Spring Break
EDITORIAL: Transparency needed on guns
Editorial | 10/23/07
Posted online at 11:21 PM EST on 10/22/07
/ Last updated at 1:06 AM EST on 10/22/07
When University President Jehuda Reinharz decided last month to arm campus police officers, he made a choice necessary to ensure the safety of this campus. However, in matters such as that which affect the day-to-day lives of every student, staff and faculty member here, more than just the merits of the actual decision matter. While Mr. Reinharz made the right call, he hasn't been sufficiently transparent with the community about his decision-making process.
Mr. Reinharz made the decision after a firearms committee consisting of students, faculty and staff convened over the summer and recommended the course of action to him, but he said he could have proceeded even without that level of approval.
"I could have come to this decision without a committee," he said last week. "But I decided to have a committee, and it did not make sense to me to waste a single moment once I had their recommendation, which was a unanimous one."
The community at large, however, is far from a consensus on this issue. The newly formed Students Opposed to the Decision to Arm presented to Reinharz a petition signed by 830 undergraduates, 16 staff members and 20 faculty members protesting the decision arguing that students and faculty should have been consulted about the decision before it was made.
Mr. Reinharz can't go back in time and change how he reached the decision, but he should explain his rationale to the entire community. On top of that, the administration hasn't revealed details on new protocols regarding how officers will use or access the guns.
We appreciate Mr. Reinharz e-mailed out the advisory committee's report. We also appreciate that Mr. Reinharz plans to form a firearms policy group that includes students faculty and staff as well as hold a forum sometime before the end of the spring semester. We hope these events will welcome community input. We also hope that Mr. Reinharz will speak to the campus about the decision and allow for a question-and-answer session. Whether or not we agree with major administrative decisions, transparency is a necessary courtesy on the University's part.
Mr. Reinharz made the decision after a firearms committee consisting of students, faculty and staff convened over the summer and recommended the course of action to him, but he said he could have proceeded even without that level of approval.
"I could have come to this decision without a committee," he said last week. "But I decided to have a committee, and it did not make sense to me to waste a single moment once I had their recommendation, which was a unanimous one."
The community at large, however, is far from a consensus on this issue. The newly formed Students Opposed to the Decision to Arm presented to Reinharz a petition signed by 830 undergraduates, 16 staff members and 20 faculty members protesting the decision arguing that students and faculty should have been consulted about the decision before it was made.
Mr. Reinharz can't go back in time and change how he reached the decision, but he should explain his rationale to the entire community. On top of that, the administration hasn't revealed details on new protocols regarding how officers will use or access the guns.
We appreciate Mr. Reinharz e-mailed out the advisory committee's report. We also appreciate that Mr. Reinharz plans to form a firearms policy group that includes students faculty and staff as well as hold a forum sometime before the end of the spring semester. We hope these events will welcome community input. We also hope that Mr. Reinharz will speak to the campus about the decision and allow for a question-and-answer session. Whether or not we agree with major administrative decisions, transparency is a necessary courtesy on the University's part.
Be the first to comment on this story