Brazen thefts, part 2

     As you know, recently, we reported some thievery in Building A200 at Irvine Valley College involving two or three rooms, including the mailroom and an office (Brazen thefts at Irvine Valley College). We reported that “administration” hasn’t seen fit to alert faculty to these incidents and, further, that they have tended to suggest that A200 is in some sense beyond making secure, a sentiment that yielded some consternation or at least annoyance.
     That was on Friday. Since then, we haven’t heard about thefts anywhere else on campus. As far as I know, no new thefts have been reported.
     Evidently, campus police are puzzled by the burglaries: in the case of the room (rooms?) that were burgled, there is little or no evidence of a window entry (books and things that would have stood in the way of someone’s entering via the window were not disturbed), suggesting entry through the door. At least one campus cop I spoke with wonders if the burglar or burglars walked into the building, walked through the open (or unlocked) door, and simply took the computer and books, perhaps during business hours.
     Clearly, administration (and/or the campus police department) were displeased by expressions of displeasure with the handling of these incidents. One apparent result is an effort, today, by campus police to determine the desirability of a meeting with denizens of A200 over this matter. (I suggested that that might be a good idea.) It appears that a meeting (between campus policy and denizens) will be scheduled for next week.
     One policeman I spoke with seemed to suggest that some faculty are apparently less than conscientious about locking their windows, and that perhaps faculty should take greater care. Beyond that, he said, it is not easy to increase security.
     One possibility is the installation of security cameras—an idea you’ll recall was promoted at board meetings in the past—but that measure raises issues of privacy that might be difficult to overcome.
     I opined that I would be willing to give up some privacy if a camera or two would be an effective deterrent. Not sure how others feel about that.
     Mr. cop also noted that, especially if he is correct in his suspicion that the thefts occurred during business hours, the practice of leaving unlocked the two end-of-hallway doors (to the exterior) is problematic. They are left open, of course, as a convenience, but that also creates a security issue.
     Finally, I should mention that Mr. cop wanted to emphasize that there is no reason to suppose that these burglaries constitute a danger that anyone could get hurt. These thieves, he said, simply want to steal things to make money. There is no reason to suppose that they mean to harm anyone.
     The worry some have expressed, of course, is that a thief caught in flagrante delicto might “get violent” in efforts to flee the scene.
     Well, such issues will no doubt come up in the meeting next week.