Policies at Kirtland should be enforced
Nicole Devriendt
Issue date: 10/23/06 Section: Opinion
By Nicole DeVriendt
Editor
This column is to express my opinion on the policies here at Kirtland, namely, the rule of smoking ten feet from the buildings. I was wondering why we have this policy in place if there is going to be no enforcement of it. I have seen many students smoking closer than ten feet from the building by the student center.
I went and asked a couple of students if they were aware of this policy. One of the students I asked James Kinyon, 20, studying Welding, Skidway Lake, said, "It's like the speed limit, as long as you don't go five miles over the speed limit, they don't mess with you." The other student I asked Justin Brown, 20, studying Business Administration, St Helen, said, "Mainly, if the mess is cleaned up they don't care."
The thing is why doesn't anyone care? Why put a policy in place if there are no consequences set in place to have that policy followed?
Personally, as I've said before, I have three children. If I set rules in place and I don't have any consequences in place when these rules are not followed I shouldn't set those rules. That would be the whole point in setting a rule is to have a consequence and/or a reward for the rules to stay established. If there were nothing set in place I shouldn't have bothered making the rule.
This is where my concern comes into focus here at Kirtland. The rules that Kirtland has established should be followed up with consequences or there should be other alternatives set in place.
One of these alternatives is to have a designated smoking area. A place set where students who smoke can peacefully go to without worry of breaking any set policy may be of help the students and the faculty.
A smoking tent is one possibility for a designated smoking area; there are colleges that already have this alternative in place. With some brainstorming some other possibilities could arise. Brainstorming by smokers and non smokers, faculty and students alike may be beneficial. Both the students and teachers having input in the matter brings a sense of togetherness in setting policies and the student will be more likely to follow those policies that they helped set.
There are many other possibilities to see that this problem has a solution. Set consequences for breaking the policy is also an option.
I would also like to add that I am a smoker. I believe, however, that if there are policies set forth they are to be followed or face the consequences. With no consequences set why would the policy be followed? With no consequences established why is the policy set?
Editor
This column is to express my opinion on the policies here at Kirtland, namely, the rule of smoking ten feet from the buildings. I was wondering why we have this policy in place if there is going to be no enforcement of it. I have seen many students smoking closer than ten feet from the building by the student center.
I went and asked a couple of students if they were aware of this policy. One of the students I asked James Kinyon, 20, studying Welding, Skidway Lake, said, "It's like the speed limit, as long as you don't go five miles over the speed limit, they don't mess with you." The other student I asked Justin Brown, 20, studying Business Administration, St Helen, said, "Mainly, if the mess is cleaned up they don't care."
The thing is why doesn't anyone care? Why put a policy in place if there are no consequences set in place to have that policy followed?
Personally, as I've said before, I have three children. If I set rules in place and I don't have any consequences in place when these rules are not followed I shouldn't set those rules. That would be the whole point in setting a rule is to have a consequence and/or a reward for the rules to stay established. If there were nothing set in place I shouldn't have bothered making the rule.
This is where my concern comes into focus here at Kirtland. The rules that Kirtland has established should be followed up with consequences or there should be other alternatives set in place.
One of these alternatives is to have a designated smoking area. A place set where students who smoke can peacefully go to without worry of breaking any set policy may be of help the students and the faculty.
A smoking tent is one possibility for a designated smoking area; there are colleges that already have this alternative in place. With some brainstorming some other possibilities could arise. Brainstorming by smokers and non smokers, faculty and students alike may be beneficial. Both the students and teachers having input in the matter brings a sense of togetherness in setting policies and the student will be more likely to follow those policies that they helped set.
There are many other possibilities to see that this problem has a solution. Set consequences for breaking the policy is also an option.
I would also like to add that I am a smoker. I believe, however, that if there are policies set forth they are to be followed or face the consequences. With no consequences set why would the policy be followed? With no consequences established why is the policy set?
Be the first to comment on this story