Critique of “˜Matt’s Law’ lacks insight
By Daily Bruin Staff
Oct. 5, 2006 9:00 p.m.
The author of the editorial “Increased fines won’t
stop hazing tradition” (Oct. 2) obviously did not read or
understand Senate Bill 1454 known as “Matt’s
Law.”
Even the title of the article shows that the authors do not have
a clue as to why “Matt’s Law” was needed and what
it will do.
The new law has almost nothing to do with increasing fines, but
rather closes the loopholes in the existing law and allows
prosecutors to charge anyone involved with a felony if the hazing
results in serious injury or death.
There are many loopholes in the current hazing law that were
brought to light as a result of Matt Carrington’s case.
First, the old hazing law only applied to violence between
students. In Carrington’s case, the law didn’t apply to
certain fraternity brothers involved in the hazing because they
were not students at the university.
Second, the old law only applied to so-called “student
organizations.” As the fraternity had no official affiliation
with the university because it kicked the organization off the
campus, Carrington’s death was not legally realized as being
a result of hazing.
“Matt’s Law” instead applies to any
organization or group.
I also disagree that allowing prosecutors to charge anyone with
a felony if the hazing results in serious injury or death will not
make a difference to those who engage in it.
Hazing is currently considered in the same class as jay-walking,
which many do but rarely get in trouble for.
If students are cited, it’s just a small misdemeanor with
relatively no consequences.
“Matt’s Law” will change the perception of the
seriousness of the consequences of participating in hazing
activities. It will no longer be just a slap on the wrist.
You stated in your editorial that “criminal research has
shown time and time again that the threat of bigger and better
punishment simply does not work as a deterrent.”
That may be true for your average street criminal. But the
people who get caught up in hazing are usually law-abiding,
educated individuals.
They are not criminals as referred to by your “criminal
research” and do not want a felony on their record. They
would probably think long and hard before committing one.
“Matt’s Law” does not focus on punishment.
It simply provides the tools needed to start the prevention
process. It may not deter all hazing, but I’m sure it will
deter some.
I agree that much more has to be done to change the hazing
tradition, but this is a good start. I know that Matt’s mom
and her supporters intend to continue working to stop hazing all
together.
Vahl is from Pittsburg, Calif.
