Both sides of this debate offer compelling arguments. Those two views, however, do not exhaust all the possible arrangements that might serve as a solution to this problem. Rather, there exists a compromise position that takes what is best from each side: Public Safety officers should be given limited access to firearms by allowing them to keep firearms in safe lockboxes installed inside Public Safety patrol cars.
This proposal would enable Public Safety officers to access firearms should the need arise without waiting for a response from the Borough and Township police officers. Public Safety could then apply their knowledge of the University’s layout to more effectively respond to an emergency situation. At the same time, on this proposal, Public Safety officers would never have a firearm on their person except in the extremely rare event of a campus emergency — thus addressing concerns that allowing Public Safety officers to carry firearms while interacting with students could have negative consequences for student-officer relations.
Admittedly, this arrangement might provide a slightly less immediate response capacity than allowing Public Safety officers to carry firearms on their persons. Nonetheless, the time required to retrieve a firearm from a patrol car and bring it to the scene of an incident on a campus as small as Princeton’s would be short. We believe that any loss in response capacity would be so small that it would be outweighed by this policy’s positive effects every day on student-officer relations.
Installing firearms in patrol cars would address the concerns on both sides of this particular debate by better protecting the student body while minimizing any damage that might occur to student relations with Public Safety officers. The Editorial Board believes this plan should be adopted as it is a workable and productive compromise that accomplishes as much of each goal as possible.
Read More
Princeton students must be open-minded judges
Jorge ReyesJudges, like Justice Sotomayor, are obligated by the constraints of their roles to be impartial. Princeton students have no such obligation — we are not detached interpreters of the Constitution but rather active political agents. While our backgrounds and values rightfully shape our political views, we shouldn’t let that inhibit our ability to listen to other perspectives.
Judges, like Justice Sotomayor, are obligated by the constraints of their roles to be impartial. Princeton students have no such obligation — we are not detached interpreters of the Constitution but rather active political agents. While our backgrounds and values rightfully shape our political views, we shouldn’t let that inhibit our ability to listen to other perspectives.
Academic receivership is a university process, not a government decision
Lillian PatersonThe federal government is attempting to take control of private academic institutions. In principle, this feels much more akin to nationalization, or condemnation –– terms that refer to government repossession of private enterprise.
The federal government is attempting to take control of private academic institutions. In principle, this feels much more akin to nationalization, or condemnation –– terms that refer to government repossession of private enterprise.
Princeton must equitably compensate student orientation leaders
Luqmaan BambaOrientation student leaders do vital work that shapes the earliest moments of the Princeton undergraduate experience. They build community, support new students, and ease the transition into college. If we value that labor, then the institution must reflect that value tangibly.