Rose Mary Woods-esque

I emailed Heather Reed and Captain Stubbings and asked K-State to resend the April 18-24 police log today. According to my inbox, I think they skipped right over those dates and published the April 25 log. The missing gap in police logs brings with it a gratuitous and unmerited conspiratorial reference to Rose Mary Woods and the Watergate era. Only those 45 and older have any shot of recalling the 18 1/2 minute gap. In the case of the April 18-24 police log gap, I'm sure it's just an honest omission. Speaking of the K-State police log, the latest version appears to be police log lite - partial sentence descriptions of various events.

This came from today's log:

OFFICERS AND EMS RESPONDED TO MEDICAL EMERGENCY AT THROCKMORTON HALL.
TRANSPORT BY EMS WAS REFUSED.

Here was the police log earlier this year, describing a medical emergency the campus police responded to:

WEST HALL
OFFICER AND EMS RESPONDED MEDICAL EMERGENCY AT WEST HALL ROOM (XXX-omitted here but room number is present in the published police log). REPORTING PERSON ADVISED FEMALE SUBJECT LOST CONSCIOUSNESS. VICTIM REGAINED CONSCIOUSNESS ON ARRIVAL. TRANSPORT BY EMS WAS REFUSED


Perhaps KSU police and Campus Security Officer Heather Reed are cutting back on details of incidents in the police log in regard for students right to privacy. If so, I can't fault them for that, but only wonder why it wasn't done sooner.

Rose Mary Woods demonstrating how she may have erased tape recordings

Letter to the editor: Against concealed carry

This letter to the editor in Virginia Tech Collegiate Times got quite a few responses, as you might expect. Here is the letter:


In light of the previous week being Firearms Awareness Week and reading the multiple articles about passing the concealed carry law, I felt compelled to write in and bring up some issues that most people seem to be overlooking.

The main argument I hear in favor of the concealed carry on campus is that if students were allowed to carry guns on campus, events like those on April 16, 2007 could be prevented or at least lessened if students had concealed weapons to protect themselves. Personally, I believe that is ridiculous, but even if this was the case, I don't think that is a strong enough argument to let people carry guns into classrooms. Campus shootings such as those on our campus and at Northern Illinois University earlier this year are not everyday occurrences; in fact they are extremely rare. What is actually an everyday occurrence is the death of approximately 80 Americans because of gun violence.

So, would the benefits of allowing students to carry weapons on campus outweigh the risks? No! What may decrease is the number of students killed in large shootings like the one that so greatly affected our campus last spring, but the reverse of this would be the number of single handgun homicides that would inevitably occur if people were able to carry a gun with them into everyday situations. I do not want some 21-year-old student sitting next to me in my math class carrying a gun.

To obtain a gun in Virginia, you must apply and go through a screening process and a background check, unless of course you decide to go to a private dealer at a gun show and simply hand over some money and buy whatever gun that suits your purpose. Some states require you to take a class before you can get a gun, but that's about as effective as putting a 15-year-old through driver's-ed and saying he or she is ready to drive a racecar. The point is that the average college student is not trained to know how and when to use a gun properly in self-defense.

If you let students carry a gun on campus where do you draw the line on when it is appropriately used? If you increase the number of guns on campus, you increase the number of opportunities to use these guns. That isn't a decision that I think should be left up to each individual and untrained student. And if you allow guns on campus, there isn't any way to prevent them from being used, there can only be punishment for using them incorrectly, which is too late to save a life. The answer to guns on campus is not more guns. The only way to prevent events like the one that occurred on our campus last year is to take the guns out of the equation, not adding more to the mix.

One final thought is that on average, if someone gets shot and killed in the United States, four out of five times it's by a handgun. Ban handguns, anybody? This is a huge issue and there are arguments I didn't address, not wanting to turn this letter into an essay, but in the end I think it is a safer and wiser decision to limit the presence of guns on campus and in general, rather than invite more in.

John Forys
senior, mathematics

---

Some of the responses;

Posted by: Terry at 2:20 am Really..."so not relevant". Who deals with determined mass shooters more than our military in Iraq or the Israelis? Granted, terrorists have different motivations and it occurs a lot more than on a US college campus. Sky marshalls are a concealed deterent (response) to those intent on harming unarmed citizens. Yet, I can't remember one saving an aircraft... Flag Abuse

Posted by: pro2a at 1:46 am yea, terry. because "you" don't think it'll have an effect on classroom shootings, we shouldn't allow it. get real, that is the worst argument i've ever heard. addressing mass shootings should be a combination of all of these approaches, and there is no possible way you could ever do enough prevention and awareness to eliminate all risk of attack. your response is just so not relevant. then once we step outside of classroom shootings, your reasoning goes right to the trash can, like the ones in this article. Flag Abuse

Posted by: Terry at 1:41 am I think SCCC is arguing for something that will have a negligible effect in deterring or countering gun violence on campus(es). Obviously awareness, prevention and preparation (including an armed response) are important in dealing with any crisis, shooting, terrorist act, etc. But the main efforts should be toward AWARENESS (of those who may be suicidal) and PREVENTION (thru treatment or sending the mentally ill student home). Even our military and the Israelis realized that intelligence and prevention are the key...especially with suicidal bombers or IEDs. Its probably not sky marshalls deterring potential hijackers. More likely they realize that passengers will beat them to death (with or without guns or bombs) because they are aware it can be a one way trip... Flag Abuse

Posted by: Brandon Wilson at 1:03 am this is the same old argument over and over again. what if... what if... the SCCC doesn't present what if's... we present proven facts. if you go back through old newspapers this is the same arguments each state went through before each passed their own Concealed carry laws. everyone knew that it would be absolute panic and shootouts everyday, but guess what? never happened. in fact almost every state that passed a concealed carry law, the crime rate went down, everywhere else without still on the rise. as for college students not experienced enough, i can tell you that most of us spend more time at the ranges improving our accuracy than most cops are required to do. the point is, think about the risks we take right now as we all walk on to campus defensless. we took the risks and look were it landed us, 32 dead. and we havent learned from that. yes the risks do outweigh the choice. that's why i have chosen to carry, because i have chosen not to risk my life anymore. we tried it with the gun-free zone, obviously that worked out real well. now its time to try a proven method of crime control. NO LONGER DO I FEAR FOR MY LIFE, BUT NOW I MAKE THE CRIMINAL FEAR FOR HIS LIFE! Flag Abuse

Posted by: Mike at Apr 28 “So, would the benefits of allowing students to carry weapons on campus outweigh the risks? No! What may decrease is the number of students killed in large shootings like the one that so greatly affected our campus last spring, but the reverse of this would be the number of single handgun homicides that would inevitably occur if people were able to carry a gun with them into everyday situations.” The benefits have without exception outweighed any small risk. Just look at the majority of states that now allow concealed carry. We just don’t see these hypothetical shootouts that the anti concealed carry people predict. Instead we see a reduction in crime. This “inevitable” increase in “the number of single handgun homicides” just doesn’t happen. In fact, at the 11 colleges that currently allow concealed carry by licensed student, there has not been a single gun accident or shootout. Flag Abuse

Posted by: Mike at Apr 28 "Campus shootings such as those on our campus and at Northern Illinois University earlier this year are not everyday occurrences; in fact they are extremely rare." No, but assaults, murders, robbery, and raps ARE everyday occurrences. Guns prevent these crimes somewhere between 800,000 and 2,500,000 times a year, according to around 14 different studies done on the subject. While the chances of another mass shooting is rare, the chances of these other crimes that don’t make headlines is likely at some point in your life. Flag Abuse

Posted by: Alyson Boyce at Apr 28 Ban handguns? Take a look at Washington D.C. where handguns ARE banned....that's a pretty peaceful place, right? Looks like it's working for them.... Flag Abuse

Posted by: Ken Stanton at Apr 28 Use your voice on the topic, take the survey & quiz: https://survey.vt.edu/survey/entry.jsp?id=1208998040655 Flag Abuse

Posted by: Ken Stanton at Apr 28 "bring up some issues … seem to be overlooking." And then you go and spout the same old rhetoric, John. First, SCCC takes a firm stance AGAINST any kind of speculation of heroism last April, and always have. The argument is that no one HAD THE CHOICE, so we will never know. "everyday occurrence is the death of approximately 80 Americans because of gun violence." The existence of gun violence only supports SCCC's cause - as we've seen, only equal power can stop a gun. "I do not want some 21-year-old student sitting next to me in my math class carrying a gun." How do you know they aren't now? What about when you're at the movies? There is a good chance there are a few people sitting next to you who are carrying. "unless ... a private dealer at a gun show..." Oh the ol' "gun-show loophole" - unrelated and it doesn't exist... next. "the average college student is not trained to know how and when to use a gun properly in self-defense." Way to sell out your fellow students as irresponsible and incapable of life&death decision-making. "the line on when it is appropriately used?" Maybe the law? It isn't different on campus! "take the guns out of the equation" Yes, that 'no-guns' policy on campus sure makes criminals tremble. "Ban handguns, anybody?" Same old conclusion. You presented nothing new, we address these points every day. Bring in some new arguments next time. Flag Abuse

Posted by: at Apr 28 Dan, I would rather hear statements supporting CCW than all of the unfounded reasons for not having guns on campus. "What if they get drunk and start shooting..." yeah, you hear about this stuff all the time off campus right? Do you realize how many people in Blacksburg own guns and carry concealed weapons already? Flag Abuse

Posted by: Dan at Apr 28 I hope your ready for the large slew of, "Get over your silly fear", "Guns save lives", "Outlaw guns and only outlaws will have them", "Guns don't kill people do", and my personal favorite, "Why not ban cars too then they kill people!" This is a good letter but I promise you'll get all said statements above and maybe more.

Daily Nebraskan: Lincoln's Hate Crimes Increasing

From The Daily Nebraskan:

A Lincoln man recently came home to his apartment only to be greeted by the message, "FAG i DIE!" scratched into the finish of his front door. This was not the first incident the man had experienced since coming out of the closet - someone scratched a swastika into the paint of his car and he found feces outside his door.

These crimes, motivated by anti-homosexual bias, are classified as hate crimes by the Lincoln Police Department.

In 2006, the FBI received reports of 7,722 instances of bias-motivated crime from participating agencies around the nation. St. Louis reported eight, Denver had 11, Atlanta had seven and Chicago reported 33.

The Lincoln Police Department reported 36 hate crimes.

In 2007, that number jumped to 59.

According to the Lincoln Police Department policy, if both the victim of a crime and the original investigating officer feel the motivating factors behind a crime involved a negative bias, the incident is reported as a hate crime.

The difference in numbers of hate crimes in cities with larger, more diverse populations than Lincoln could be a result of less-stringent criteria required to classify a crime as bias-motivated. It could also be a result of a willingness on the part of the Lincoln Police Department to acknowledge hate still exists in the city.

"The (phenomenon) behind the large amount of reported hate crimes is solely because of the reporting practices (of the police department)," said Chief Tom Casady of the Lincoln Police Department. "We do good job of recording crimes as hate crimes compared to most other cities because we're not imposing an overly strict standard of evidence."

A problem with classifying hate crimes is there is no universal definition, said Hugh Whitt, a professor of sociology at UNL who studies religious hate crimes.

"Sometimes, you have to delve into the motivation of (the) people involved," he said, and that can be "real sticky."

For example, if a man wanted to rob a liquor store and selects a target at random, that is a crime. If the man decides to rob a store because the proprietor is black, that is a hate crime, Whitt explained.

Reporting hate as a category of crime is often voluntary and discretionary - some places don't even acknowledge that crimes motivated by hate are different than any other crime.

And, he said, without a doubt, hate crimes are under-reported.

"The key difference in Lincoln is we really want officers to use their common sense. If they have an inkling or thoughts about the motivating factor, they use their best judgment and report it," Casady said. "Poor reporting artificially depresses statistics."

The ease of classification increases the amount of crimes reported as hate crimes. This helps the police track trends based on type of bias and type of crime.

Acknowledging that hate crimes do happen in Lincoln pulls away the veil of denial about racism and hatred, he said.

"The advantage of this kind of reporting is we get a more accurate picture of hatred. To believe (eight) hate crimes happened in St. Louis flies in the face of common sense," Casady said. "How do you raise public awareness about the issue if (people) believe hate crimes don't occur here?"

Casady said the most serious hate crime Lincoln has experienced was the kidnapping and murder of Harold Grover, a gay man, in 1993. Grover was killed by two men from Kansas who traveled to the city with the intention of finding a homosexual and killing him.

The least serious, and one of the most common, is hate language, said either during fights or in graffiti.

"The worst words in the English language are hate speech. The dirtiest words are hate words," Casady said.

The words can be anti-homosexual language on a bathroom wall, spoken over the telephone as a threat, thrown about during a violent fight or spray-painted onto the sides of a vehicle. The police department has seen all of these happen within the last 18 months.

The victims and perpetrators are usually young people, Casady said.

"Young people who are racist are socially aware and know to keep their bigotry under wraps and not use the N-word but express the same attitudes towards gays and Asian-Americans," he said.

One incident in Lincoln in March involved middle-school age children in which the kids called a classmate gay, beat him with bamboo and assaulted him.

To cut down on the intolerance that leads to these kinds of incidents, Casady recommends action.

"Stand up against hate speech - refuse to listen to it, take away its audience or go somewhere else entirely," he said. "Any hate crime is one too many. I'm worried about the denial I see. People who just don't know or believe it doesn't happen don't call it out and run the risk of being complicit."

Daily Texan:Fraternity leaders face hazing charges

SAE in hot water. From The Daily Texan :

The Travis County Attorney's Office charged four members of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon Texas Rho Chapter on Friday for allegedly hazing pledges with cattle prods, beating them with bamboo sticks and forcing them to binge drink.

Officials indicted former chapter President Chase Bolding, economics senior and former pledge trainer Austin Sherrill and former pledge trainer Will Evans with both hazing, a Class B misdemeanor, and furnishing alcohol to a minor, a Class A misdemeanor. Attorneys also charged former Vice President Jimmy Berry with failure to report hazing, a Class B misdemeanor. Class B misdemeanors are punishable by up to six months in jail and a maximum $2,000 fine. Class A misdemeanors are punishable by up to one year in jail and a maximum $4,000 fine.

All of the charges relate to incidences that occurred during the fall 2006 semester. Lawyers for the charged members could not be reached by press time.

Travis County Attorney David Escamilla said this was the first time a hazing-related investigation had led to additional charges. Escamilla said the Nov. 17, 2006 death of engineering freshman and pledge Tyler Cross sparked the 14-month investigation. The correlation between the hazing investigation and Cross' death is under the jurisdiction of the Travis County District Attorney's office, but representatives from the office did not confirm any relationship by press time.

"The message we're trying to send is really to focus on the leadership," Escamilla said. "If they aren't going to control the hazing, then I don't know who will."

After the Ohio State University football game on Sept. 9, 2006, Bolding, Sherrill and Evans called a meeting at a pledge's room in the University Towers private dormitory, according to the probable cause affidavit. At the meeting, Bolding forced a pledge to take the "bows and toes position" in which he had to raise himself on his elbows and toes while lying on a table. After the pledge got into position, Bolding flipped the table over onto the pledge. Later in the meeting, Evans threw darts at a pledge's hand after telling the pledge to put his hand against a dart board. Several darts struck the pledge. Sherrill also picked up a hot clothes iron and burned the faces of two pledges in the room. The two were instructed to not attend classes until the minor burns healed, the affidavit said.

On Nov. 10, 2006, the fraternity hosted a "cactus run," where pledges were required to gather large amounts of cactus with their bare hands for an upcoming party, the affidavit said. At the event, Evans required three pledges to eat Crisco and two others to eat cat food. Evans also shocked several pledges with a cattle prod and forced one to sit on a cactus, according to the affidavit.

Four days later, during "Jungle Week," - a week dedicated to building structures for the fraternity's biggest party of the year - members required pledges to participate in a pool-building competition, dividing them into two teams, the affidavit continued. The pledges ran across the house's yard carrying heavy rocks, while active members struck them with bamboo sticks. Members forced the losing team to pile into the back of a Penske truck, where Sherrill gave a speech and shocked the pledges with a cattle prod, the affidavit said.

Two days after that, on Nov. 16, 2006, the chapter hosted a ceremony called "Senior Boo" where nine active members chose one pledge each to attend, the affidavit said. That night, the pledges got into the back of the Penske truck parked outside of the fraternity house. The members instructed the pledges to remove their shirts and blindfold themselves, and at least one other member was hog-tied. Sherrill drove the truck to the location of "Senior Boo," while members in the back used cattle prods on the pledges. When they arrived at the ceremony, the members gave the pledges three half-gallon bottles of tequila, whiskey and Rumplemintz to drink, the affidavit said.

Sherrill encouraged the underage pledges to "consume excessive amounts of liquor," the affidavit said. Sherrill and Bolding also "traded swats" from a piece of bamboo with the pledges. During the ceremony, Bolding singled out one pledge, forced him to get into the "bows and toes" position and kicked him in the stomach. On the ride back, Bolding and Sherrill provided the pledges with a keg of beer, the affidavit said.

Juan Gonzalez, vice president for student affairs, said the University is taking a proactive effort to prevent hazing and providing alcohol to minors. On April 7, representatives from SAE and UT signed a mutual agreement restricting the fraternity from such activities. Gonzalez said SAE is the only Greek organization to sign the agreement.

"What was made public today was very disturbing," Gonzalez said. "Individual students, and also organizations, need to recognize that there are consequences. At the end of the day, we're talking about illegal activities."

Guns bans can't stop wackos bent on murder

That's the incongruous sounding headline of this piece in the KC Star by Thomas McClanahan. If gun bans can't stop wackos, can concealed carry? He explains:


The panel that oversees Kansas state universities has decreed that campuses under its control shall be weapons-free. I wonder: Will students, faculty and staff feel safer?

The recent move by the state Board of Regents came a year after the Virginia Tech massacre — a mass public shooting that left 32 dead in a place that was already weapons-free, in theory. Like so many of these incidents, Virginia Tech showed why gun bans in places as open as campuses are toothless as safety measures.

The thought of students or faculty walking around campus with weapons is not an attractive one, I’ll acknowledge. In some visceral sense, it feels wrong at first blush, and it’s a sad comment on the state of our society that officials must grapple with the risk of some psychotic releasing pent-up anger in a hail of gunfire.

Yet it is delusional to pretend that gun-free zones on paper can create gun-free zones in reality, unless you’re talking about closed environments such as government buildings or airport concourses.

Personally I’d feel safer on a campus where I knew some of the students or the staff — those who complied with the licensing requirements of concealed carry laws, if applicable — were likely to be armed. Not all campuses are gun-free zones: Colorado State University, as well as all of Utah’s universities, allow concealed-carry in compliance with state laws.

The Trolley Square Mall in Salt Lake City, the scene of another shooting spree last year, was also a posted gun-free zone. Five people were killed, but the death toll would have been higher but for an off-duty police officer who, ignoring the mall rules, retained his weapon. After hearing shots, he fired back at the shooter until police arrived.

That was only one of several incidents in recent years in which armed citizens acted to prevent or curtail shooting sprees.

The nonsensical nature of the campus gun-free zone has not been lost on a growing number of students. After the Virginia Tech shooting, a group called Students for Concealed Carry on Campus was formed at Facebook.com, the social networking site.

These students sought the right to defend themselves, and last year they organized quiet protests on several campuses across the nation. Last week, they conducted another round of protests, in which students wear empty gun holsters on campus.

This kind of spontaneous response is surprising to some who follow the issue.

“Gun-rights activism typically originates among rural people who are hunters and the like,” said David Kopel of the Golden, Colo.-based Independence Institute. “To have young adults leading on this is something new.”

What the Kansas Regents did earlier this month was endorse a broad policy requiring weapons-free campuses and criminal background checks for newly hired staff. Officials said a consultant would be engaged to figure out how to implement the policies.

According to The Star’s account of the meeting, much of the discussion dealt with where to post signs prohibiting concealed weapons.

I asked Regents’ spokesman Kip Peterson how putting up signs would stop a wacko bent on mass murder. Peterson said he couldn’t comment until the specific policies and regulations were put into effect.

I wish them luck, but this exercise looks like another replay of the familiar fantasy underlying gun control: the assumption that gun bans alone can curtail violent crime.

In 2003, a study by the Fraser Institute of Canada concluded that restrictive gun laws in England, Wales and Canada were an expensive failure. A news release announcing the findings stated: “Disarming the public has not reduced criminal violence in any country examined in this study.”

About the same time, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control reviewed 51 studies, including some partly funded by the CDC, and found “insufficient evidence” that gun laws helped prevent violent crime.

The chairwoman of the Kansas Regents, Christine Downey-Schmidt, says ensuring safety is a critical board responsibility, and “continued diligence” is a vital priority.

Well, sure. But at some point, you’d think the Regents would explain how a policy that makes people defenseless can improve their safety.

Living dangerously - Off Campus Housing

From the Phoenix Tribune online a story that illustrates off campus housing is no respite from crime.

Instead, like many college students nationwide who choose to live away from school, they became victims of crime.
According to public records, four out of the 10 Tempe apartment complexes where police are called the most cater to ASU students, and one of them - where the most horrific crimes have occurred - is actually recommended by the university.
"I don't feel as safe as I think I should," said 20-year-old Riana Wernick, an ASU junior living at Gateway on Apache. "There's way too many people with way too much access."
Wernick thought she'd be safe when she moved to the upscale off-campus apartment complex at 2323 E. Apache Blvd.
The pricey modern units were gated and filled with other students just like her. But when Wernick walked outside one day and found her car had been stolen, she realized she was wrong.
Wernick soon discovered many of her friends had also experienced crimes at the complex. Their belongings were stolen. They witnessed fights. Their property was damaged.
Police were called an average of 502 times per year from 2005 to 2007 at Gateway on Apache, formerly called University Housing of Tempe.
The average number of calls for service at the complex was .52 per resident in 2007, compared with the citywide average of .06 per resident for the same year.
In another complex, Gateway at Tempe, where one sexual assault and one rape were reported in February, police responded an average of 379 times per year over the past three years, records show.
These apartments, along with Scottsdale Gateway apartments, are all owned by the same company and ASU refers them all to young adults attending ASUlooking for off-campus housing.
While students say they are surprised by the amount of crime occurring in their complexes, police say the trend is common. And while ASU has created a special program for off-campus students, it recommends apartments to students without first determining if they are safe.
"Anytime you put students into a complex, we're going to be out there a lot," said Tempe police crime prevention Sgt. Ken Harmon. "I think they bring with them this on-campus, dorm mentality, 'I live with ASU students,' and 'I trust ASU students.' It couldn't be further from the truth."
He added, "They're not in a dorm and not all these people are ASU students."
The Associated Press reported a 2005 study by U.S. departments of education and justice shows crime rates for students living on campus were at least 50 percent lower than those living away from their campus, in the case of violent crimes. However, on-campus students were more likely to have belongings stolen.
Harmon said that students are both the criminals and the victims in their communities. He said the socially oriented focus of student apartment complexes creates conflict with more studious neighbors and that the trusting nature of the students leaves them vulnerable to criminals looking for easy victims.
In fact, Harmon said that most of the city's victims of sexual assaults and attempted sexual assaults this year involved the rapist climbing in through an unlocked window or door, and citywide, 44 percent of burglaries also show no signs of forced entries.
"I can't think of any young woman who deserved any of this, but if their door had been locked, (the criminals) would've moved on to the next one," Harmon said of the recent attacks.
Management at Gateway's complexes refused to take any questions from the Tribune as to what they are doing to keep their young-adult residents safe. However, the company issued a statement through public relations specialist Julie Ratcliff, of kREED + COMPANY.
"Our residents' safety is a top priority," the statement said. "We have many preventative measures in place at our community."
The statement listed some of these as crime-free multi-housing, tracking police calls for service at the complex, surveillance cameras in common areas, a gate and security. The complex also holds at least one safety meeting per semester.
Still, some residents living at the communities said they just don't feel safe.
"This is my second year living here, and I really don't feel safe at all," said ASU junior Danie Lack, who lives at Tempe Gateway.
ASU freshman Emily Green, 19, a Gateway on Apache resident, said crime in her complex has been such a nuisance that she has asked to break her lease after about nine months.
"There's a ton of fights around here. We randomly hear gunshots and my friend was taking care of his dog and his apartment got broken into," Green said. "You know parties, random people come in and they put him to gunpoint."
Green said she told management at her complex she fears for her safety and would like to work out a fair agreement, but "they said no."
ASU Associate Vice President of University Student Initiatives Michael Coakley said nearly 75 percent of students at the university live off-campus or commute from their parents' homes. Because of this, ASU began a new program, the Off-Campus and Commuter Student Services program, "to engage" students living off-campus.
However, while it does refer students to off-campus housing, the program does not hold the apartment complexes to any standards or ensure they are safe places to live. Also, the program doesn't track exactly how many students are involved in it, so its impact can't be measured.
"We know how many hits the Web site gets and how many people come to the programs," Coakley said, "but we don't know how many are duplicates."
Coakley said ASU tries to protect its off-campus students by partnering with police to hold crime-prevention events, but that the new program is more to provide a connection for students living away from ASU.
The program also has students act as liaisons between the complexes and the university.
While many of the complexes police visit most often cater largely to ASU students, some of the communities with the most calls have residents of many age groups.
Sierra Vista Apartments II, 615 S. Hardy Drive, and Coronado Apartments, 1865 E. Broadway Road, had the highest calls for service last year.
One apartment complex, Mill Pointe Apartments, formerly called the Villages on Mill, 4120 S. Mill Ave., had more than 800 calls for service in 2005 and 2006, then dropped down to 249.
Police said Mill Pointe Apartments is a great example of how fixing up the appearance of a property can also have a positive impact on crime.
"I was just commenting to one of my guys the other day that this place has done the transformation," Harmon said of Mill Pointe.
"They've taken a lot of steps of who goes in and who goes out and making that environment a lot safer," he said.
Police said the idea behind this concept is called the "Broken Windows Theory." Written by James Q. Wilson in 1982, it argues that properly maintaining a community by painting over graffiti, fixing broken windows and addressing other eyesores can lower crime.
"A rundown place invites crime," Harmon said.
Michael Levine, who wrote the book "Broken Windows, Broken Business," said adequate lighting and good property maintenance put criminals on the defensive, which is just where they should be.
"You've got to light the windows up," Levine said. "You've got to show criminals psychologically that the bad guys are not in charge."
One apartment, the Tanglewood Apartments, failed to stop criminals from operating on the property, prompting Tempe police to move forward with the rare but powerful criminal abatement process.
During criminal abatement, police can obtain a temporary restraining order mandating the property owners to take certain steps or be charged with a class 5 felony. The program essentially forces businesses to comply with crime prevention efforts.
A police notice released to the Tribune in a public records request showed the Tanglewood Apartments failed to address repeated drug sales and trafficking of stolen property on its premises between April 2006 and September 2007.
The complex was the only one that police have begun criminally abating in the past two years. And after the proceedings began, calls for service decreased by 73 percent, said Tempe police spokeswoman Sgt. Cindy Davies.
"That's a pretty effective tool," Harmon said.
However, he added, "A lot of times management doesn't know how to turn it around."

It could be worse

From South Africa comes this report. No reference to concealed carry - just carry. From the story:

Students say they are thinking of bringing firearms to campus for protection after a female student was robbed at gunpoint at the University of Cape Town.All SA campuses are supposed to be gun-free zones.Last weekend's attack on UCT's middle campus, in which a 20-year-old student was robbed of her handbag, laptop and car keys, has sparked outrage over the lack of security. And although security has been beefed-up since the robbery, security guards remain unarmed.Lesley Connolly, of Claremont, was walking to her car from the Kramer Law Building when two men grabbed her handbag, laptop and car keys.Police said the men jumped into a blue Mazda 323 and sped off.
The dazed student ran to tell Campus Protection Services guards, and when one drove in pursuit, a robber fired at him.A week earlier, second-year engineering student Michael Woodward, 22, was mugged at gunpoint as he walked home from UCT to his flat in Highstead Road, around the corner from Rondebosch police station. He said he was walking down Woodbine Road, about 200m from a campus security point, and was on a crutch, having broken his ankle."This well-dressed guy came up and asked where middle campus was. I gestured toward it, but as I did so he kind of changed character and lunged towards me. I got a fright and struck him with my crutch."Then I saw he had a gun and I stopped. He asked for my wallet and cellphone, which I handed over."A couple of hour later Woodward's girlfriend received an SMS from his phone, purporting to be from Woodward himself, asking her for his PIN number which he'd "forgotten".Now some students say they are considering bringing firearms on campus for protection.Lewis Martin, a psychology student from the US studying at UCT, said crime was rampant in Cape Town and was now moving on to campus.He had no choice but to consider buying a firearm to protect himself and his friends."Having a gun-free policy is good, but it could also be very dangerous if criminals come on to campus with guns. "At some universities in the US and even at certain schools students are often armed to protect themselves."It was "scary" to think that not even the security guards were armed.Another student, Carl Viljoen, said if the security guards or a student had had a firearm at the time of the robbery, the criminals might not have got away. "Sometimes having a firearm can save someone's life. I'm strongly considering getting one."Gabi Kulis, a psychology major at UCT, said although there were cameras and security guards, she still felt "very unsafe" on campus.She now avoided walking to her car alone.But UCT management says the campus will remain a gun-free zone. Spokeswoman Gerda Kruger said the attacks were "most regrettable and disturbing". Just days after the attack on Connolly, UCT science and education professor Kevin Rochford was shot dead in front of his home less than 2km from campus in Little Mowbray.Kruger said UCT shared the fear and frustration of students and staff about crime. But she said there was far less crime at UCT than in the surrounding areas or any other campus in the country."This does not make us complacent; we are constantly reviewing the situation and are improving our approach to preventing crime constantly. The safety and security of our staff and students will continue to enjoy the highest priority on the executive agenda of the institution," she said.Following the robbery at UCT other Cape Town campuses have also stepped up security. University of the Western Cape spokesman Luthando Tyhalibongo said crime was "a very real factor" on campus. But UWC saw itself as a part of its immediate community and society.Violent crimes which have brought campus security under the spotlight include:
In January 2005, UCT mathematics Professor Brian Hahn was bludgeoned with an umbrella on campus and kicked in the face. He died eight days later.
In October 2005, UCT engineering professor Hugh Douglas was robbed at gunpoint in his office on the campus.
In July 2006, UCT chemistry professor Mino Caira was left with serious head injuries by an attacker in his office