Proactivity needed at OSU

To those who got away from the police near Ohio State University's campus this past weekend: Beware. You still might get in trouble.

After the melee that occurred Friday night, Columbus police and OSU officials are not giving up on finding the ones that got away.

As part of the Crime Stopper program, CPD is offering students and anyone else an undetermined reward for turning in pictures and video footage of the disturbance in an attempt to prosecute the rioters they did not catch Friday night.

Students who might have evidence of the rioting should turn it in. Contributing evidence would give students the opportunity to help law enforcement officials punish rioters for the damage they caused and could possibly keep causing if they are not caught.

Those who were involved need to realize that if they did the crime, they will have to do the time, even if the police didn't catch them that night. A crime is still a crime even if the perpetrator isn't caught. Not only did they damage property, they damaged OSU's reputation by rioting over and over again.

But the police and OSU officials need to understand that while they might catch more of the criminals, they aren't preventing this from happening again. Rewarding people who turn in evidence is a reactive measure, not a proactive one, and that is what's needed. Police need to continue patrolling the area more. And OSU officials need to make it clear to students that they will not accept this kind of behavior.

Living wills prevent disputes

The United States Supreme Court should decide legal matters, not emotional ones that tear families apart.

For good reason, the nation's highest court refused to hear a case about a Florida woman who has been in a coma for 11 years. The woman's husband, who also is her legal guardian, said she would not want to be kept alive for so long and has decided to take her off a feeding tube. Without this tube, the woman will starve and die within a couple weeks. The woman's parents think the man has ulterior motives, such as inheriting money and getting remarried, and want to keep the woman on the tube.

As tragic as this case is, it is not the place of the courts to decide it. The parents have no legal right to determine the woman's future. The husband is her legal guardian and therefore has the right to make the decision for her. There doesn't seem to be any hope of the woman's recovering after being comatose for 11 years.

To prevent this kind of feud from happening within families, people need to specify in a living will what they want in case they are put on life support. The best course of action is to tell all family and friends your wishes and have them written in some sort of living will to ensure your wishes are carried out.