Safety that is provided by police presence on campus is overshadowed by fear and harm, directly impacting the very students they claim to protect. Therefore, due to national issues stemming from how policing operates, LBCC should remove its officers from campus.
The presence of officers on campus changes teachers’ views and begins to make them see police as a tool of discipline. This, in turn, results in the normalization of police being used as a quicker selection tool over time.
According to the Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice, officers on university campuses continue the practices of the larger policing institution and criminalize Black students as well as students from racial minorities at higher rates through over policing.
Normalizing the utilization of law enforcement to deal with student behavior begins to make disciplinary issues seem like they need a police presence.
These escalated responses of expulsions and referrals to police disproportionately affect students who are Hispanic or Black compared to white students.
Black students face arrest rates that are 3 1/2 times higher than white students, as well as being reported to the police at twice the rate, according to data from NBC News.
This data is mostly collected at a high school level, however the pattern does not stop at graduation.
Data from the journal College of Safety and Emergency Services explains how racial profiling extends to Black Americans on college campuses. They brought up the phrase “driving while Black,” which refers to the fact that Black Americans are pulled over at higher rates than other groups due to racial profiling.
Black students, even in higher education, face higher rates of arrest and police interference.
Extra persecution is not limited to a racial basis.
Disabled students are also being referred to police at higher rates and report having more violations of freedoms, such as being arrested without a warrant, having their disability ignored, or being questioned without their rights being read to them, in comparison to other demographics.
This persecution results in a rate of arrest that is forty-four percent higher than that of someone without a disability and is extended to 55% in the case of Black disabled individuals, according to a study done by Cornell University.
While positive citizen-initiated interactions resulted in a more positive view of officers, even positive officer-initiated interactions ended up causing students to have a more negative view of the police, according to a study done by Columbia Southern University on four-year universities.
The study found this correlation however, they did not find sufficient evidence in their study to establish causation however, they offered forward a few possible reasons.
One reason the study offers as a counter for why that may have occurred is that most interactions where an officer engages a member of the public is most likely going to be a negative reason, such as a ticket or correcting some behavior.
However, even other studies found similar results that, regardless of interaction type or personally having a bad experience, police presence was negatively perceived by the student body.
According to Iowa State University, this pattern continues with students who did not face any sort of persecution or illegal search and seizure from the police.
They still held negative views of on-campus police and, at times, had worse attendance rates purely from interacting with a campus officer, with the possible reason that students begin to fear that their own behavior can result in harsh punishment.
There has been little research conducted on the effectiveness of campus policing, as according to the Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice, fewer than ten books have been published on the topic in the last four decades.
The lack of concrete information makes it impossible to see if there are any benefits to the systems implemented and makes the negatives feel that much more unnecessary.
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the most common college situation that calls for police intervention is “liquor law violations.”
Some examples of liquor law violations would be consumption or possession of alcohol while underage, or the purchase of alcohol for a minor, such as an older student buying drinks for younger students.
A majority of the time, these are not situations that require the police to intervene and could be much better served by private campus security. Police involvement can result in a permanent mark in the form of a misdemeanor, which is something that will be attached to the students legally for life.
Students would be far better served if there were a non-government force that could intervene in these situations and, at most, punish them within the framework of the school to allow their employment opportunities and ability to function in society to remain.
We now have to ask ourselves whether it is worth it to continue implementing policies that target the most disenfranchised among us, especially when results are so inconclusive, obfuscating the benefits, if there are any to be had.
As well as cost taxpayers over $1.5 billion a year to provide these officers for public four-year institutions, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics.
The solution, while simple in messaging, is complex in application.
We need to remove and replace these systems with less punitive options, such as a non-police-associated campus security that still protects students from crime and ensures their safety on campus; this has to be done while also protecting students from the extreme consequences that even minor run-ins with the law can result in.
