GUEST COLUMNIST: Making safety the highest priority

Given that the University is in a nationally recognized state of crisis when it comes to security, the administration's proposal to simply installing additional blue phones and adding a few additional police to the area is insulting. Does the administration take us for fools? Four of my classmates and I wondered about this the other day, as we listened in horror to each other's experiences with crime here. "If we used the blue phones every time we were suspicious of something, the police wouldn't be able to handle the number of incoming calls," one friend said. The student who was shot in September had been held up in front of a blue phone, and was told not to move. "Much good the phone did," my friend added. Adding a few more police to certain parts of University City will only have one result: crimes that would have occurred on one block will now occur somewhere else off campus. A few police do not solve the problem. The administration must be fully aware of this, because whenever the number of reported violent crimes increases, they perennially offer blue light phones and a few more badges, only to cause a geographic shift in crime. By the time any results can be measured, a new group of students has replaced those against whom the violent crimes had been committed. When there is a new outbreak of violent crime among new students, administrators can offer the same useless actions. Since the administration does not seem capable of recommending a real solution to the real problem of campus safety, we suggest University President Judith Rodin sponsor a Safety Consulting Competition, offering a reward to the student or group of students who generate the best idea on how to solve the crime issue at Penn. Given the number of students who have been involved in challenging and complex consulting projects all over the world, given the number of students who have heard about bluelight phones and badges all too often and given our overall level of commitment to the issue at hand, we are sure reasonable and implementable proposals will flow freely. Brainstorming over lunch for just a few minutes, my classmates and I came up with these preliminary ideas: · Define off-campus areas the University is willing to "protect" and erect guard kiosks -- similar to the one on Locust Walk -- along these boundaries. Students would know which areas are safest, and security staff could react immediately to suspicious activities in these areas. · Set up a system whereby a percentage of all alumni donations and gifts to the University are set aside to fund safety initiatives. · Improve lighting surrounding campus so that students can actually see at least one block ahead of them, but do not simply change light bulbs or increase wattage. Results seem difficult to obtain when it comes to safety at Penn, and results may not come within our short time here. Therefore, we suggest every student sign a "Promise to Ourselves" letter: a promise not to contribute money or confer any kind of benefit to the University in the future unless it has taken real measures to solve the crime crisis and a promise to safeguard incoming and prospective students by warning them about the dismal quality of life at Penn and the administration's paltry "safety" proposals. Meanwhile, this letter will serve as a reminder to the University that safety must be a priority. As students continue to sign this letter over time, it will serve as an act of solidarity for all who are concerned about safety, and will bind current and future generations of Penn students to the safety crisis.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.