[Durham INC] Editorial: Duke admin’s proposal to close campus roads does more harm than good (Chronicle)

[John Schelp]

Chronicle Editorial: Securing the area, no hysteria
Duke Chronicle, 28 August 2013

News of the robbery
 between Bostock and Perkins libraries this past 

Sunday has quickly spread across campus, alarming administrators and 

students alike. Their concern is understandable, as the location and time 

of the crime call into question the security of the entire campus. Although 
administrators and the Duke University Police Department should act to 
prevent future robberies, we caution against reactionary measures that 
either unnecessarily restrict campus activity or fail to directly 
address
 the problem at hand. 

The nature of Sunday’s armed robbery sets it apart from
 previous 

robberies and break-ins at Duke. It occurred in an area near the heart 

of West Campus frequented by students, and the perpetrator managed 

to bring a concealed weapon onto campus. 

Given that a general sense of safety is essential to the activities of Duke’s 

students and faculty, the University has a responsibility to effectively 

address the issue of campus security. Any measures the University takes, 

however, should not sacrifice campus activity or relations with the 

surrounding community.

The administration’s proposal to close roads around Duke’s campus, 

such as Towerview Road, does more harm than good. The proposal 

does not address the likely causes of Sunday’s robbery. A campus 

lockdown of this sort would also severely restrict student movement on 

and off campus. In fact, decreased access to campus could exacerbate 

security problems by forcing students who are off campus late at night 

to park farther away from their dorms.

Furthermore, closing down roads around campus fuels unwarranted 

hysteria about the incident and reinforces the myth that Durham is 

crime-ridden and dangerous, a falsehood that has continually undermined 

town-and-gown relations. We still do not know who the armed robber was, 

and we should not make assumptions about his background or origins. 

Moreover, walling off Duke from Durham risks further alienating the 

surrounding community and deters students from enjoying Durham’s 

vibrant cultural and historical resources, many of which are underused 

by students.

Duke’s administration should instead focus on maintaining, and possibly 
increasing, high levels of security officers on all three campuses. 
Deterring criminals to come onto campus in the first place is critical 
for preventing, rather than just reacting to, crime. The administration 
should also work to improve officers’ ability to prevent crime. This can 

be done by increasing the ratio of DUPD officers to non-police security 

guards. DUPD officers are authorized to carry weapons and make arrests, 

unlike security officers who typically cannot do either. 

Finally, the
 administration should widely publicize its current security 
efforts, such as educating students on where security officers are 
stationed and the security services provided to students. 

Even as we question the wisdom of the latest proposal, we applaud the 
administration for how seriously it has reacted to last Sunday’s 
incident and similar crimes. 


First and foremost, we want students to be safe, but, in ensuring their 
safety, we should not needlessly sacrifice relations with Durham or 
student’s ability to enjoy the community around them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20130828/a3d3baac/attachment.html>