Public Safety officers who have been sworn in as police officers may soon be carrying firearms on campus, if the Fraternal Orders of Police (FOP), the labor union that represents Princeton University police officers, gets its way.
“The best-trained people for ...(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
Sorry, I didn't mean for my comment earlier to come across as extreme - I meant it mainly for the sake of argument. Here's what I meant: if we can all agree that the idea of Psafety officers carrying around automatic weapons (which would, after all, be more *effective* against an active shooter) is absurd, what is it about them that repulses us? What is it about the idea that seems imprudent? Once we identify the answer to those questions, we can ask if the same rationale might be applied to handguns. I guess it's hard to tell whether handguns should be considered an entirely separate issue from more powerful weaponry.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Sorry, I didn't mean for my comment earlier to seem extreme - I meant it mainly for the sake of argument. Here's what I meant: if we can all agree that the idea of Psafety officers carrying around automatic weapons (which would, after all, be more *effective* against an active shooter), what is it about them that repulses us? What is it about the idea that seems imprudent? Once we identify the answer to those questions, we can ask if the same rationale might be applied to handguns. I guess it's hard to tell whether handguns should be considered an entirely separate issue from more powerful weaponry.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
I don't like the idea mainly because it is reactionist fear mongering. I would be horrified to hear of a proctor pulling a gun on a student, or an armed proctor busting a room party. Kudos to the thoughtful posts by Burd. The Proctor trolls posting earlier down are a bit absurd, just admit you're a proctor, you'll keep your anonymity, and you'll be more convincing in what you have to say. I am NOT against the idea of the police trained members having access to firearms which are locked in the trunks of cars. I wouldn't mind there being a central gun locker either. Officers will have to react to any "shooter" kind of situation from a central location, or by car. When reacting to a suspicious person call, they can likewise respond in a car and arm themselves before approaching the subject. I think they stand to lose what little approachability they have by being armed at all times. There are ways to have the firearms accessible, but less visible. I realize this conflicts with the "treat every situation as as life and death serious" training, but I do not favor guns being pulled on campus -- and they will be if firearms are omnipresent. While keeping the officer safer, they're also a lazier way to command obedience. Asking a student to stop headbutting a lamp post might work, but having a drawn gun and asking the same thing will result in immediate compliance. Proctors are asked to play a difficult role and balance many priorities. I favor keeping those special people that can walk that line without a handgun on their hip in every situation.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Doesn't sound like those guns in Arizona are automatic. I think they're just using standard law enforcement Colts with a safe-semi fire control.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
...unlike the campus police officers in Arizona... http://www.kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=7975527&nav=HMO6HMaW
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Eh? I assume that you are being sarcastic. But if not, I want to let you know that campus police officers in the state of New Jersey are not permitted to carry automatic weapons (NJSA 2C:39-6c).
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
What about allowing Psafe officers to carry around automatic rifles? I wouldn't necessarily be against that. It'd look cool, and would certainly discourage any psychopaths from acting out violently.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Matt Burd and Check Your Facts reported accurately. Public Safety does not have a cache of guns for use in emergency situations. Thanks also to Will. While I hope that no Police Officer ever has then need to discharge a weapon other than for training, it would be better he had a gun if the need ever occurred. Please also remember that besides active shooter situations incidents happen. While out with a suspect that might seem innocent like students climbing through a window to get to their room, Public Safety could identify this to be a thief through the course of the investigation. If the thief decided to use a gun, it could be to late for that Police Officer or anyone else who might get in the thief's way. Public Safety is there to protect.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
I know that Matt, I just mentioned tasers because someone else had.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
M'10: You're right, Public Safety does have gun lockers, and they do have guns in those lockers. HOWEVER, any public safety police officer who possesses one of those guns anywhere else on campus is guilty of a third degree crime, because public safety does not have the written authorization from the governing officer of the institution to carry firearms (NJSA 2C:39-6e(1)). As mentioned before by 'Check Your Facts,' public safety's guns are for training only. As for your "Assassins" water gun game, where you were called in as a suspicious person, you can thank the police officers of Public Safety for showing restraint if you were caught. Possession of an imitation firearm, anything that can be mistaken as a firearm (water guns included), on campus is a disorderly persons offense (NJSA 2C:39-6e(3)). I doubt that you were charged with this. Your Public Safety staff shows a lot of restraint when dealing with students on campus, and they want to maintain a close relationship with you. The issue of arming officers is more of an issue about protecting campus from outside individuals. Princeton's main campus covers three different municipalities, and Public Safety protects all of it. As a former police officer with Public Safety, I can tell you that I was more concerned about being harmed by the non-university affiliated people I ran into at West Windsor fields in the middle of the night, than by any students out having a good time. Will: You won't have to worry about Public Safety, or any police officer in New Jersey, carrying Tasers anytime soon. Under New Jersey law (NJSA 2C:39-4h) it's a fourth degree crime for anyone to possess.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
This entire line of arguments is absurd. The people who are so against police officers having weapons would be the first to sue if something terrible happened. Correction, their parents would be the first to sue. Trained police all over the country carry weapons, in some form, at all times. These police shouldn't be excluded simply because they work at Princeton University. It's the most irresponsible thing I could imagine.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Clubs are not "University grounds". We own our own land (with one exception) and fall under the jurisdiction of the Borough Police. Borough Police actions on Prospect are not an encroachment of the Princeton campus; they are many things, but not that. I think you're also blurring the line again between Public Safety security officers and police officers. Yes, we all see Public Safety security officers not behaving as professionally as we might like from time to time. A friend of mine, for example, once shouted "I'm just dropping a bomb off at Dod" and was waved past the guard booth by a bored-looking guard. That having been said, the sworn police officers of public safety are certainly, in my experience, as responsible as any municipal police officers I've ever come in contact with, and I don't see why they shouldn't be armed. The University made a conscious decision to shift from a proctor/security guard model to a campus police department model, and given that shift arming our police officers would seem to be the next logical step in terms of providing for the security of our campus. If there's some dangerous lurker on campus, I want that person confronted as quickly as possible by a police officer who does not have to fear that he is going unarmed against an armed nutcase. In a Virginia Tech shooter situation, our Public Safety officers would be useless. Since you brought up the issue of tasers, let me say that I think arming our Public Safety police officers with tasers is a terrible idea. Police are trained to never draw a firearm unless they are fully ready to use it, unless lethal force is warranted in other words. Tasers fall into that hazy non-lethal force area, and I think there is now a record in this country of tasers being used when perhaps they should not have been, due to their being considered lower on the use of force continuum than they perhaps should be. Let's stick with batons and pepper spray. That's an issue totally removed from the issue of whether or not to arm our sworn police officers, though.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
To Will: You may have misread my statement; I wrote that the Borough police are encroaching on University grounds, such as inside the clubs. Do they really belong in there? Tough call. But also realize that I was being sarcastic with my comments about "shooting vandalizers" in response to previous posts. I agree with you that it would take a few extra minutes for public safety to access the gun locker, but what I am saying is that armed police officers on a daily basis are not necessary. If we want to make an analogy, like the smart kid above you, we could compare this to police officers who keep a shotgun in the trunk of their cruisers. While it is true that the few extra seconds it takes to get to that gun might have consequences, the firepower of a shotgun just isn't necessary constantly. I would argue that public safety doesn't even need tasers. Now for this "Check Your Facts First" smart guy/public safety security guard. First, there is a gun locker. Don't know whether to believe me or this guy? Ask Steven Healy, the director of public safety. As for the "162 suspicious persons" last year, I was one of them. Yes, I was reported as a "suspicious person" while playing Assassins, the common water gun game. Now I agree with you that regular patrols would help with prevention, but they don't need to be armed. As for fixing the bubble and keeping "suspicious persons" off campus, why don't we wait on arming public safety, and start with getting security guards in the booth who actually do their job, instead of watching TV on the computer. Bottom line, I, along with probably many other students, do not have the greatest faith in public safety as it is. Maybe they should re-evaluate their current state and fix their reputation on campus with students before jumping to the conclusion that arming officers will help them.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Public Safety should definitely not have guns.<p>They are irresponsible, unprofessional, and lazy.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Public Safety does NOT have access to guns. They own a few firearms for the purposes of TRAINING ONLY (since their police officers are fully qualified and trained in firearm use). When their police officers go through the police academy (AND BECOME QUALIFIED TO UTILIZE FIREARMS), they can use those firearms for those purposes ONLY. The officers do NOT have access to those firearms at any other times, including in the event of an emergency. Moreover, the idea of having a firearm on their person is to protect themselves and others from unexpected dangerous incidents, such as the numerous times they encounter wanted felons on campus as "routine" suspicious persons who sometimes are carrying weapons. The main idea in police training is that NO incident is routine, and that anything can happen at anytime. In 2007, there were 162 suspicious persons on campus. I wonder if any other police officers would even risk themselves the way Public Safety Police Officers do by interacting with gang members and suspicious persons without any protection. Try to put yourself in their shoes. It's like walking into a boxing ring with your hands tied behind your back. Is the boxer going to hit you? Maybe. Can you do anything about it if he does? Nope. Maybe the administration will fix that magical Orange Bubble to keep criminals and dangerous people off campus, then maybe you could argue that police officers shouldn't be armed. Until that magical accomplishment comes, though, there should be armed police officers familiar with the campus and its buildings regularly patrolling campus; the Public Safety POLICE Officers are the perfect answer for that.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
First of all, since you called me out by name, the incident that I think you're referring to occurred at Charter Club, not on campus as you said. It wasn't a case of PBPD encroaching on campus at all. Secondly, great, there's an armed weapons cache locked away somewhere. If a Virginia Tech-type shooter decided to roll into McCosh 50 blasting, those extra minutes it would take Public Safety officers to roll back to HQ and arm themselves could be decisive. We live on an open campus, anyone can enter at will, and if we as a community already recognize that we need a campus police department with sworn officers to protect us then I think it only makes sense for those sworn officers to be allowed to carry guns just as they would if they were working for a municipal or state police department. I think one of the sources of confusion here is that people don't understand that there is a difference between public safety security officers and public safety police officers. Your alarmism about public safety officers shooting random students is just ridiculous -- the PBPD don't shoot public urinators, why would Public Safety officers? We're not giving the randos manning traffic booths glocks and sending them on their way -- we are giving the small number of fully-trained police officers we have on staff the tools they need to protect us properly. The fact that the likes of former Borough Police Chief Chuck Davall and the other sworn officers of Public Safety can't carry a sidearm on duty just because they work for Princeton is just absurd.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Well I, for one, am against arming public safety. NEWSFLASH: They already have a cache of guns on campus that they have access to in case of an emergency; what they want is to be able to carry these weapons at all times. Is this really necessary? I don't think so. The type of incidents that occur on campus simply do not require guns. I would even argue that many borough police officers do not need firearms; catching students urinating on Prospect isn't really that dangerous, is it? Meg B is correct that the crime rate is quite low and the Borough police are around the corner, often too eager to encroach on University grounds, as you yourself, Will Scharf, have seen. This other kid wants armed officers to patrol Firestone; again, public safety has guns. They have a gun locker. They're just not allowed to carry them around everywhere, like when busting parties, dealing with lockouts, or loafing at the Wa. Are guns really necessary on a daily basis? I agree with "Also Concerned." I have personally seen and experienced many public safety officers and Borough policemen, as well as Princeton security guards who are quite belligerent and unprofessional. I truly would not trust some of them with firearms although, I admit, these officers are few in number. But I also assure you that these are the officers who are pushing hardest for firearms; those who enjoy abusing their position of power and harassing students. Those who crave the added power of holding a gun in their hands when it really is not necessary. And to "Pu08," great point that "vandalizers" would think twice. Really. Because now public safety officers can shoot them, right? Hopefully they can shoot those pesky high schoolers who skateboard everywhere as well. And truly, right now, Princeton has a "day-camp" feel, with no "real rules and laws." The only instance in which I would condone public safety officers using guns is in the case of a shooter; not with a "vandalizer," thief, or anyone else. Finally to the kid at the top: you're right. We need officers packing at every corner, lecture, precept, and dorm, so we can gun down threats as soon as possible. Our campus is just that dangerous. No. Our campus has dangers, like anywhere else. But arming public safety is not the answer. Instead, students should look out for each other; we should talk to friends or acquaintances who seem troubled, RCA's should talk to their zees, we should be on the lookout for dangerous or suspicious behaviors. UHS can expand their counseling services. What we need is a proactive, rather than reactive solution. We do have a gun cache if anything does happen, but we want to try to make sure that it never gets that far. So the rest of you can wear your Kevlar vests under your shirts and keep a throwing knife hidden in your backpack "just in case," but I'm going to pick the gun cache that officers can use in emergencies over belligerent public safety officers who don't need guns, except to shoot drunken students and "vandalizers."
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
People need to understand that Public Safety employs both Police Officers and Security Officers. Security Officers will always be unarmed, and they can be used to cover calls where an armed Police Officer is not necessary. But the Police Officers in the Public Safety Department should be armed. They have gone through the SAME academy as all other Police Officers in the state. Currently, Public Safety Police Officers are in attendance at many high profile lectures at Mccosh or Robertson. If an active shooter incident were to occur at one of these lectures, armed Police Officers from Public Safety would be the difference between life and death.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
I think that vandalizers and theives would really be thinking twice if they saw public safety walking around armed on campus. It gives Princeton less of a day-camp feel and more of that of a real community that is protected and demands respect- and has real rules and laws. A lot of crimes seem to just happen on campus with little repercussion, and that is because I think many townies know and believe that PSafety is not the police and that gives them an excuse to do things they wouldn't normally do in the community. I don't believe a police-state image is what Princeton should project to others, but above all things I think it is a bit scary that if there is a shooter on campus, there is no one to shoot back or have the same force to help end a dangerous situation-- instead we'll all be waiting for the borough police to get on campus slowly but surely. All you need is one event and everyone would talk about how we could have been more prepared and tried to stop it sooner- well I'm glad PSafety is taking themselves seriously enough to rise to that challenge.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
I worry about "don't tase me, bro" incidents turning into "don't shoot" incidents. It's not that I don't trust psafety to have pretty decent judgement. But I don't have much confidence in princeton hotheads to keep their cool and not behave in a threatening or resisting manner that could escalate police response unnecessarily. Especially students who have never encountered police before and may not understand just how important it is to be calm and not resist, even if they think police are overreacting--that's my main concern.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
I'm not against police officers having guns, but I've never been particularly impressed with the competence of Public Safety...I sure hope they have enough training. I'm assuming they would only brandish their firearms in life-or-death situations. It would be an outrage (and against regulations, I assume) for them to militarize campus...
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Fine. Arm a few public safety guys to respond to armed threats. If the guys who respond to parties in dorms are packing.... that doessn't look good to those of us who write checks to the endowment. Tread carefully.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Also, while Borough cops may be close, do you think they could navigate Firestone levels A-C as a shooter roams through? Could they figure out which lecture halls connect to McCosh 50? How about the various underground pathways that connect different buildings, like Fine/Jadwin/McDonnell, or LTL and Schultz? What about the extra people a shooter could kill during those few extra minutes while Borough police respond and figure out how to even get to the person? Leave it to the experts on the campus: Princeton University's own Public Safety Police Officers.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Meg B, it only takes one person to harm another, regardless of how many or how few people have committed crimes in that area before him. Also, crimes and gang activity have been on the rise in Princeton. Check the FBI for more recent crime statistics. In 2006, 37 violent crimes were reported in Princeton. The gang members caught in the act of robbing university buildings (http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2007/10/25/news/19147.shtml) were members of the gang MS-13, which is one of the most "fearless" gangs in the country, and they show little respect for police officers (whether or not they are armed). Do a Prince search on assaults or gangs and then tell me there's no violent crime on campus.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Considering the current crime rate in Princeton, (http://www.epodunk.com/cgi-bin/genInfo.php?locIndex=18361), I don't think we need anymore armed officers in the area. An exercise in redundancy? The borough cops are like five feet away.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Our 15 sworn officers who would be armed under this plan have received the same training as any other local police force. If they were to quit their jobs here they could immediately be hired in Princeton Township and be armed.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Ms. Harvey's idea that arming police officers would dissuade those in need from seeking out help is ludicrous at best. At its worst, it is reactionary and closed-minded. That sort of attitude is exactly the kind of backwards thinking that may get someone seriously hurt on campus. It is high time the bureaucracy looked outside the “orange bubble” and acknowledged the real world. Furthermore, I’m left questioning whether she is even the correct person for this job, since her qualifications are obviously lacking. I would hope that the “General Manager for Safety” would have an iota of common sense.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
This issue came up in William Paterson University in the 1980s and other colleges. Putting aside the obvious phalic implications of having an unarmed campus police force, the idea has merit only if university police subject themselves to the same psychological tests and police training that qualifies other police. Campuses have become dangerous places -- and if police are to be more than just glorified security guards, they need to be trained and armed.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
The key quote from the article is: “Students think that Public Safety officers just deal with students all day, but it’s a very open campus where anybody can walk on,” Westrol explained. The public safety web site talks about "authorized visitors," but fails to acknowledge that so very many events on campus are billed as "free and open to the public."
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!
Not having armed officers on campus is asking for trouble. If we're going to hire sworn police officers, we might as well give them the tools to do their job properly. Ridiculous not to.
Thumbs Up! Thumbs Down!