Someone’s in trouble with DPS
Until the events of this past weekend, LXR had been a relatively quite dorm this year, with few problems larger than the lack of hot water during my morning shower. This week, however, things have changed drastically as DPS officers make the rounds several times a day, banging on doors and handing out safety violation notices.
Residents now face door checks during which officers walk through the halls trying to open each door (similar to what Sunday morning’s intruder did), reprimanding those students who have their doors unlocked. One officer, who knocked, hesitated briefly, and then proceeded to open my unlocked door himself, told us that these demands have come from the “administration”.
I recognize the need for increased dorm security, but I don’t think that it should come at the expense of student privacy and peace of mind. The citation slips which have been left on numerous doors in LXR make me feel uncomfortable in my own home; I used to feel reasonably safe in LXR, but now I just feel constantly annoyed.If the administration wants to increase security in East Campus, I think they should, but they should not try to place the onus entirely on students by implementing these checks.
If I leave my door unlocked and someone steals my computer, that’s my fault, and I accept responsibility for it. But if an outsider manages slip into the building, I should not be held accountable for ineptitude of campus security.
- Lynn Kirshbaum, Photo Editor. Photo by Lynn.
Entries (RSS)
May 1st, 2008 at 4:54 pm
It’s pretty hard to reconcile the issue of responsibility in the last two sentences. Is it only your responsibility if someone from the Georgetown community breaks into your room?
I’m only asking because I think campus security includes students taking responsibility for themselves, taking the simple, easy precaution of locking their doors–something you can do yourself, rather than rely on underpaid security guards.
I think it makes sense to lock your door and take responsibility for your own security, within your room, because you have the ability to do that. And if we all do that, then it eliminates the school’s excuse, it won’t let them blame students. And then we might actually see some change.
I’m not saying that it should necessarily have to come to that, but why not lock your door?
May 1st, 2008 at 5:17 pm
I do lock my door when I am not in my room, and have no qualms or complaints about doing so, and I have also taken to locking it at night or when I am sleeping. However, when I’m lounging around in the middle of a Wednesday afternoon I don’t see the need to lock my door. I feel safe in the Georgetown community, and I don’t believe that anyone who lives in my building wishes to cause me harm. These constant door checks make me feel uneasy, as though DPS is trying to scare me into believing that the security guards are not doing thier job. If I have to lock my door to be truly safe in my dormitory, then perhaps I shouldn’t leave my room at all. Or maybe I shouldn’t enter LXR in the first place.
May 1st, 2008 at 6:22 pm
I’m with Lynn here. Security should include students taking responsibility for themselves, but that doesn’t need we have to be babied. I want to have my door unlocked at certain times of the day and shouldn’t have DPS coming around telling me that I need to lock it. If, as a result, something ends up being stolen from my room, I’m perfectly willing to take responsibility for that.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Sure, Sam, but you will take responsibility for whatever other crimes might be committed by people who come to rob you? Personally, I think DPS/Securitas is more to blame in this round of crimes than students are, but why not just lock your doors?
May 1st, 2008 at 10:09 pm
i’d have to agree with lynn on this one, this sounds creepy and unnecessary. i’d question whether this is really the best use of DPS’ resources. in the meeting tuesday evening rocco said he has canceled officers’ days off and he’s having them work overtime - in order to give them time to micromanage students’ door-locking habits? seems a little wasteful.
it was kind of funny, in the meeting they talked about the new door-checking policy in the context of greater DPS and administrative presence in general, leading some guy to worry there would be non-uniformed officers and administrators wandering the halls. rocco clarified it would just be uniformed officers, but todd olson’s reply was pretty awesome: “when i go around at night i don’t check doors because i could be misunderstood as a creepy guy.” say what you will about dr. olson, at least he’s self-aware…
anyway, does anyone know if there repercussions for getting a safety violation notice or having your door unlocked? or is it just a stern talking to?
and will: i can’t really remember an incident in which a robber committed additional crimes beyond just burglary - can you? with the sexual assault incident, it’s kind of unclear why that guy had a gun in the first place but, as i understand it, he didn’t rob anyone while he was there. i’m not convinced that the kind of spill-over effect you’re implying actually exists. i think we can all agree that locking your door is generally a good idea, but i don’t think you need DPS harassing you to do so.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:25 pm
I’m with Will and Jeff on this one. Sure, it’s mildly irritating when a DPS officer knocks on my unlocked door when I just stopped by my apartment for a second to change my shoes, but having my laptop stolen or, god forbid, getting sexually assaulted would go beyond a minor annoyance. We have a right to privacy, but we don’t have a right to act like spoiled, entitled kids who don’t want to take any responsibility for our own safety. I’m sure if anyone who leaves their door open actually did become the target of a crime, the first words out of their mouths wouldn’t be, “hey, it’s my own fault for not locking the door.”
May 1st, 2008 at 10:28 pm
(Despite what Sam says.)
May 2nd, 2008 at 12:14 am
I guess my oppostion to this policy is also born out of the belief that our hallways should be considered safe, or at least safe enough so that the risk of being robbed or assaulted is so small that it’s reasonable to leave your door unlocked. If DPS concentrated on guarding our entrances instead of patrolling the hallways, whether or not our doors are locked probably wouldn’t be an issue.
May 2nd, 2008 at 1:08 pm
That’s a reasonable expectation, but it runs counter to your other argument about not being babied. Would you expect to be able to live in a real apartment building in D.C. or any other major city and not lock your door? If you want to be treated like an adult, you have to act like one.
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:46 pm
LXR is not an apartment building, real or otherwise, and having a safe hallway doesn’t qualify as being babied.
May 2nd, 2008 at 5:46 pm
I would just like to say Lynn’s idea that not locking your room door (but locking your apartment door) in a Lisner apartment is equivalent to not locking a door in LXR is pretty silly.
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:26 pm
I just ran into a DPS officer for the 3rd or 4th time today on my floor (the third) of LXR, and while it’s kind of annoying, I still think it’s worth it to make sure all the doors are locked at least for the last few weeks of the year. Even if your laptop was stolen because your door was unlocked and you immediately took the blame for it, that’s still another public safety email, another theft on Georgetown’s record, and more press about how LXR has horrible security. Not that I really think that thieves/sexual assaulters are trolling campus websites to see where the weakest place they can strike at is, but it just can’t be good if word keeps getting out about how easy it is to get in here and steal stuff. Of course there should be better security to stop intruders from getting in in the first place, but it doesn’t just affect one person when there’s a crime.