Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
I doubt that there is anyone on this board who isn't concerned about the liberal definitions of hazing. I don't think any of us like it -- including those of us who equate real hazing with stupidity.
But that's the way it is. And it's the law in every state. And it's the rule in every Greek Letter Organization.
So, until someone, or some organization, or some legislature or whatever changes it, we live with it. And we abide by it.
Or we lose our charters.
Which part of that is so hard to understand?
|
Of course DeltAlum is right here. However, in practice, very few criminal/civil (depending on the state) cases are ever brought for violation of the hazing statutes. Why? Most of the laws are misdemenor offenses, and when there is more substantial harm (death, injury, etc) the state is much more likely to go after the responsible parties on those grounds....easier to prove, heavier penalties, etc.
So, solutions. If the vast majority of hazing offenses are handled at an host intstitution and/or organizational level - then begin a discussion. Tell the people that make these decisions you are concerned that many of the policies (which are generally MUCH more specific than statute) are incongruent with a higher learning experience.
If no effort is made to check the "hypersensitives," we have no one to blame but ourselves when we lose a chapter.
Brad