top of page

The Gatepost Editorial: Safety & security 

By The Gatepost Editorial Board

In the March 1 issue of The Gatepost, News Editors Adam Harrison and Kaitlin Carman reported on instances of vandalism in Corinne Hall Towers and Larned Hall.

Perpetrators of any building damage have not been publicly identified as of press time, March 8, which leaves residents of both Towers and Larned to bear the cost of repairs at the end of the academic year. Hundreds of students will not have all or part of their $100 room deposit returned if the culprits are not identified.

The vandalism included broken exit signs and damaged laundry room and elevator doors. 

While vandalism has not increased on campus since last year, it remains a frustrating issue for resident students, who all ask one question: “Why do I have to pay for this?”

And is it fair that all students in a building have to pay for the destructive impulses of a few?

The Gatepost Editorial Board believes all students in a residence hall should not have to pay for damages in their building.

Damaging a student's own, individual dorm room is another case - that should come out of that resident’s deposit.

But not damage to public spaces everyone uses. It raises the question of security on campus and in residential buildings.

Is it sufficient? Is it working? If it were, wouldn't the student or students be found and charged for the damages? 

If the security cameras are not working, then FSU has a much larger problem regarding student safety. 

Vandalism is one concern - but the much larger issue at stake is the safety of all students if these security devices are not operable. 

Students are promised a certain degree of safety on campus, and if the cameras in resident halls are not working, that strips away a layer of security from the resident students.  


As of March 8, we do not even know if the vandals are Framingham State students. 

If the resident hall security cameras that monitor hallways and elevators are not fully operational or the images are low quality, students should be aware of this.

If they are working, why aren't they being used to identify vandals?

If all students were not liable for paying for the damages of a few, and the cost came out of the  University’s budget,  the camera quality might be better.

When a student joins the Framingham State campus, they and their families are promised a level of safety and security while living here.

The University should be transparent about what is and is not operable as students are paying to be here. If there is a level of respect students should maintain while living here, there should be a level of transparency from the administrators of the place they live.

While students at Framingham State obviously have the responsibility to behave themselves, Framingham State obviously has the responsibility to keep them safe with a working security camera system.

There are also spaces in residence halls where additional cameras should be placed.

This would include but is not limited to high-risk areas such as the residence hall stairwells.

This would not only help students feel safer, but it would also hold those who make the wrong decisions accountable. 

Operational high-quality cameras would also monitor trash and item buildup that often goes unnoticed in these unseen locations. 

Operational high-quality cameras are not an unrealistic ask.

This should be the bare minimum, the first line of defense for families and students who have faith in the promise that Framingham State is a safe environment. 

And if this is the case - if the cameras are producing high-quality images - what should Framingham State be doing better to find the perpetrators of the vandalism?

Recent Posts

See All


Os comentários foram desativados.
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
bottom of page