yes. college students seem, as a demographic, more likely to be victims of crimes because they are easier targets. the police officers are more likely to need the guns.
* When you say "victims of crimes" do you mean violent or non-violent crimes, or both? * Do you think the perpetrators are members of the college community, or outsiders? * Do you see arming the campus police as changing the perception of the campus leading to fewer crimes committed in the first place, or do you envision the police actively intervening in the crimes (either more frequently or more effectively)?
-both. college students are fairly likely, in my experience, to leave their doors unlocked and have their stuff stolen. college-age females are also fairly likely targets for sexual assault. -again, both. sometimes students get in fights, do stupid shit, steal each other's stuff...but there are also other members of the community who see an opportunity to take advantage of the students' follies. -more of the latter, i suppose, but a bit of both. if you're committing a crime and you see an armed officer coming toward you, you're more likely to run away than if you saw an unarmed rentacop.
if you're committing a crime and you see an armed officer coming toward you, you're more likely to run away than if you saw an unarmed rentacop.
And that begs the question of whether the criminal can clearly tell the difference - and even how much of a difference there is in the first place. As I am at a state school, they are police officers with all the power of local police officers or state troopers, such as the power to make arrests. They are lacking the gun but most of them carry mace and I think I've seen billy clubs or something similar on our officers. Their uniforms are indistinguishable from local police officers. IMO they do not look any less intimidating or official than local police officers.
(Except the poor newbie officer who gets stuck on crossing-guard duty every the morning. The newest officer always seems to get that job, and s/he looks like quite the sap wearing that reflective vest.)
It's my gut response too, and like you it's not well-reasoned. Hence my posting this question. I want to see the arguments for and against and come to a more informed decision. It's being debated on my campus, and I have abstained from voicing my opinion as of yet since I don't have a reason for it. Unfortunately I haven't been able to make the events where people are discussing it, so I haven't learned much about the arguments through my campus.
Campus police who do not have guns typically rely on armed local police when guns are required. According to the US Justice Dept, the median response time for violent crimes is in the 6-10 minutes range (26.6% within 5 minutes, 32% for 6-10 minutes, 29.7% for 11 minutes to 1 hour
( ... )
I'm on a campus with a relatively high security officer to student ratio as well as a moderate amount of crime (armed muggings, bicycle theft, drunken violence, etc.), and based on observing security officers both helping and worsening problems, I think it can be justified both ways. In my opinion, campuses with significant crime problems should have some fraction (not all, not none) of their security force trained in the use of guns, but it shouldn't be standard. Basically, if something especially bad were going on, someone would call in for guns, so they wouldn't just be carried around all the time. I'm not totally sure about this, but I believe this is what my school does.
FWIW I'm at a state school, so for us they're police, not security officers - they have all the same legal powers as local police or state troopers.
Two questions.
* What do you see as being the difference between having some of the police force armed, and having the unarmed police force call for the local police who would be armed? * On a limited budget, would you rather see money go towards (a) arming police and training them in the use of the guns, (b) better training the police to work within their current limits, or (c) hiring more police officers with the same level of training as the current police officers? I think in general I'd prefer (b) at this point in time (I am not convinced guns are necessary and would rather err towards not having them), but on my campus in specific I feel we could use a stronger police presence overall so I'd probably say split between (b) and (c).
* I think response time is also an issue, as I mentioned in my reply to q10 above. I expect that having some armed would be a faster response time than either having to call local police or having a store room or something for the weapons.
* Now that I think about it, I expect that our campus officers are already highly trained since they're police, so I wonder how much good extra training would even do.
And two more thoughts.
* What do you think about non-lethal weapons such as tasers?
* It's my understanding that the push to arm our campus police is out of fear of a school shooter - a particular category of violent crime. While the incidence of such an event at one particular college in a given year is negligibly small, the possible consequences are devastating.
I think that they should not, though I have an exceedingly personal, non-analytical reason for this stance. I've almost been shot (and, presumably, killed) by a campus security cop
( ... )
Comments 16
Reply
* When you say "victims of crimes" do you mean violent or non-violent crimes, or both?
* Do you think the perpetrators are members of the college community, or outsiders?
* Do you see arming the campus police as changing the perception of the campus leading to fewer crimes committed in the first place, or do you envision the police actively intervening in the crimes (either more frequently or more effectively)?
Reply
-again, both. sometimes students get in fights, do stupid shit, steal each other's stuff...but there are also other members of the community who see an opportunity to take advantage of the students' follies.
-more of the latter, i suppose, but a bit of both. if you're committing a crime and you see an armed officer coming toward you, you're more likely to run away than if you saw an unarmed rentacop.
Reply
And that begs the question of whether the criminal can clearly tell the difference - and even how much of a difference there is in the first place. As I am at a state school, they are police officers with all the power of local police officers or state troopers, such as the power to make arrests. They are lacking the gun but most of them carry mace and I think I've seen billy clubs or something similar on our officers. Their uniforms are indistinguishable from local police officers. IMO they do not look any less intimidating or official than local police officers.
(Except the poor newbie officer who gets stuck on crossing-guard duty every the morning. The newest officer always seems to get that job, and s/he looks like quite the sap wearing that reflective vest.)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Two questions.
* What do you see as being the difference between having some of the police force armed, and having the unarmed police force call for the local police who would be armed?
* On a limited budget, would you rather see money go towards (a) arming police and training them in the use of the guns, (b) better training the police to work within their current limits, or (c) hiring more police officers with the same level of training as the current police officers? I think in general I'd prefer (b) at this point in time (I am not convinced guns are necessary and would rather err towards not having them), but on my campus in specific I feel we could use a stronger police presence overall so I'd probably say split between (b) and (c).
Reply
Reply
* Now that I think about it, I expect that our campus officers are already highly trained since they're police, so I wonder how much good extra training would even do.
And two more thoughts.
* What do you think about non-lethal weapons such as tasers?
* It's my understanding that the push to arm our campus police is out of fear of a school shooter - a particular category of violent crime. While the incidence of such an event at one particular college in a given year is negligibly small, the possible consequences are devastating.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment