<p>“…offered these two immoral, geniuses admission.”</p>
<p>LOL @ IMMORAL.</p>
<p>oh good grief. this isn’t news at all. it’s hilarious, and they’re stupid. let’s leave it at that.</p>
<p>****ing hell I have class in WPH… kappa sig shames our school</p>
<p>I’d think consensual, yet stupid and most likely drunken sex is really no big deal…in my book. It’s a big deal for the university’s reputation and the law doesn’t like it too much, but nobody was harmed. It’s actually kind of funny. </p>
<p>They’re not throwing racial comments towards entire groups of people.</p>
<p>I like the phrase that people were subjected to seeing this against their will. Because 1. I think the number of promiscuous websites mean that it’s likely not against any will, and 2. (Aside from the previous cynicism) people weren’t actually being forced to watch or take pictures. and 3. for whatever reason, people want to see the photos which I think shows that it’s more a matter of stupidity than anything else.</p>
<p>I mean, I certainly don’t agree with what they did, but it’s not like it reveals anything bad about USC. In fact, I think (well from the article) that the students are handling the situation fine. Obviously, they know it’s not something that is appropriate, but there’s far worse things that have been done on college campuses.</p>
<p>BUT YOU GUYS! IT’S IMMORAL AND SHAMEFUL! [/sarcasm]</p>
<p>I apologize for sharing my “puritanical” views regarding this “unfortunate incident” on this website. I am obviously out of touch with contemporary morals. I most certainly do not think that it is a reflection on USC as an institution.<br>
And lastly, I am grateful that I’ve finally learned about the true meaning of “roofies”.</p>
<p>It’s not a morality issue. Two people do not reflect the ideals and behaviors of a student body that numbers close to 35,000.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t say that this personally offends or angers ME, but If USC doesn’t expel both of them then there is something really wrong with that school. We have laws and codes of conduct for a reason. This isnt typical drunken college misguided behavior; this was purposely planed out and executed. They are basically saying f@#k you to the school that is educating them, providing resources and possibly loans/scholarships. Beside it really isn’t that funny of a prank; just dumb immature behavior. They should be expelled for stupidity if anything. Think about it this wayif you had sex on top of your work place building wouldn’t you expect to be fired? Umm yeah.</p>
<p>Holy **** people, don’t overreact or anything. Yes it was stupid. So what? Smart people still do stupid things. If USC kicked everyone out who had ever done a stupid thing, there would be nobody left.</p>
<p>Overreact? They had sex in a open public place in broad daylight. Where is that considered legal or appropriate behavior? You get arrested for that, and since the offense was on school property by students they should also face repercussions from the school. Yes there is plenty of outrageous behavior on college campuses, but there is a difference between what happens within a dorm or fraternity house while no one else is watching and a deliberate executed illegal behavior in broad daylight on a university building. There a plenty of people who would love a REAL opportunity at higher education waiting to replace these idiots who don’t seem to have any respect whatsoever for the opportunity they were given. A university is doing YOU a favor by excepting you, not the other way around. It should be expected that you would be expelled for something this inappropriate and disrespectful to the institution.</p>
<p>If the two universities involved choose not to get involved they are excepting them from the ramifications of their actions. If the two universities choose to become involved they may be accepting a new student in their place.</p>
<p>DPS should have arrested them for public exposure and having sex in public. That’s a crime not just a college prank. Being on a college campus shouldn’t exempt them for the law. DPS is an extension of the LAPD. If this happened outside of campus the LAPD would have arrested the individuals. As a minimum the student that is from USC should be expelled and they actually should both be arrested. While this is the action of two stupid students it reflects badly on USC in people’s minds and we don’t need that. DPS should never have just sent them off with a handslap.</p>
<p>DPS is not the LAPD. Their main job is to keep the students on campus safe. They are not out looking to arrest students, and would vastly prefer not having to do so. Like it or not, USC students are not treated the same as the people who live in the neighborhood.</p>
<p>To everyone saying that these students should be expelled, please justify it. And no, “it’s a crime” is not a good enough justification. Neither is “it makes USC look bad”. I’d argue it makes the school look worse to expel the student for this action.</p>
<p>The girl at UCLA with the anti-Asian video committed a hate crime. Was she expelled or punished by the school? No – but she dealt with/is dealing with the repercussions of her actions, just as these kids would do.</p>
<p>You prudes want to know what else is a crime? Underage drinking. It happens at every college in the country. So, instead of trying to be the morality police on an Internet forum, why aren’t you calling up every college chancellor or president asking them to expel each student under the age of 21 who participated in underage drinking? Oh, riiiiight.</p>
<p>Worse things happen at USC (and other colleges.) You don’t think kids have sex in libraries? What about frat houses – since, at USC, those are technically considered University “housing.” Should USC throw out every frat guy whose had sex in his frat house bedroom?</p>
<p>USC will deal with these kids in accordance to the ways they’ve dealt with similar situations in the past; I’m sure, back in the days before cell phone cameras, kids on college campuses around the country had sex in public. This got attention because of social media. If USC didn’t kick out those kids 30 years ago, they don’t have to kick out these kids now.</p>
<p>Anyone here saying that some other student deserves a spot at USC because they wouldn’t “have sex” needs to crawl out of their hole. Newsflash – even smart people can have sexual feelings for another human being. Just because someone has a brain doesn’t mean they don’t have physical urges as well.</p>
<p>Geez. Like I said – if you have problems with 18-21 year olds acting their age, tell your son/daughter to attend BYU where they WOULD kick out anyone in a physical relationship with another student.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Either you’re jealous you were rejected – hint, it’s “accepting” not “excepting” – or maybe you think your child who was rejected would behave like a perfect little princess. From my experience, it’s the kids who were restricted by their parents that acted out the most in college. I’m sure your son/daughter has done some things you’d find reprehensible – but would you want them kicked out of school?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>what two universities involved? AFAIK, only one university was involved: USC. Anything else, without evidence, is mere gossip/speculation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>1) they were pretty much trespassing on the building’s roof (an alarm went off when they opened the door)</p>
<p>2) not only did they B&E into a USC building, but they also had sex on the roof (obviously without the university’s permission)</p>
<p>3) as per 1 and 2, they probably violated the student code of conduct, and should hence be expelled (assuming the girl goes there)</p>
<p>There is no rule in the USC student code that says “Students may not have sexual relations,” or any similar variation. I dare you to look it up and try to find something saying otherwise. (The student handbook is readily available on USC’s website.)</p>
<p>If the school is punishing the male student for breaking and entering – the girl is his UCLA girlfriend – it’s not something they would announce. Students are sent to review boards all the time for cheating, theft, etc – but it’s not plastered all over University websites and publications because IT’S NOT ANYONE’S BUSINESS.</p>
<p>If the male student has a clean disciplinary record at USC, his B&E punishment would be minimal. I broke into the Lyon center outdoor pool at 3am freshman year and I had to write an essay on the importance of rules at the University.</p>
<p>Besides – you don’t go to USC anyway, so why the hell do you care? Am I ■■■■■■■■ the UCLA boards demanding that the anti-Asian girl be put on trial? No. I don’t agree with what she did, but I think karma will come back to her, regardless of if she’s still at UCLA or not. None of my damn business, to be perfectly honest.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>it wasn’t a hate crime; hell, it wasn’t even hate speech. the university tried to seek action against AW, but they found out that they couldn’t. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes because having sex in the privacy of your bedroom is the exact same thing as having sex in the public in front of hundreds of people :rolleyes:</p>
<p>even if people DO have sex in the library, it’s not as if they go to the main study area where everyone is and just start having sex for everyone to see. Look at a top view of that building online. They could have had sex way at the bottom, where no one would have seen them. They didn’t. Their goal was to get attention, and that’s what they did.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow, how did you get such insight? Did you ask the students themselves about their motivations? Did they tell you that they wanted to get caught? Geez.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A previous poster said they should be punished for having sex on University property; using their logic, if USC can expel a student for having sex in a campus building, they should expel people in USC housing as well.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No one cares about the students who cheat or steal because those students don’t make NATIONAL HEADLINES. When they do then it becomes EVERYONE’S BUSINESS. Also, again, there’s no evidence, at all, pointing that this girl goes to UCLA; your school newspaper hasn’t said anything about it, and neither has mine.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So what if i’m a UCLA student? i thought this was America, where i had the right to voice my speech no matter what my affiliations were; I’d imagine that even if i did go to USC, you’d just label me as some ‘prude’ who needs to get over his ‘puritan’ beliefs.</p>