Maybe if the frat brothers had called their dads, all of this wouldn't have happened.
OT: Live University/Fraternity Shaming coming up at 10AM (link)...
- Thread starter MtNittany
- Start date
I don't see anything irresponsible about showing the public how this behavior destroyed a family. Just look at all the posts in here defending this kind of hazing as the kids fault.
Everyone says they want to get in front of this stuff and it's a noble goal. The truth is that the university and the local public health experts have been offering responsible solutions for years. There have been many changes at downtown bars and wishing the Greek community around binge drinking. It isn't like the frat didn't know this was against the rules. Of course large swaths of the community freak out when the University and town crack down too.
A young man is dead and several other young men were at a minimum grossly negligent in his death. Should they not face consequences?
yes everyone in the frat should face consequences. putting more restrictions and making kids even more afraid to call for help is not going to help anything
The truth is that the university and the local public health experts have been offering responsible solutions for years.
I agree. Offered them, and mostly getting lip service about enacting these solutions in return, or getting a polite, thanks but no thanks in return. But either way, something is not taking hold with the students, despite the history and the attempts at education and stricter rules. So, the media could take up the cause and pound these points home until some effective changes are in place and prove to be working. That includes the 'good Samaritan' approach that is largely unknown and underutilized. Maybe that needs to be expanded and publicized. We all agree that getting help is more important than avoiding scrutiny. Do the students know about this? Can it be enhanced to make it more effective and get more use?
The crackdowns aren't the problem, but they aren't effective over the long run, apparently; it's getting the education to stick repeatedly.
Should they not face consequences?
I stated very clearly in the post you responded to that they should face consequences through the judicial system. I doubt anyone is arguing that. I view that type question as just an attempt to show moral superiority.
The media-driven info centering on one high-profile instance leads to a complacent public, thinking 'well, that won't happen here', the same way blaming PSU football has caused that line of thinking and therefore has done zero to educate and prevent further sexual assaults of all sorts.
I think back to my time in college. Several times I was told to have another or be accused of being a lightweight. I probably said that to somebody else too. But shouldn't the person drinking be responsible for his own decisions?
If my kid died I'd probably want to go after everybody. If my kid was a frat member going along with the "hazing" I would be defending him as an innocent bystander (he didn't know the guy was hurt, just thought he was drunk). It would be difficult to defend my kid if was heard attempting to cover things up or stopping a known serious injury from being reported.
If my kid died I'd probably want to go after everybody. If my kid was a frat member going along with the "hazing" I would be defending him as an innocent bystander (he didn't know the guy was hurt, just thought he was drunk). It would be difficult to defend my kid if was heard attempting to cover things up or stopping a known serious injury from being reported.
All of these young men are guilty of being young and stupid. They aren't criminals and it shouldn't ruin their lives. It will if the charges stick.
Last edited:
The media covers the prevention and education aspects too. The problem is unless someone is hurt or dies the public just don't take it seriously. People think "it can't happen to me, or to my son or daughter" until it does.
In this case it appears from the evidence that at least one young man made some effort to take action that would help Piazza but the peer group was able to snuff it out. Once again the group and institutional dynamic prevailed.
I don't know what the answer is, but I don't think stopping a DA press conference will make anything better in the long run either.
If the evidence alleged is correct then yes they certainly are criminals. Multiple of age men purchased and provided alcohol to minors. That's a crime. There's really no argument to oppose that. You may argue that many people do that, which is a different argument. It is definitely a crime.
So true. I have talked with all my buddies about this. We all graduated in early 80's. It's all about the hard liquor now. We just had beer. You pretty much got too bloated to get crazy drunk just on beer but they banned kegs from Frats and tailgates and now you get these kids that pound the hard stuff. They put vodka in the yellow whiffle ball bats at tailgates instead of beer. It's.crazy.
The peer pressure to stop the one person from getting help is especially disturbing. Sensible heads were far outnumbered.
I'd disagree that the prevention and education is covered to any noticeable degree. And if there has been some progress made along these lines, are we even aware of it? From my own experience way back when (which was bad enough at times) and from others mentioning it here, the problem has escalated significantly over time. Part of the education has to come in the form of making it easier and more instinctive to get help when something goes wrong, rather than to hope for the best and don't get yourself in trouble. And the media needs to push for the education to be mandated and taught in local areas, not simply via TV, for example.
They could throw out ideas to get the discussion started.... e.g. make all students who go into a fraternity or sorority go through a few hours of training to learn about these situations and to learn and discuss handling them. Get local law enforcement involved to partner with the school and organizations. Maybe make some other mandatory training for other, less organized groups and individuals. (I have nothing off the top for how to do that, but some ideas need to be initiated and allowed to evolve).
We're not going to stop the DA press conferences, unfortunately. That horse has left the barn, especially when elections are coming up. Stopping them is not the solution, and I did not say that. But giving far more time to education and prevention starting even before college age is needed, and the media can help or even lead that effort. But I doubt they will.
With how many times this has happened on and off campus, Frats or not, I presume they just chose this instance to set and example that it won't happen anymore.
What charge will they get for holding that gun to his head while he drank that much? I've never been .40 because I stopped. It's called free will.
Probably a fairly small number of people on these boards recall a time when there were some states when you could buy beer at age 18, and wine and liquor at 21.
Growing up outside of Harrisburg, we could drive down to Maryland and get beer. And because I looked older than my age before I was 18, I was usually the designated customer to buy the case when we got there. They rarely carded you then.
But that is a good point about not drinking to excess very often when drinking just beer.
Should we be thinking about a return to that modified approach, since we know a prohibition won't work?
How many times has a kid died while multiple folks clearly knew he was way past just drunk? How many times has a kid died after one kid told another kid not to call 911? How many times has a kid died and then the people who were there were caught red-handed destroying evidence?
Now I understand you are saying how many times has a kid OD-ed or gotten too drunk at a party, frat or otherwise, but in many of those cases the people involved are charged with furnishing and other crimes. Like it or not our justice system considers his death as part and parcel of the other crimes and thus it meets the definition of the higher crimes charged. If you can't see the difference between some kid falling off a balcony on Beaver canyon and this concerted effort to conceal what was going on then I don't know what to say.
And the brothers also chose freely when they intentionally violated the local law and the fraternity policy and furnished alcohol to a minor during a social event outside of agreed to IFC rules.
A person can always say no. I didn't join a fraternity because I didn't want to get hazed. My son did not join a fraternity (even though he had a couple of them that really wanted him because he was an athlete) because he didn't want to have his grades suffer. If you don't want to go through all this stuff, don't join a damn fraternity.
Yep, they did. So punish them for that. But the victim has some responsibility in this too. No one should drink enough to have a BAC that high. They all made dumb decisions that night, but his tops the list.
So how would you suggest a dead man be punished? Seems to rational people that he faced some consequences for his decisions.
I'm with you on all of that, but I wasn't there. And neither were you. Presumed guilty before innocent. Today's world blows.
Where did I say he should be punished? I'm responding to posts saying it was all the brothers' fault because they made him drink. No one can make you drink. And certainly no one can make you drink enough to get up near a .40. It's a tragedy and a collection of bad decisions...but alcohol and youth don't usually result in too many good decisions.
I don't presume them guilty. If you look at my posts several times I have qualified with "if the evidence presented is correct" or similar language. I haven't seen the video, I haven't seen the texts, and I wasn't there. I also have no reason to think that the video and texts are not true, or that all of the many brothers that testified are lying. It appears that the DA has a strong case (not legally, I am not a lawyer, but as a layman).
You know the answer to that. Unfortunately, Norml has way less stroke than the Liquor Lobby. The main threat from weed is critical shortages of snack foods.
If they had a policy to report everything to the AD and President would make them innocent? #Joe
They consulted the kinesiology major who is as much a doctor as Shultz was a police officer.
You are a sad person. Pray no one in your family ever dies when others chose not to help.
I'm sad because I taught my kids to think for themselves and don't let others determine what happens to them? My daughter just graduated from grad school today and my son just finished his junior year in college and neither had ever reached close to a .40 BAC.
good for you. A kid is dead and you just keep patting yourself on the back with your moral superiority. We can all only hope to be as perfect as you.
I've seen 1 SPM sign in Centre County. Problem is the other 4 or 5 guys each have 1,000+ each and are going to split votes.
Who peed in your Wheaties? So all 18 of those kids go to jail for life and serve hard time...how does that help the dead kid's family? I never said those involved should not face consequences, I just don't think they should be fried for it.
I'd be surprised if Bernie Cantora did not win the upcoming primary. For an incumbent DA not to receive the local FOP endorsement is pretty damning.
Last edited:
It is not just the drinking. It was drinking in the context of hazing and then not getting him help when he was injured.
And they did not get help because they were drinking. It pretty much all goes back to the drinking.
Do you really think it's that simple? You've spent weeks rushing and getting to know a bunch of guys. You've become friends with them and the other pledge brothers. You're having the time of your life and so excited to get the bid. You get a little buzzed, feeling really good and then they start pouring drinks down your throat and all of a sudden you just say, "wait, I changed my mind. I'm out". It's really not as simple as you think.
Tests have been forcing pledges to drink four years and it's a really bad thing. I hope this helps to end it.
MANY frats do not feed their pledges drinks or even allow them to drink once they get bids...most other frats have sober brothers every single night to make sure everything is okay. this frat did about everything you can do wrong in this situation.
It won't help to end it. Some guys will get busted, have their lives ruined and this kind of stuff will continue to go on just like it has for a long long time. When you mix youth and alcohol dumb stuff happens. Punishing everyone involved will only ruin additional lives. Young people die in drunk driving accidents every day, yet they still do it. Young people die from drug abuse every day, yet they still do it. Young people die or get hurt in fraternity hazing incidents all the time, yet they continue to pledge. Education in these incidents may be better than incarceration.
This stuff happens because it's tradition. Older guys had it happen so they are going to do it to the younger guys. Maybe this will break the tradition at PSU.
If people make their own decision then it's on them. Being essentially forced to drink? That should stop.
yeah hopefully this ends all the dumb rituals that have been going on for years....been a tough 6 years for psu
