Resistance to authority is a natural behavior for college students. We view ourselves as powerless; subject to the whim of every bastion of campus hierarchy, from administration and faculty to campus security. As a response to this powerlessness, we tend to get angry, complain and resist.

Recent grumblings have been aimed at the campus security office. Students say they believe the office’s primary goal seems to be an elimination of fun at every possible turn. What’s wrong with a little drunken revelry once in awhile; it’s college, right?

Open security logs of late have shown a number of parties broken up, and a few public intoxication citations handed out. Meanwhile, a theme house and a handful of cars have been broken into. The thiefs were not caught.

Theft is not a new problem to this or any campus. However the nature of these most recent incidences should hit a little closer to home with students. Computer hardware stolen from Carver is one thing; someone breaking into a theme house is quite another.

To pin the blame for an unlocked door on campus security is not an acceptable answer. Students need to be more vigilant and less naive about the possibility of a break-in. The assumption that crime doesn’t happen in “sleepy little Indianola” is a thief’s best ally.

However, Director of Campus Security Chris Frerichs’ encouraging students to promptly report safety risks and incidences does little to actually prevent crime.

Nothing discourages a thief more than an increased chance of getting caught. The college needs to take a look at its priorities in keeping actual crime down on campus. More attention paid to actual security concerns is a starting point. Campus security should delegate more staff to keeping an eye out for actual threats to public safety, and less to the diffusing of such threatening social interaction as a loud party.

Simpson should be willing to spend money on a larger security staff to bust more criminals and fewer parties. Our security is worth as much.