University of South Carolina Libraries
Fire alarm: burnt toes? DEAR MS. MILLER: I was extremely distressed to note Mr. Beauford's comments in the Gamecock (Feb. 14- Beauford: system works). Its labeling Scott Derks' column fallicious disturbs me greatly. He reports that the fire protection system was tested in January. Isn't it true, though, Mr. Beauford that all you tested was the water pressure in the sprinkler system? Isn't'. it true that the fire box and the sprinkler heads were not tested until after Mr. Derks' article appeared in the Gamecock? Mr. Beauford, I am even more disturbed at your nonchalant at titude towards fire alarms. It was noted in the Feb. 14 ar ticle, that according to a federal act, an alarm system is not required in a dorm where a sprinkler system exists. If this is the case, then why, sir, do you require fire drills? To be more specific, why did you require a fire drill on the Horseshoe last year that utilized an individual in each tenement, blowing a whistle? Have you ever considered what the consequences would be if the in dividual that was suppose to blow the whistle was out when the fire occcured? (Note the funds that were approved for a fire alarm system were approved last month, not last year.) One more thing about this wonderful sprinkler system that -protects us; if there should be a fire at night, how would the sleeping student be warned? By the flames at his feet, perhaps? This letter is not meant to attack your efforts. It is our contention, that if by our questioning we can promote greater saftey in the Horseshoe, the we have done our job as representatives of the residents. DAVID SPINAZZOLO HORSESHOE PRESIDENT Bates House publicly maligned DEAR MS. MILLER For the second time in this academic year, the men of Bates G A ME The GAMECOCK is published tri semesters with the exception of Uni Changes of address forms, subscrip should be sent to Drawer A, USC, Cc $3 per semester or $6 for both semes GAMECOCK this year received S50 entitling full-time students to a subs GAMECOCK are In Rooms 316 an University campus. Phones are 777 class postage paid at Columbia, S. publication of the students of the Unit official publication of the Universiti not necessarily represent those of thi staff members of the GAMECOCK. Editor......... . .. .... Managing Editor.... .. .. .. Associate Editor.... .. .. .. Assistant Managing Editor. .. .. Business Manager.... .. .. Sports Editor..... .. .. .. Asst. Sports Editor.... .. .. Photo Editor.... .. .. . ..... News Editors...... .. .. .. Feature Editor.... .. .... Circulation.... .. .. . ... Classified Advertising. .. .. Staff Writers .. .. .. .. .. ...La Gilbert, Bob Grondahl, Julie LumI Ellen Murray, Kris Schweickert, Va Betty Woodruff and Charlie Felisi Sports Writers. .. .. .. .. ..Bill C Photographers..........Courtr St. Advertising Manager . . . . House have been publicly maligned in the letters column of the Gamecock. Capstone resident Deborah Gustaff, in fact did not specifically condemn the Bates House resident, but the inference was scarcely camouflaged. Miss Gustaff in the Feb. 14 edition to the Gamecock launced a scathing denunciation of dorm parties in general and the Cap stone party in particular. Since Bates and Capstone governments have cooperated on at least three such parties the Bates residents are obviously those referred to by Ms. Gustaff as the 'drunk guys' who created the vile odors and spread the filth throughout Cap stone. It is apparent that Ms. Gustaff has never bothered to attend one of these functions; perhaps she has become too enamored with her own 'elitism.' To thwart the at titudes of militant feminists, let it be said that other residents representing the 'capping stone of education' saw fit to descend their ivory towers and have a good time. In answer to Ms. Gustaff's question concerning the location of these parties, a little common sense will provide the answer. The majority at the party(or so stated non-participant Ms. Gustaff were men. If this were the case at a women's dorm, imagine the im balance that would have taken place had the party taken place at Bates House. The hardworking presidents of these dorms, Harriet Lovelace and Pete Feheley, considered this problem beforehand and with the additonal hassle of providing the tran sportation for unescorted women through dark and unsafe streets, they decided it would be best to hold the party at Capstone. It is a shame that the efforts of these two individuals to provide good times for the residents of their dorms should be critized so unjustly. Ms. Gustaff in her letter did a great disservice to a number of people. Her attack slighted all those unselfish volunteers of both dorms who worked so hard at the party to make it successful. In addition she degraded both the residents of Bates House and her sisters at Capstone. Could it be that Ms. Gustaff's sole motive was to voice displeasure, selfish at COCK F-weekly during the fall and spring' Iversity holidays and exam periods. tion requests and other mail items lumbia, S. C. Subscription rates are lers. Bulk copies are $6 per 100. The 000 from the student activity fund,' cription to the paper. Offices of the d 318 of the Russell House on the -8178, 777-4249 and 777-3888. Second C. Although the GAMECOCK is a ersity of South Carolina, it is not an f. The opinions expressed herein do i University, the student body, or all - - - . . Glenda *vs..... -.....- ..... .. . .@OHlly Gatling - - .. . .John T. Gas~ii -........ ....Sharon Givens -.-.-... .. ...Ute Huckabee -..-... .. ...Doug Williams . . . . .. . Steve Parker . .. . .. .. ran Zupan ... .. .. ..arin aurcnstead Vicki Thomas ... .. .. .. ....Bob Craft - -. .. . 'Monty Preston -.-.-... .. ..Patty McGuillian rry Evans, K. Wayne Ford, Armida ikin, Ruthie Lyon, Hugh McKinight, n Sfeiglit:, Lou Tenant, Ann Winters, baum. rant, Jim Hersh, Gary West, Teddy Hef ner, Charles Collins ey Dicely, Doug Holladay, Alan Hul, we Kish, Lewis Phillips, Mur--- egl - -- -- -. .,. 4rt Freesh ding staff arganizatan.. Letters that, at the inconvenience caused by the temporary suspension of open house? Perhaps I have been a little too hard on Ms. Gustaff, but my remarks are merely intended to defend these much needed social functions. As a hall advisor at Bates I have had more than ample opportunities to observe those less fortunate than Ms. Gustaff. Some people do not date every weekend, or any weekend for that matter, and these functions provide a much needed outlet from academic endeavors. The isolated Bates man needs contact with the main campus and these 'beer busts' are a small step in that direction. Ms. Gustaff, please be :more patient with those in the future who lack your social ad vantages. WALLY OWINGS BATES HALL ADVISOR Musical talent discovered DEAR MS. MILLER: Two Thursday nights ago, a group of Carolina students put it all together in the Bates House Cafeteria. Andy Marquez and Jim Carrero, two industrious Bates House residents, have been en deavoring to find musical talent amongst USC students, and to let the Carolina community know about it. Well believe me, they have found some real talent. It lies within the voice of a freshman coed, Miss Faye Tucker. Brilliantly accompanied by David Clark on the guitar, Miss Tucker displayed a superb array of music ranging from songs of Judy Collins to Peter, Paul and Mary. The whole show lacked something, however. That was an audience. Unfortunately, only about 20 people showed up for this stellar performance. It's a real shame that such an enjoyable shown was appreciated by so few. An extra added attraction in the form of 3 Bates House residents FOR THE All PI Z Highwa 0i playing an impromptu guitar arrangement also proved to be good entertainment. These three were Roger Henault, Fred Efird, and Dennis Angelides. Fred Efird also sang two songs, while ac companying himself on the guitar. Despite this fine showing, howerer, the night really belonged to Faye Tucker. She was asked to sing more and more, even after she had sung all the songs she and David Clark had rehearsed. They even sang a few selections that they had never really done together. And even these songs came through just great. It's really a sad thing thing that so many people missed this showing of talented USC students. It seems to me that the main theme amongst 99 44-100 per cent of the students around here is apathy. This concert was ad vertised around campus. Yet, only about 20 students showed up. And this happens for many other programs that are offered to the students. But the sad part about it was that this show was offered to students by fellow students. But it failed none the less.Or did it?No, it didn't. Because I do know of 20 or so students, including myself, who walked out of Bates house cafeteria that night just a little happier about everything. All this because of the voice of Faye Tucker. DENNIS HOYER SCPIRG promoters intend -fraud DEAR MS. MILLER: I would like to make the following comments concerning SCPRIG: 1. The promoters of SCPIRG know and intend it to be a fraud. This is verified by two basic facts: First, SCPIRG petitioners are urged to sign by promoters who strongly emphasize the voluntariness of membership due to the refund. However, those promoters know from SCPIRG experiences elsewhere that refund-takers will CAROLINA STUDI ON WEDNESDAY You Can [ALlAN SPAGHETl 1.50 ZAHnE y 378 or Off 1-26 (Exit Icama en Sun.-Thurs., until 12:00 c Open fri.-Sat. until 2:900a.m be few, thus providing a strong argument for the discontinuance of any refunds. Secondly, potential petitioners are led to believe that SCPIRG is a new concept that will somehow allow "the students" to legitimately buck the establish ment. However, to be a cor poration in form, and it is to have govermental taxing power over its subjects. The real hooker here is that, unlike corporations, SC PIRG's owners will not be able to dissolve it and that its govern mental-like power will lack the control of usual checks and balances. Moreover, grass-root control by the elective process is precluded automatically by the maze of a corporate structure. 2. There are threats made by some supporters of SCPIRG that USC students, administrators, and the public are faced with a choice of SCPRIG or revolution. (See, eg. Roberts's letter in THE GAMECOCK, February 4, 1972). That is nonsense. That sort of attempted intimidation and coercion should be ignored by USC students and administrators who may wish to oppose SCPRIG's attempted fraud. Furthermore, the promoters should be recognized for what they are: A self-proclaimed elite; a small, special-interest group that seeks unwarranted governmental power to accomplish their own personal ends. It is significant and obvious that SCPRIG's promoters know that they would be able to ac accomplish nothing if they had to rely upon voluntary contributions. 3. It is ironic that the persons to be defrauded are the peers of SC PIRG's promoters. It is more ironic that the plan relies on student apathy for its success, while its promoters profess to rely upon student concern. There is one question that we should all demand an answer to: WHO IS GOING TO AUTHEN TICATE THE NEARLY TEN THOUSAND SIGNITURES THAT SCPIRG CLAIMS IN SUPPORT, TO INSURE THAT ALL ARE STUDENT'S AND THAT NO STUDENT HAS SIGNED TWICE (OR TWO HUNDRED TIMES)? ROBERT W. NIXON ENT ONLY. Eat 'USE da Inn) .m.