Dear Editor,
Despite the university’s attempts at safety and security
through the installation of card readers and sirens, I still
find academic buildings unsafe. I routinely have class in
the academic side of West Grace, and I find the amount
of safety and security in the building lacking.
The entrance to the building itself does not have card
readers. This is because the door is supposed to lock at
5 p.m. each day by disabling the motion sensor on the
outside of the door. The reason the doors lock at this time
is because the biomedical engineering department on the
second floor closes for the day at this time.
However, there are night classes taught in this building,
and students need to gain entry. This would imply that
someone would have to let the students into the building
either intentionally or through exiting. I have witnessed
four separate occasions when students who were locked
out provided a sufficient force to override the motor on
the door and pry it open.
Moreover, the lights that are supposed to illuminate the
entrance have been burned out for quite some time so that
the entrance is dark. There are no cameras anywhere in
the building, so if a robbery were to occur, there would
be no record of it.
One major problem that the building has is the emergency
door on the first floor, which empties out into the alley
behind the building. The sign clearly reads that it is an
emergency exit only, and I have entered and exited from
the building, as the alarm does not work and the door
does not lock. Another problem is that the guards on the
honors dorm side of the building are generally oblivious
to anything that happens on the academic side.
I find it very hypocritical of the university to pour
money into the other academic buildings on campus to
provide security, but they managed to overlook one in
the center.
Despite the safety on campus, I am still surprised that
there have not been more incidents of crime with the lack
of security. It would be very wise of the university to fix the
problems with the West Grace building before something
terrible happens. There is certainly opportunity.
– Steven Chopski
To the Editor of The Commonwealth Times and Bethany
Emerson, News Co-Editor,
We are writing in response to the Nov. 8 article, “Concealed
weapons on campus: Student’s right or shooter’s
tool?” As panelists from International Students for Social
Equality who participated in the debate, we are more than a
little confused as to why your article gives such prevalence
to one viewpoint while nearly ignoring the viewpoints
of those who argued against the introduction of
concealed firearms on campus. The representatives
of the ISSE – a third of the panel – are generously
given one sentence of explanation for our perspective.
Each of the audience members you quoted
obtained more voice than this.
During the debate, ISSE repeatedly pointed to
the absurdity of focusing on the legal and safety
issues of concealed weapons possession, rather than
addressing the complex causes of the tragedies that
bring up the issue in the first place. What could
possibly cause a youth with their entire adult life
ahead of them to decide to violently murder their
peers and self? Why is a place of learning considered
unsafe on a regular basis, owing to crime both on
and off campus? On this point, those in favor of
allowing concealed weapons were silent and refused
to address the issue.
We repeatedly stressed that social tragedies, such
as school shootings, must be seen in the context
of a grossly unequal society, where a handful of
billionaires prosper while millions are forced to
struggle for the daily necessities of life. Moreover,
we live in a society brutalized by militarism and
inequality. The U.S. is currently engaged in two
wars abroad that have killed well over a million
civilians and destroyed Iraqi and Afghan society,
while at home, the U.S. has the highest prison
population in the world. For many young people,
life may even seem hopeless. Meanwhile, social
services, such as education and health care, which
are critical to assisting the most troubled youth,
face constant cutbacks.
As for the issue of urban crime, it must be
considered in the context of rising poverty, job
loss and social decay. When an opposing panelist
noted that New York and Washington, D.C., had
banned concealed firearms, yet still had high rates
of crime, we responded that these cities also have
some of the most impoverished areas in the entire
country.
Richmond faces the same problems. According
to census data from 2000, two census tracts immediately
north of the VCU campus and Interstate 95
had poverty rates of 52.1 percent and 72.5 percent,
the latter being the highest rate in the entire city.
Police and firearms do not solve these problems
of unaffordable housing, rising health care and transportation
costs, and a lack of decent jobs. Carrying
concealed weapons within public institutions stifles
the spirit that those institutions are intended to serve:
freedom of speech and association, independent
thought, diversity and tolerance.
Shame on the paper for such lousy reporting.
All of these points were ignored.
Sincerely,
Jeff Lassahn and Michael Gilbert
International Students for Social Equality