Maybe I'm still dizzy from the June LSAT, but I feel compelled to point out the many logical fallacies in Ms. Belyus's argument regarding causes of recent riots. Contrary to her assertion that the first riot at Penn State occurred in 1998, riots have had a long tradition of occurrence at Penn State and many other universities. Searching the Collegian archives yields much information about various riots during the past ten years, and alumni can provide you with riot accounts dating much further back. Ms. Belyus's conclusion that recent alcohol regulation has been the keystone of riot stimuli is destroyed if her premise that riots are a new phenomenon is invalid.

More generally, riots at Penn State don't have a single cause; they occur under a myriad of circumstances. There really are good reasons for suspecting the crowd outside of Acme Pizza of providing a breeding ground for rioters. The borough council is simply trying to pinpoint and mitigate as many catalysts as possible. In light of Penn State's riot-free Arts Festival this year, I'd argue that they are succeeding.

I won't deny that this success comes at the cost of slightly greater infringement upon the rights of students and business owners, but that is the nature of this country's state police power. Until the student body can show that they can party peacefully, the borough is justified in employing the extra police presence.

Riots can be fun to participate in and to watch. They are exciting, and may even promote a sense of unity. They are also illegal and extremely detrimental to the community, the local businesses, and to our reputation as responsible students.