variety Magazine.

It seems that every week, there is another tragedy in a city across the U.S circulating in the news, resulting in a mass death. It is important that we recognize the lives that are taken at these events; it is also important that we take a closer look at the institutions and structures in place, like the justice and social services systems, that are failing to take proactive action. The actions of these individuals are clear on printed pages and cycling television news. But there is less focus on the structures behind these violent actions that are not on the pages and screens.

Instagram does not preserve our national parks

Laura Niezgoda

Climate change is not the only threat affecting the outdoors. Humans are damaging the outdoors, harming wildlife and endangering people after being inspired by Instagram posts.

Instagram is destroying the United States National Parks Service.

With the rise of social media, users have flocked to the great outdoors after seeing it promoted on social media. These beautiful parks and places, such as the Great Smoky Mountains National Park or Zion National Park, are experiencing an increased number of visitors due to the increased sharing on photo-sharing social media sites, like Instagram.

Instagram experienced a surge of popularity from December 2014 to September 2015, increasing its users from 300 million to 400 million. At the same time, the national parks reported an increase in visitation in 2015 of 307,247,252 visitors, which has steadily increased until 2020. In 2020, the national parks closed or limited attendance due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite this three and a half month closure, the National Parks reported 237,064,332 visitors when they did reopen in July 2020. Instagram continued to grow in users with an estimate of 1.074 billion users.

Popularity me ans increased

Photo by Laura Niezgoda laura.niezgoda@marquette.edu An image taken August 2018 highlights a rocky area of Yellowstone National Park. exposure to users, meaning influencers are bringing more traffic to the National Parks.

Influencers, social media users with a significant following, attempt to gain more following by creating a spectacle of their life. This spectacle can include posing with aesthetic backgrounds in gorgeous places.

In 2021, California experienced a super bloom of wildflowers in North Table Mountain, where people flocked with selfie sticks and extravagant outfits, leaving behind crushed flowers that included native California poppies, lupine and purple owl’s clover. While it may seem like these are just flowers, these flowers pose a significant contribution to pollination and are endangered by visitors bringing in invasive plants, harming native plants. The super bloom destruction in North Table Mountain is not alone, as a similar phenomenon was found in the Antelope California Poppy Reserves, during the super bloom of 2019 at the Antelope California Poppy Reserve. In flocking to receive the perfect picture, people often endanger the wildlife’s habitat and nature itself. In 2016, a couple took a Bison calf into their car in Yellowstone National Park, as they believed the calf was cold. Due to their ignorance, the bison calf was later rejected by its herd and started continuously to approach people on the side of the road. The calf later had to be euthanized.

Humans intentionally encounter and approach these animals at a shocking distance, in some cases, only being two feet away when the National Park Service recommends being at least 25 yards away. Public spectacularization is an increasing problem with the national parks, but instances like these can also result in injury to humans, such as gorgings.

In posting pictures, Instagram users typically do not disclose safety information and education, which is incredibly dangerous to those who may be inspired to visit the National Parks. Visiting the national parks is overwhelming, and if not properly equipped and educated, visiting the National Parks can be life-threatening.

Despite the wildlife, there are several other instances where people can be seriously hurt and simultaneously endanger the wildlife around them. The El Dorado fire in 2020 started due to a pyrotechnic that misfired during a gender reveal party, a type of party popularized by Instagram. This wildfire burned more than 22,500 acres of land and killed 31 people.

National parks are crucial to preserving wildlife, and while there have been many irresponsible instances of human ignorance, ignorance can be fixed through education.

“Leave No Trace” is an educational organization that focuses on informing people on issues related to the great outdoors. By working closely with the national parks, “Leave No Trace” starts to solve problems that come due to the increased popularity online. They work to solve pollution, misinformation and other damaging practices in the outdoors.

There is no question of social media’s significant impact on people’s perception of nature, so it is essential to know how to navigate being outdoors to respect and experience nature.

There are seven principles to know and follow when in outdoor spaces: plan ahead; prepare, travel and camp on durable surfaces; dispose of waste properly; leave what you find; minimize campfire impacts; respect wildlife; and be considerate of other visitors.

Increased popularity for the national parks is not inherently a negative thing. According to the National Park Service Act of 1916, the National Park Service was created to “conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and … leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.”

The parks are meant to be enjoyed and allow people to connect with nature, but they are not an excuse for people to endanger themselves and others for the sake of a selfie.

Laura Niezgoda is a sophomore studying communication studies and criminology and law studies. She can be reached at

laura.niezgoda@marquette.edu

Rittenhouse not ‘hero’, example of persisting white privilege

Grace Cady

The initial charges brought against Kyle Rittenhouse, a teenager who killed two men and injured others in Kenosha, Wisconsin during a protest were first-degree intentional homicide, attempted first-degree intentional homicide, first-degree reckless homicide, first-degree recklessly endangering safety, possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 and failure to comply with an emergency order. After nearly three and a half days of deliberation, the jury found Rittenhouse not guilty on all charges Nov. 19.

This result spoke to two different Americas: one that believes that Rittenhouse was acting on behalf of his second amendment rights in selfdefense and one that is disheartened by the evident double standard we are seeing in this country. The Rittenhouse verdict isn’t the beginning or the end of a movement for either, but it leads us to reflect on gun laws and racial disparities in America. This verdict sheds light on how deeply injustice runs in this country.

Prosecutors in the case began to see trouble when Rittenhouse was freed of his illegal firearm charge. Rittenhouse was a minor in possession of an AR-15 style rifle when he went to the protest in Kenosha. This protest in particular was for the shooting of Kenosha-native Jacob Blake, a 29-year-old man left paralyzed after being shot by police seven times in the back.

However, Judge Bruce Schroeder granted the defense team a motion to dismiss the weapons charge. The argument being that Rittenhouse’s rifle barrel was longer than 16 inches, the minimum barrel length for a gun allowed under state law. Despite this, it is troubling that Rittenhouse was not eligible for even a misdemeanor considering the clarity of the word of the law: “Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.”

One of the biggest issues with gun laws in America is how they are misunderstood. People often misinterpret the second amendment as being an unlimited right to bear arms. A common issue is that some people tend to feel that any legislation restricting the ownership or use of firearms is “unconstitutional.” This is far from true. Regulating the use of firearms in America is necessary to do the bare minimum to keep each other safe, and it is entirely constitutional.

Rittenhouse has been dubbed a hero among conservatives for not only countering a protest against police brutality, but also for his violence against those who opposed him. Rittenhouse was even nominated by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene for a Congressional Gold medal; the highest award from Congress which was previously given to Rosa Parks. Although this may seem ridiculous or even laughable to some, the rhetoric surrounding gun violence is concerning and should be taken seriously. Historian of white power movements at the University of Chicago Kathleen Belew said, “It has never taken more than a whisper of approval to fan the flames of militant right action. The Kenosha acquittal is a shout.”

The most serious issue with the Rittenhouse verdict is how different things may have been if he were a person of color. Among the far right, he is a patriot, a man defending his country against rioting and protests. However, we’ve heard a very different story from those same people regarding injustice brought upon people of color.

In November 2014, Tamir Rice, a 12-year-old boy, was fatally shot by police while holding a toy gun. The case was quickly criticized by many due to the faulty handling by police; specifically because Rice was shot by police within two seconds of their arrival, raising doubts that they made any effort to converse with him. Yet to some, this murder was justified. Many farright conservatives made comments blaming Rice for his death and suggesting that the police officer was right to shoot him.

In response to a 2015 Salon article about the shooting, Free Republic, an Internet forum for self-described conservatives, left comments such as this: “Until black Americans teach their kids not to point toy guns at police officers, nothing will change.” The narrative of white men versus Black men who are violent couldn’t be more starkly different.

The portrayal of Rittenhouse according to conservatives and gun rights enthusiasts had it all wrong. Rittenhouse made the intentional decision to attend a protest he was not supposed to be at, armed with a gun he was not supposed to have and was emboldened by many for his actions. Rittenhouse shot three people, killing two, and was regarded with dignity and respect by not only many conservative Americans, but also by our former President Donald Trump.

None of this was heroic. It was not brave, bold, strong or dignified; it was violence for the sake of violence. The looseness of gun laws in America and the individual entitlement to use firearms recklessly are troublesome issues. More than that, it exposes the racism that exists in America despite how much many people may try to ignore it. The lack of accountability given to white men who murder in America and the crucifixion of people of color, even in innocence, is our biggest issue following this verdict.

Grace Cady is a sophomore studying journalism. She can be be reached at grace.cady@mar-

quette.edu

Statement of Opinion Policy

The opinions expressed on the Opinions page reflect the opinions of the Opinions staff. The editorials do not represent the opinions of Marquette University nor its administrators, but those of the editorial board.

The Marquette Tribune prints guest submissions at its discretion. The Tribune strives to give all sides of an issue an equal voice over the course of a reasonable time period. An author’s contribution will not be published more than once in a four-week period. Submissions with obvious relevance to the Marquette community will be given priority consideration.

Full Opinions submissions should be limited to 500 words. Letters to the editor should be between 150 to 250 words. The Tribune reserves the right to edit submissions for length and content.

Please e-mail submissions to: alexandra.garner@marquette.edu. If you are a current student, include the college in which you are enrolled and your year in school. If not, please note any affliations to Marquette or your current city of residence.