LETTER: More lights, officers better than gates

---

by Jason Ciarochi

---

Editor's note: The barriers blocking the parking lots will be replaced by permanent gates. See diagram, page 6. The author has been notified of the plan, but he feels that his arguments apply to the gates as well and wishes that his opinions be pub- lished.

To the editor:

With the recent crimes at Rice this semester, no one doubts that the current security policy is inadequate.

As a male, I do not feel as threatened as other members of this campus. This does not excuse the apparent lack of protection for our students.

I have spoken with many students who are not satisfied with the current security arrangements.

Some students are in states of fear while others feel that the poli- cy is inconsiderate of students' needs.

For the sake of newer students unfamilar with the issue, I will discuss two annoyances with the current policy.

The first is the locking of college lots. Two years ago, Rice students were victims of a heinous crime. The university prudently responded with a "temporary" solution re-stricting entry to the campus at night.

At the time, many students expressed dissatisfaction with the decision, but they were assured that the barriers would be removed after a comprehensive evaluation of the policy.

Why are the barriers still up? No one is exactly sure.

I have three problems with the policy.

First, it is extremely inconvenient. Most people who drive late at night are usually tired and would like to get to their destination more quick-ly.

Second, the barriers serve no real advantage.

A simple analysis over the past five years reveals that individuals committing crimes on the Rice campus tend to not have their own transportation in the first place.

If potential assailants are traveling by foot, how will a road barrier restrict them?

Third, the barriers increase the chance of automobile accidents on campus.

I am certain that I am not the only one to witness cars flying through the inner loop or college lots late at night.

My second gripe deals with the current policy.

To the university's credit, the idea of assigning campus policemen to colleges is excellent.

Unfortunately, this policy has not been completely successful. Students are still vulnerable while traveling to their car or around various parts of campus.

To the university, I offer a simple solution: more officers and lights.

I hope that the university's crime problem will end with an apprehension of the recent assailant, but I fear that it will not.

The lights in the residential lots were a good start. We should continue the policy through the dim areas of campus.

The lights around campus are enough for a traveler to see, but not nearly as bright as the common grocery store parking lot. Perhaps this is a problem that the students will have to solve.

A few alterations in our lifestyle can seriously reduce the risk of crime.

For the night owls, arranging schedules to travel together is not too difficult.

Being aware of one's environment is not that difficult either.

Everyone knows how to avoid compromising situations with strangers, but not everyone identifies those situations.

A few minor changes by students, even if unaccompanied by policy changes of the university, can make a serious difference.

Jason Ciarochi

SRC '96

This item appeared in the Opinion section of the January 26, 1996 issue.

Copyright © 1996 The Rice Thresher. All Rights Reserved.
This document may be distributed electronically, provided that it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice. However, it cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of:
The Rice Thresher, Rice University, 6100 Main, Houston, TX, 77005, USA.