Security cameras would benefit UI’s student body
Administrators at the University of Idaho recently put a high priority on a proposal submitted by Executive Director of Public Safety and Security Matt Dorschel, which would add 291 security cameras on campus and fund a permanent operations center.
To be honest, before Dorschel made his proposal I thought UI already had active security cameras in most, if not all buildings. The university is unique from other schools in that it only has functional security cameras in University Housing as of right now, and I assume many other students are just as unaware of this as I was.
Erin Bamer
The cameras would be meant to ensure the safety of faculty, staff and students, with the purpose of deterring theft or violent crime rather than enforcing university policy.
With the number of crimes committed on college campuses across the United States, UI should follow the footsteps of other schools and move forward with adding security measures instead of resisting it.
As of yet, it seems there are no significant arguments against adding more security cameras to campus. And really, what arguments could legitimately be made anyway?
Some people could say adding so many security cameras would be too expensive. The proposal would cost $305,308 in one-time costs and $250,000 in reoccurring costs to run the operations center, which would be manned at all hours every day if fully funded.
But, Ron Smith, vice president of finance and administration, said the one-time costs are low compared to other projects and the on-going costs are comparable to other projects, so finding trouble with the financial aspect of the proposal is difficult.
Most likely the majority of the complaints from students will be derived from the misconception that adding nearly 300 security cameras to campus will infringe on their personal privacy.
First off, this argument isn’t legitimate because the only operating security cameras already in place at UI are located where students live, where they receive the most amount of privacy they can get on campus anyway.
If a student has an issue with added security measures violating their privacy, they should have brought it up much earlier than now.
On a more important note though, these cameras would not be installed with the intent of enforcing university policy. Their true purpose would be to increase the level of safety for students, faculty and staff by preventing theft and violent crime on campus.
When it comes down to it, both of these arguments are outweighed by the benefits more security cameras would bring in regard to ensuring the safety of the UI community.
It’s not as if UI is a particularly bad school when it comes to crimes committed on campus. In 2013, there were zero reported incidents of robbery, aggravated assault and homicide, according to City of Moscow UI campus crime stats. But there is no reason safety shouldn’t be a top priority at all times either way.
It will always be better to be safe than sorry, and an increase in security measures on campus will help UI make strides in fulfilling this philosophy.
Students, faculty and staff should not balk at the idea of adding security cameras to campus. Instead, we ought to embrace the benefits that new safety measures would bring and find the funds to make it a reality.
Erin Bamer can be reached at [email protected]