Home » Opinion » Busting up break–ins

Busting up break–ins

With Reading Week disappearing into memory almost as fast as those Caribbean tans, it pays to reflect on one of the major issues facing Western students whenever a suitably long vacation break rolls around.

It’s an issue that’s reared its head in virtually every other University Students’ Council presidential election in the past: a break–in prevention program covering residential areas with high student population densities.

But with all the bluster coming from on high about such an issue, we’ve never seen anything trickle down to the individual student. Why the hell not?

It makes sense, after all. Although our local police should devote themselves to enforcing law, there’s something to be said for a little crime prevention.

But according to a litany of former USC presidents, the overwhelming response from London Police Services has been shooting down the thought of any such program. That goes for former police chief Murray Faulkner as well as current chief Brad Duncan.

Sure, I can see things from the police’s viewpoint. Students aren’t taxpayers — in fact they’re more often than not a source of annoyance. I also think budgetary reasons are also bunk, but that’s mainly because I think the city’s police budget is astronomically high as is.

There are likely other issues. And for full disclosure, I’m writing this having not contacted the LPS for a full comment on their reasoning why they wouldn’t get behind such a program.

With that being said, I’m hard–pressed to think of how any arguments against such a program outweigh the benefits.

Every year a large portion of Western students head back to their respective homes for the holidays, turning student neighbourhoods into ghost towns. And even though London’s population is still large enough to push be just shy of Canada’s top–10, it’s still a university town. This city’s clock operates around students and everyone knows when students are going to be around — and when they’re not.

Obviously this creates a situation where various unsavoury types have unfettered access to a large concentration of unoccupied homes — pure catnip for cat burglars.

If there were a similar situation for London residents, I would hope the police would find it in themselves to ensure the citizenry is receiving adequate protection from crime. But in this situation there seems to be a reluctance to act, specifically because those affected are so clearly not London residents.

Over the years the relationship between town and gown has been understandably tumultuous. As a Londoner born and raised in an area with a 50/50 split of student and traditional housing it’s very easy to become annoyed with overly exuberant students caterwauling their way home from Richmond Row three nights a week.

But the knife cuts both ways — for every jackass student, there’s another student who is alienated from London by the undercurrent of anti–student feelings most of the city seems to possess. When residents decide it’s OK to put a sign on their front lawn telling students to “Go Home” then something has clearly gotten out of hand.

Which is why such a program might finally heal some of the wounds on the town and gown relationships. Students might finally realize the city sees them as more than a temporary cash cow to be milked dry, and as a result start to moderate their behaviour and be more respectful of neighbours.

But unfortunately what it all comes down to is a lack of power on the part of the student body. Yes, the USC can lobby away to its little heart’s content if they don’t get their way, but there really isn’t a whole lot they can offer the police in exchange for their assistance on such a program. A USC member knocking door–to–door isn’t going to persuade individual houses of students to party in a respectful manner, and that’s the only thing London’s police would really want out of the student body.

Follow the Gazette on Facebook and Twitter.