Vigilance, not violence

In his letter in the Sept. 17 Diamondback, (“Protect yourself”), Sean O’Donnell expressed an understandable amount of frustration over the recent incidents that occurred just off the campus. However, his message that students need to be armed to be protected was both frightening and outrageous. O’Donnell called for vigilance to help students protect themselves. I would like to make a similar call for vigilance, without urging students to arm themselves with guns. Let’s use these unfortunate events as a reminder that we all need to be aware of our surroundings and the steps that we take to protect ourselves. The cliché we’ve heard since freshman year needs to take on a new meaning. Why should we ever walk alone at night? There are free police escorts that will take us anywhere at any time. Take advantage of Shuttle-UM and NITE Ride services when available. We pay a lot of money for these services, and they are a safe way to get around the campus. And please, lock all your doors and windows at night. It’s true, these steps are not always enough to prevent crimes from occurring, and the people to blame are undoutedly the perpetrators. There is more that can be done to make us safer and the programs already in place have considerable room for improvement. I encourage all students with concerns or ideas about how to increase security to attend the Student Government Association’s Annual Safety Walk on Oct. 15 at 6 p.m. beginning at the Stamp Student Union. We will walk with police representatives, university administrators and elected officials through the areas on and around the campus where students feel the most unsafe, discussing what steps can be taken to make College Park a safer place to live and learn. In no way am I faulting any of the victims of past incidents. However, those crimes serve as a painful reminder of just how vigilant we students must be. And that vigiliance doesn’t have to come in the form of a gun.

Brad DochertySenior Vice PresidentStudent Government Association

Overexaggerated

Yesterday’s cover story, “East Campus 101,” accurately refers to the proposed redevelopment of East Campus as “the most dramatic change to sweep the area in decades.” But the statement that the project will “dwarf Silver Spring’s downtown” is incorrect. The four-block shopping center called “Downtown Silver Spring,” built by the same developer as the one selected for East Campus, is considerably smaller than what College Park is about to see. However, the Silver Spring business district as a whole is the largest in the state after Baltimore and has more office space than some major American cities. Silver Spring is an economic engine for both the state and the region. Saying the East Campus redevelopment will dwarf that is not only inaccurate but wildly misleading. Once again, it shows how The Diamondback fails to fully appreciate anything that lies outside of the campus gates.

Dan Reed JuniorArchitecture

Air Your ViewsThe Diamondback welcomes your comments. Address your letters or guest columns to the Opinion Desk at opinion@dbk.umd.edu. All letters and guest columns must be signed. Include your full name, year, major and day- and night-time phone numbers. Please limit letters to 300 words. Please limit guest columns to between 550 and 700 words.Submission of a letter or guest column constitutes an exclusive, worldwide, transferable license to The Diamondback of the copyright in the material in any media. The Diamondback retains the right to edit submissions for content and length.

POLICY: The signed letters, columns and cartoon represent only the opinions of the authors. The staff editorial represents the opinion of The Diamondback’s editorial board and is the responsibility of the editor in chief.