Wednesday, December 01, 2010

What Duty to Protect?

The lawsuit's allegations against UMW include:
Negligent security measures.

Failure to properly monitor the parking deck, which the complaint says UMW officials should have known to be dangerous.

Failure to warn students of dangers in the parking deck.

Failure to install and operate security cameras.

Failure to train security guards, campus police officers and others on how to report, investigate and prevent sexual assaults.

Failure to properly investigate complaints of rape and provide adequate security.
I'm not persuaded.

Now if the lawsuit had focused on prohibiting the tools of defense, I might be more sympathetic.

Besides, even if the campus security alert system had been activated, why wouldn't people assume they were just being punked again? I assume everyone there is familiar with "The Boy Who Cried Wolf"...?

If it's any consolation, miss,  I'm pretty sure campus safety expert Colin Goddard would tell you you did the right thing.

[Via Mack H]

4 comments:

Defender said...

Advertise a free buffet, then be surprised when people show up to eat. And they're the ones teaching our kids.
To submit.

Mack said...

Seriously, I would really wonder what Colin or Andrew Goddard think of this development?

I assume they will keep silent unless forced to comment. Why? so as not to alienate their campus allies.

Ed said...

"No student shall throw or cause to be projected any object or substance that has potential for defacing or damaging University or private property or causing personal injury or disruption."

So much for the UMW baseball team.....

Fits said...

"...cause to be projected..." Aside form the horrid English, football, tennis, badminton, even soccer must go as well.