Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if Howard wishes then it should ban dogs from its campus. One sees self entitled people who flout leash laws and don’t clean up after their dogs, whether I’m public parks or someone else’s private property.

That said, it seems that some of the students based on their comments have more of a problem with the color of ‘outsiders’ than with dogs on their campus

This exactly. Don’t want dog walkers on your campus, fine, post signs and enforce it. that makes total sense to me. But the students are basically saying white neighbors are “interlopers”. As if college campuses all over the country don’t have locals that use the campus spaces. Give me a break.

If white students talked this way about black neighbors they’d be called racists.

This

And if nearby black residents were walking around a predominantly white campus showing such wanton disrespect they would be locked up on sight. That's systemic racism which is significantly more pernicious than petty name-calling.

Sure....look up DC crime stats, my friend, and see what's actually going on in the real world vs. in your very fertile imagination.

What the hell does that have to do with black STUDENTS at predominantly white schools all across the country repeatedly getting stopped by campus police and asked to show ID? Do you honestly think black non-students walking around those campuses would tolerated? Do you honestly think they'd be simply disliked and called "interlopers"? You don't think there'd be countless incidents of black non-student dog-walkers ending up in handcuffs and in some instances in the hospital? You sitting here bent out of shape cause Howard students are irritated with the neighboring residents? Shyt I'd rather have students irritated with me than campus police putting a bullet in my ass just for being black.

The plain fact is that neither is right and neither should be tolerated. You are damn right black students have been mistreated. But that does not make what the Howard students are saying okay, either. It's all wrong. Varying degrees, sure, but still wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if Howard wishes then it should ban dogs from its campus. One sees self entitled people who flout leash laws and don’t clean up after their dogs, whether I’m public parks or someone else’s private property.

That said, it seems that some of the students based on their comments have more of a problem with the color of ‘outsiders’ than with dogs on their campus

This exactly. Don’t want dog walkers on your campus, fine, post signs and enforce it. that makes total sense to me. But the students are basically saying white neighbors are “interlopers”. As if college campuses all over the country don’t have locals that use the campus spaces. Give me a break.

If white students talked this way about black neighbors they’d be called racists.

This

And if nearby black residents were walking around a predominantly white campus showing such wanton disrespect they would be locked up on sight. That's systemic racism which is significantly more pernicious than petty name-calling.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if Howard wishes then it should ban dogs from its campus. One sees self entitled people who flout leash laws and don’t clean up after their dogs, whether I’m public parks or someone else’s private property.

That said, it seems that some of the students based on their comments have more of a problem with the color of ‘outsiders’ than with dogs on their campus

This exactly. Don’t want dog walkers on your campus, fine, post signs and enforce it. that makes total sense to me. But the students are basically saying white neighbors are “interlopers”. As if college campuses all over the country don’t have locals that use the campus spaces. Give me a break.

If white students talked this way about black neighbors they’d be called racists.

This

And if nearby black residents were walking around a predominantly white campus showing such wanton disrespect they would be locked up on sight. That's systemic racism which is significantly more pernicious than petty name-calling.

Sure....look up DC crime stats, my friend, and see what's actually going on in the real world vs. in your very fertile imagination.

What the hell does that have to do with black STUDENTS at predominantly white schools all across the country repeatedly getting stopped by campus police and asked to show ID? Do you honestly think black non-students walking around those campuses would tolerated? Do you honestly think they'd be simply disliked and called "interlopers"? You don't think there'd be countless incidents of black non-student dog-walkers ending up in handcuffs and in some instances in the hospital? You sitting here bent out of shape cause Howard students are irritated with the neighboring residents? Shyt I'd rather have students irritated with me than campus police putting a bullet in my ass just for being black.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I cannot believe that we need a thread about this. I'm sorry, but don't walk your dog to do their business around ANY campus or park where people sit, play, and picnic.

Definitely don't walk your dog around a university that has a history.

If a bunch of black teenagers are rowdy on the train, your alarm goes up. If a bunch of hoity toity white people bring their dogs around a predominantly black campus, your alarms should go up.

We shouldn't discriminate against white people being places, or black people being places, doh. But if white people are tone deaf enough to let their dogs defecate and urinate anywhere, particularly an HBCU, then we have a problem.

Howard should ban dogs, period.

Very funny.

Let's start enforcing this in the whole city.

Blacks stay in historically-black areas, whites in historically-white areas, and I guess other are out of luck.

Bloody brilliant!

You're an idiot. THat's not what I said. Maybe if our ancestors didn't enslave black people and unleash dogs on them, this wouldn't be an issue now, BUT IT IS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I cannot believe that we need a thread about this. I'm sorry, but don't walk your dog to do their business around ANY campus or park where people sit, play, and picnic.

Definitely don't walk your dog around a university that has a history.

If a bunch of black teenagers are rowdy on the train, your alarm goes up. If a bunch of hoity toity white people bring their dogs around a predominantly black campus, your alarms should go up.

We shouldn't discriminate against white people being places, or black people being places, doh. But if white people are tone deaf enough to let their dogs defecate and urinate anywhere, particularly an HBCU, then we have a problem.

Howard should ban dogs, period.

Very funny.

Let's start enforcing this in the whole city.

Blacks stay in historically-black areas, whites in historically-white areas, and I guess other are out of luck.

Bloody brilliant!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if Howard wishes then it should ban dogs from its campus. One sees self entitled people who flout leash laws and don’t clean up after their dogs, whether I’m public parks or someone else’s private property.

That said, it seems that some of the students based on their comments have more of a problem with the color of ‘outsiders’ than with dogs on their campus

This exactly. Don’t want dog walkers on your campus, fine, post signs and enforce it. that makes total sense to me. But the students are basically saying white neighbors are “interlopers”. As if college campuses all over the country don’t have locals that use the campus spaces. Give me a break.

If white students talked this way about black neighbors they’d be called racists.

This

And if nearby black residents were walking around a predominantly white campus showing such wanton disrespect they would be locked up on sight. That's systemic racism which is significantly more pernicious than petty name-calling.

Sure....look up DC crime stats, my friend, and see what's actually going on in the real world vs. in your very fertile imagination.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if Howard wishes then it should ban dogs from its campus. One sees self entitled people who flout leash laws and don’t clean up after their dogs, whether I’m public parks or someone else’s private property.

That said, it seems that some of the students based on their comments have more of a problem with the color of ‘outsiders’ than with dogs on their campus

This exactly. Don’t want dog walkers on your campus, fine, post signs and enforce it. that makes total sense to me. But the students are basically saying white neighbors are “interlopers”. As if college campuses all over the country don’t have locals that use the campus spaces. Give me a break.

If white students talked this way about black neighbors they’d be called racists.

This

And if nearby black residents were walking around a predominantly white campus showing such wanton disrespect they would be locked up on sight. That's systemic racism which is significantly more pernicious than petty name-calling.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if Howard wishes then it should ban dogs from its campus. One sees self entitled people who flout leash laws and don’t clean up after their dogs, whether I’m public parks or someone else’s private property.

That said, it seems that some of the students based on their comments have more of a problem with the color of ‘outsiders’ than with dogs on their campus

This exactly. Don’t want dog walkers on your campus, fine, post signs and enforce it. that makes total sense to me. But the students are basically saying white neighbors are “interlopers”. As if college campuses all over the country don’t have locals that use the campus spaces. Give me a break.

If white students talked this way about black neighbors they’d be called racists.

This

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think if Howard wishes then it should ban dogs from its campus. One sees self entitled people who flout leash laws and don’t clean up after their dogs, whether I’m public parks or someone else’s private property.

That said, it seems that some of the students based on their comments have more of a problem with the color of ‘outsiders’ than with dogs on their campus

This exactly. Don’t want dog walkers on your campus, fine, post signs and enforce it. that makes total sense to me. But the students are basically saying white neighbors are “interlopers”. As if college campuses all over the country don’t have locals that use the campus spaces. Give me a break.

If white students talked this way about black neighbors they’d be called racists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Contrary to what some posters have said, I find what Howard University is doing no different from what some other urban colleges/universities have done.
Some posters referenced Columbia and its "openess". On the part of Columbia's campus that most resembles Howard's Quad there are gates, some of which Columbia chooses to keep open 24 hours a day. But that is at Columbia's discretion and it can change its policy at any time. At night, there are guards at those gates and they will stop people that they don't think "belong" on campus. Yale used to lock the gates at night to their equivalent of the Quad. Only students who lived on that quad had the ability to enter after certain hours. Pratt Institute in Brooklyn grew tired of the growing number of people with babies/toddlers using their equivalent of a quad as a park. Partly because there were sculptures on campus on which children were climbing like they were playground equipment but regardless, Pratt told people that children were not welcome unless they were on campus for an event or were affiliated with the school. There were no protests. People who lived nearby were fortunate to have a gem in their neighborhood. Some of them abused the privilege so a broader group of people lost out.

Howard has the right to decide on the environment it wants to create for the people who study, teach and work at the University. It is also the University's right to decide who has access to its campus. For those unaffiliated people who live in the neighborhood and are granted periodic access, they should be thankful to the University for sharing its space and follow the policies the University sets. But that is the University's choice and if it chooses to restrict access to its campus, then so be it.

Exactly. But they can’t discriminate about it. The student letter that proposed that the campus be open to students of other HBCUs but not to the public suggests that this involves more than dogs and boorish dog walkers.

Anonymous wrote:Contrary to what some posters have said, I find what Howard University is doing no different from what some other urban colleges/universities have done.
Some posters referenced Columbia and its "openess". On the part of Columbia's campus that most resembles Howard's Quad there are gates, some of which Columbia chooses to keep open 24 hours a day. But that is at Columbia's discretion and it can change its policy at any time. At night, there are guards at those gates and they will stop people that they don't think "belong" on campus. Yale used to lock the gates at night to their equivalent of the Quad. Only students who lived on that quad had the ability to enter after certain hours. Pratt Institute in Brooklyn grew tired of the growing number of people with babies/toddlers using their equivalent of a quad as a park. Partly because there were sculptures on campus on which children were climbing like they were playground equipment but regardless, Pratt told people that children were not welcome unless they were on campus for an event or were affiliated with the school. There were no protests. People who lived nearby were fortunate to have a gem in their neighborhood. Some of them abused the privilege so a broader group of people lost out.

Howard has the right to decide on the environment it wants to create for the people who study, teach and work at the University. It is also the University's right to decide who has access to its campus. For those unaffiliated people who live in the neighborhood and are granted periodic access, they should be thankful to the University for sharing its space and follow the policies the University sets. But that is the University's choice and if it chooses to restrict access to its campus, then so be it.

Anonymous wrote:I think if Howard wishes then it should ban dogs from its campus. One sees self entitled people who flout leash laws and don’t clean up after their dogs, whether I’m public parks or someone else’s private property.

That said, it seems that some of the students based on their comments have more of a problem with the color of ‘outsiders’ than with dogs on their campus