Another ‘constitutional gray area to be sorted out’

Publication Date: 11/05/2009

This letter is in regard to the debate concerning the proposal of a campus-wide umbrella ban. As a non-umbrella user, I would like to express my continuing support of the proposal to institute an umbrella ban across Purdue’s campus.

Firstly, umbrella users typically do not abide by the “2-feet-away from the next closest person” rule, resulting in the oppression of non-umbrella users such as myself. Just last time it rained, I was unapologetically struck with not one, but two, umbrellas. Non-umbrella users such as myself are forced to the worst parts of the sidewalks as we dodge these hazardous objects. Also, once these umbrella-users get into the classroom, it is impossible to avoid the puddles created by the run-off rainwater from their umbrellas.

Secondly, I find it odd that umbrella users feel that they have a constitutional “right” to carry these menaces. Just because our current laws do not prohibit this act, it does not mean that the law supports it; it is just one of many archaic anomalies people cling to in our legal system. It would as if I claimed the legal right to set up small huts all over campus, so long as I do not disturb others with my squatting.

Carrying an umbrella is dangerous and tacky, and I hope this ban will encourage people to buy trendy raincoats, making our campus a safer and more scenic place. In fact, I hope this ban is just the beginning. I, for one, am sick of cars driving within 30 feet of the sidewalk, creating an unhealthy and loud atmosphere for us walkers. Yet another constitutional gray area to be sorted out in the future, I am sure.

Joseph Fitzpatrick

Sophomore in the School of Management