Although the results of Public Safety's most recent blue light response time test are a little disturbing, perhaps they speak to a much larger issue.
First, it's commendable that Public Safety conducted the tests with the help of the Student Government, Women's Initiative and the Residence Hall Association. When Women's Initiative conducted similar trials in years past, the university responded by installing new blue lights in several problem areas. Naturally, we can only hope that this semester's rather lackluster numbers (but increased transparency) produce a similar change in Public Safety procedures.
More importantly, it is good to see Public Safety addressing problems before they arise. All too often, it seems university administrators make policy in retrospect, changing safety and security protocols only after a crime or assault occurs. Tests like these, even if they don't yield the most desirable statistics, are amenable and proactive steps in the right direction.
But we should keep in mind that we cannot criticize Public Safety for something it cannot control. While the blue lights ensure students have a way to communicate directly with Public Safety officers in the event of an emergency, they cannot always stop a crime in progress. The lights and the cameras equipped above them cannot stop a criminal in his or her tracks, and Public Safety officers are physically unable to respond as instantaneously as we would like to believe. Certainly, Public Safety should ensure they are responding to crises as fast as they can, but the blue lights provide us with a rather false sense of security.
While it is appropriate to demand Public Safety make much-needed adjustments to decrease response times, students should remember that they alone play the most important role in preventing crime. We need not a test to prove that.
