LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Crime frustrates officers, too

To the Editor:To the Editor: Professor Alan Myers' Letter to the Editor ("Don't blame crime victims," DP, 1/30/96) requires some response from University Police. First, in defense of University Police Captain John Richardson, the comment to "remove the phones from view" and "make people aware" is part of universally accepted concepts in crime prevention. To carry the captain's remarks beyond the realm of educational commentary is somewhat ludicrous. Finally, Professor Myers is probably correct in having heard that University Police was one of the largest private police operations in Pennsylvania. However, that was relatively more accurate in 1991-92 than in 1996. In 1991, there were 94 Penn police officers represented by the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP); three were detectives and one was assigned to victim support. Today the FOP represents only 72 members, with five assigned as detectives/investigators and six assigned to victim support. With another five officers in varying stages of appeal from recent terminations, the uniformed operation stands at 56 persons, down about 37 percent from what we previously fielded. Consider also that University Police recorded nearly 36,000 incidents in 1995. Almost every incident required at least one officer to physically respond. Thousands of false alarms (fire, burglary and panic) consumed at least two officers per incident. Felony crimes or sizeable disturbances may have involved five, six or more officers per event. Yes, there are times when we could be more visible in spite of shrinking numbers, and we will be encouraging our members in that direction. Professor Myers is obviously frustrated with crime in the University community. Be assured that the vast majority of our members share that frustration and personally resolve each day to improve the situation. John Washington University Police officer Secretary, FOP Lodge 113 Why the 'DP' sucks To the Editor: Just when I thought the DP had taken its orgy of self-congratulatory columns to the apex of narcissistic rhetoric, Adam Mark managed to take it one step further ("The dawn of a new era," DP, 1/29/96). After four years at this university, one gets accustomed to the DP's annual ritual of shrill self-praise. But enough is enough. You want to know why the DP sucks? You want to know why no one likes the DP? I'll tell you why: The DP sucks because with a handful of exceptions, none of the writers could write their way out of a paper bag. The grammar is atrocious and spelling mistakes are endemic. The DP sucks because, unlike what the editorials constantly shriek, the standards of journalistic integrity and accuracy in reporting are practically nonexistent. Who can forget the two freshman candidates for the UA two years ago who were tricked into speaking to a reporter for two minutes, after which the DP sanctimoniously published their innocent remarks -- knowing full well the candidates would be banned from the elections? Journalistic integrity? I don't think so. The DP sucks because it frantically persecutes everyone around it in the community but never turns its malevolent eye inward. The DP sucks because every headline sensationalizes trivialities. Teams don't win or lose, they crush the opposition by five or six points, or get destroyed by nine or 10. One second the football team is the greatest thing since sliced bread; the next, sports writers are squealing for Mark DeRosa's head. And finally, the DP sucks because it has an immensely exaggerated sense of self-worth. You want to help chart the University's future path? I'd rather let the UA take the reins (and I despise the UA). Has anyone over there ever heard that journalists should report the news, not create it? Just stick to what you know best, resume-building and verbal masturbation. We will all thank you for it. Blas Nunez-Neto College '96 News coverage appreciated To the Editor: Many thanks to the DP for sending a reporter and photographer to the exhibition of the work of the late Robert Le Ricolais on short notice ("Exhibit honors prof with architecture display," DP, 2/1/96). Winter weather delayed the opening of the exhibition of Professor Le Ricolais's marvelous structures in Meyerson Hall. Blending theory and practice the exhibit traverses the fields of architecture, engineering and poetry. You helped this exhibition receive much-deserved attention. Malcolm Campbell Interim Dean, Graduate School of Fine Arts Meal plan was a team effort To the Editor: The new Hillel-University Hospitality Services Kosher Dining option ("New Hillel meal plan offers more options," DP, 2/1/96) was made possible by many people who helped create this vision and have worked tirelessly to see it become a reality. They include Steve Murray, vice president for Business Services; Marie Witt, director of support services at Business Services; Don Jacobs, executive director, Hospitality Services; Anis Langley, executive chef, Hospitality Services; Pam Lampitt, director of purchasing, Hospitality Services; Adam Sherr, meal contract coordinator, and Dan Sullivan, director of the Faculty Club. For me, and for my colleague Rabbi Howard Alpert, it has been a pleasure working with such wonderful professionals who care deeply about University community and the continued improvement of student life. Jeremy Brochin Director, Penn Hillel End ROTC participation To the Editor: I'd like to thank the two ROTC cadets for demonstrating quite clearly why ROTC should be unceremoniously thrown off campus --- it obviously rots the brain ("ROTC students react," DP, 2/5/96). The writers advance the ridiculous claims that the ROTC question is one of "complexity," subject to "multifaceted debate." The issue itself is simple, not multifaceted. By providing faculty status, course credit, and special facilities to ROTC, the University is violating its own anti-discrimination policy. Period. It isn't about book drives or tutoring, it's about irrational bigotry and the spread of prejudice and hatred, and the University's promise not to participate in such things. No one is telling anyone he or she can't belong to ROTC. What we are saying is that if you want to participate in an organization that discriminates, be it ROTC, the KKK or the American Nazi Party, then do so. But do it on your own time. The University has no obligation to facilitate the promotion and continuation of hate and bigotry --- in fact, it has an obligation to not support discrimination. Paul Lukasiak Administrative Assistant School of Social Work