Reporter Volume 25, No.20 March 10, 1994

By MARK WALLACE
Reporter Staff

After lengthy debate, the Faculty Senate voted 27-15 last week to
support a resolution recommending continued use of the document
"Policies Governing the Use of Side Arms By Public Safety Officers at
the State University of New York at Buffalo" that was implemented Jan.
1, 1988. The resolution superseded an initial resolution put forward
at the meeting that would have supported some proposed changes in the
1988 document.
	The proposed changes would make sidearms "part of the standard
equipment carried by public safety officers at the University at
Buffalo." The 1988 document says that firearms are not part of
standard equipment.
	Stephen Bennett of the Educational Opportunity Center said
that he was against the changes because "I haven't seen it discussed
to the point that it's clear that the current policy isn't working.
This is a sensitive issue, and the statistics don't show that change
is needed."
	Bennett said that UB had a tradition of having no guns on
campus, and wondered what sort of message UB would be sending to its
students and others by arming its public safety officers. "Guns are
accidents waiting to happen," Bennett said. "I don't care how well
people are trained. But if we arm our officers, we'll be sending the
message that guns can protect you."
	Bennett said that he "suspected a hidden agenda here. Are we
going to shy away from the concept of public safety into becoming a
university police force? I strongly and vehemently object to the whole
concept of this proposal."
	William George of Engineering, who put forward the resolution
that the Faculty Senate supported, said that the 1988 document already
allowed public safety officers to be armed in many circumstances. "Our
present policy does not say that weapons can be used only after hours
and must be left in public safety vehicles," George said. "Contrary to
what we're led to believe, our present policies are not restrictive. A
public safety officer can carry a gun any time someone thinks it's
necessary."
	James Lawler of Philosophy said that four problems had led to
the proposed changes; a case in which a student had died, a case in
which a female police officer "felt insecure" without a weapon, the
difficulties associated with unlocking the box in public safety
vehicles in which weapons are currently kept, and students who "feel
strange" that officers do not have guns. But from none of these
problems was it clear, Lawler said, that having weapons would improve
anybody's safety.
	"We have a high level of civil order at UB," Lawler said. "Our
traditional campus policy should be seen as pioneering a new concept
of security. Allowing public safety officers to carry arms capitulates
to the culture of violence that we're trying to combat."
	Herbert Schuel of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences said that
he was "in favor of arming the police at UB. I agree with what people
are saying about the violence of our society, but we're deluding
ourselves if we think that by saying it isn't so, we solve the problem
of violence. The Amherst police and other area police don't come on
campusQPublic Safety is our police. If we don't want them to be, then
we should disband them and get the other area police out here."
	Erwin Segal of Psychology said that Schuel's argument "points
out the value of the old system. The fact that the police aren't here
means that what we've been doing has been working," Segal said.
	Robert Palmer, vice president for student affairs, said that
the proposed new policy is a shift away from the standard public
safety model. "There's no hidden agenda here," Palmer said. "We are
moving from the old model to more of a police force model. We're one
of the last universities in the country not to have armed public
safety officers.
	"We have to finally accept that no matter how much we wish we
were different from other institutions around the country, we're not,"
Palmer said. "We've consulted with many groups, and we believe that if
we are to provide the safety that you want, to ask us to do that
without the proper tools would be a mistake."
	President William Greiner, who said he was speaking "as a
member of the Senate," said that he had discussed with the Office of
Public Safety what they thought about the problems of safety on
campus. "I'm not trying to encourage you to vote either way," Greiner
said. "But it's my understanding that the police concept emerges in
their thinking for several reasons."
	The Office of Public Safety is concerned that its force is
aging, Greiner said, and that recruiting is made more difficult when
public safety officers are not allowed to carry arms. "We're having
difficulties recruiting officers," Greiner said. "But those
difficulties would go away if officers were considered police rather
than safety officers. Not only their prestige but also their salaries
and benefits would go up."
	William George said that "It's been suggested that we have a
lack of confidence in our public safety officials, but the fact is
that we have the finest quality security force in Western New York.
Their ability is not what's under debate. We're being led to believe
that putting a gun in somebody's hands makes them safer, but that's
not true. Having a gun doesn't stop bullets."
	A proposal by James Lawler to create a faculty committee to
reexamine the current policy of arming the police will be considered
at an upcoming meeting of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee.
 	In other Senate business, a resolution was passed that
commended the Provost for his "Procedures for the Review of Academic
Deans, February, 1994," accepted it as being generally consistent with
previously expressed Faculty Senate concerns, and urged its immediate
implementation.