Opinion
Debating Jitney downtown policies
By Emily Tubb ’19 and Gabe Rivas ’16
February 4, 2016
Tags opinion
Absurd rules will be dangerous by Emily Tubb ’19
Walking down the Hill, frozen by Central New York weather, you can spot flocks of underclassmen making their way to the Village of Clinton, NY. On Friday and Saturday nights, Hamilton students trek to the bars to drink slightly higher quality beer than the watery Keystone Light that is frequently consumed in bulk on campus. These underclassmen watch as those with the coveted star on their Hill Card are able to travel by means of the Jitney, which passes them upwards of six times on their journey downtown. The existing rule that requires Jitney drivers to check Hill Cards prior to letting students aboard is ridiculous for a number of reasons and creates countless problems much worse than some underaged people consuming overpriced drinks. The 8-10 p.m. drop-off downtown was a silver lining that allowed students the opportunity to escape from binge-drinking situations and relax at the bars early on in the night.
The irony of Hamilton’s policies on alcohol is apparent. As freshmen, we have received contrasting messages from the school administration and campus safety about the gravity of underaged drinking. From our extremely enlightening First Year Experience presentations, we received a false sense of the consequences of underaged drinking on campus. The administration painted a picture of a laissez-faire approach to dealing with drinking, yet somehow campus security has no hesitation to hand out points to anyone and everyone, clearly conflicting with the lax ideas the administration wanted us to believe.
But the hypocrisy of the policies do not end there. The idea of preventing underaged drinking at Hamilton was created in order to protect students’ well-being in the long run. What seems to be overlooked is that these policies often end up hurting students rather than protecting them. When underaged students attempt to make their way to the bars downtown, they are left with two options if they want to be with upperclassmen friends: either squeeze into a car with upwards of 10 other people with the “least drunk” person driving or embark down the Hill by foot. Both options can become extremely dangerous and although there hasn’t been a recorded accident yet, the likelihood of one is inevitable.
If the administration wishes to be one with the students, they should lessen the dissonance between their words and actions. Through the presentation of a seemingly lenient alcohol policy, as well as the constant preaching of how important it is to protect the wellbeing of the students, we are led to believe something entirely different than the reality created by the policies. It is the College’s responsibility to protect the safety of the students, and this should outweigh the goal of preventing underaged drinking. The College is attempting to prevent a problem that is unpreventable.
There will always be underaged drinking on college campuses, including our very own “safe haven” on the Hill. Hamilton’s best option should not be to attempt to deter underaged students from getting to the bars downtown, but rather to make sure that students are safe. By opening the late night Jitney back up to all students, regardless of age, Hamilton will be creating a safer environment, discouraging the dangerous alternative routes students take to travel downtown. Underage drinking is inevitable on the Hill, as is the fact that students of all ages will make the late-night trip downtown this weekend. It is the bar’s responsibility to check IDs and enforce the drinking age; they are liable in this instance, not the College. Hamilton’s responsibility is to promote a safe environment for all students, whether they have a star on their Hill Card or not.
Jitney rules old news by Gabe Rivas ’16
Firstly, I think it is important to state that the 8-10 run has not been cancelled. In fact, since last fall, nothing has changed! Last semester the Jitney coordinators met with the Student Activities Director to discuss difficulties we were having with the 8-10 p.m. run of the Birnie Bus. The 8-10 p.m. run used to make stops at all of the daytime stops, but was having a hard time maintaining a timely schedule, since the bus drives much slower than the college vans. It was taking the bus well over an hour to complete the entire loop. When we met last semester, we wanted to expedite the 8-10 p.m. run and get all the students still off-campus back to the Hill in a timely manner before 10 p.m. Therefore, we discussed the frequency of ridership to all of the stops at length, and realized that frequency of riders going downtown was drastically lower, if not non-existent, than the number of students still left out at Target, WalMart and Marquee Cinemas. On that account, we decided to prioritize the students still left out at these stops and take preventative measures against underage students using the 8-10 bus to get to the downtown bars before the Late Night runs. When we made the change last fall, there was not any backlash from the student body. Unfortunately, at the start of this semester the Birnie Bus drivers were accidentally dropping students off downtown. As a result, there were a large amount of students (mostly underage) piling onto the buses during the last half hour of the 8-10 run trying to get downtown before the start of the Late Night run, where we check IDs. For these reasons, we wanted to send the campus an email reminding them of the approved stops of the 8-10 run. I will be at the SA meeting on Feb. 8 to discuss the issue further and encourage all to attend and voice their concerns and suggestions!