In response to the editorial "Collision Course," (The Daily Collegian, Oct. 26), I applaud Undergraduate Student Government President Rob Kampia, the USG Senate and the executive branch for their efforts to create a plan for bike paths on campus.

It is unfortunate that the University does not consider this a safety problem worth investigating. It seems to me that the University's idea of safety goes only as far as its wallet. When I lived in the dorms, a University employee told me a poster I had taped to the ceiling was a fire hazard. Fine. I signed a contract stating I would obey the rules, so I took it down.

Later that year I went to a football game. So many people attended that the aisles, steps and exits were full, prohibiting movement. I know football tickets bring in a lot of money, but what would happen if a fan had a sudden emergency? If his/her condition was dependent on immediate medical attention, that patron would be dead. It is obvious the University is fallible in terms of making decisions based on safety when a large sum of money is involved.

In State College, a fine for a moving violation on a bicycle is $84. Compare this to a $42 auto speeding ticket in Maryland and we see that State College finds bicycle and pedestrian safety to be a very serious issue (unless this is merely a means for the town to fill its coffers at the students' expense). Obviously, the local authorities cannot come to a consensus on this point.

Who is left to make the decision of whether or not bicycle safety on campus is a problem warranting further investigation? The majority of faculty and staff either have designated parking spaces, have the use of campus parking garages or use the shuttle bus provided for them. Forgive me for invoking the common sense theorem, but it seems that the people best-suited to make such a judgment are the people who walk and ride the paths on campus every day, the students (remember us?).

I ride my bike or walk to class every day. I see people who ride safely and people who ride like idiots and endanger others. But to discharge commuting in a way that reduces downtown traffic, protects the environment and reduces our dependency on fossil fuels by not even investigating the possibility of safety enhancement is a ridiculous and irresponsible action on the University's part.