The sentiment behind Carla Dogan's Wednesday column entitled "Inebriation needs moderation at games" is understandable. In fact, she has every right to complain. At some point everyone gets frustrated with drunken students. However, I think she steers her argument in a very dangerous direction.

Specifically, I take great exception to her assertion that "Students who approve of the "show and blow" policy may or may not be a minority, but popularity is irrelevant once a new policy or law takes effect." Speaking frankly, I think this is an ignorant that detracts from her column. There are two main points that discredit her viewpoint on this issue.

First of all, laws or policies without popular support are often implemented in backhand or secret ways. Often this happens for a very good reason. On the whole, they are often either illegal or just general bad ideas. Observe the Bush Administration's wiretapping and surveillance schemes.

Finally, the "irrelevance" of popular opinion once these laws or policies are on the books discounts the possibility of them ever being repealed or changed. In fact, it literally shits on the entire democratic process. This statement puts the interests and wants of the government or authorities before the interests of the people, essentially inverting the design of a democracy. The statement advocates a complete lack of accountability for the government.

Hopefully Carla will correct her mistaken understanding of how a democracy works. After all, Prohibition wasn't repealed because of its popularity. It was repealed because a bunch of do-gooders tried to impose an unpopular policy on a populace that didn't want to listen to them.