TO THE EDITOR:
There is a slight discrepancy in the ammunition bill in Student Congress right now. In the original bill, there was an intention to force the Tar Heel Rifle and Pistol Club to my committee, student safety and security, for funding before even appearing before Student Congress for funding.
This has since been removed from the proposed bill and Student Congress has turned its focus solely on the “individual gain clause.” To that clause, I say bull!
Much discussion not publicized is that this is more of a funding feasibility bill than anything else.
The gun control aspect, I believe, is a political scheme solely to gather support among the more liberal representatives. It’s plain politics.
But, there remains discussion to have the safety committee help fund the club so it doesn’t have to request as much from Student Congress.
I’m OK with that; I see the relationship to safety and education and I’m perfectly happy funding them.
But, there’s a legal issue: my committee can only fund on-campus events. There’s no clear precedent nor provision in the Student Code to permit this.
If Student Congress truly cares for the success of this organization, it will scrap this ridiculous bill, grant off-campus funding capabilities to the committee, and leave it at that.
Letting my committee help fund the club will lessen the financial burden that Student Congress has and should serve as a compromise.
