Beep. It’s 3 a.m. and the door’s been left a crack open. Again. Door alarms, access monitors and restricted BruinCards, while well-intended, characterize the inconvenient and inconsistent “safety” system used on the Hill.
Before using these dated measures in the new housing complex, UCLA must first examine how useful they actually are.
Sproul, Hedrick and Dykstra Halls, while the cheapest on-campus housing options, are like fortresses as far as security goes. Between 9 p.m. and 5 a.m., residents must swipe their BruinCards twice before using their room key, and guests who live off-campus must provide their IDs and fill out paperwork before they can get through.
Junji Toshima, the Housing and Hospitality access control manager, said that the population density of high-rise halls warrants the extra security.
However, plazas such as Rieber Vista and Hedrick Summit have about the same number of students. Safety measures, especially ones deemed necessary enough to inconvenience students, ought to be consistently implemented.
The monitoring system began in the late ’80s to protect residents with public community restrooms and open lounges, Toshima said, and monitors are supposed to verify the identify of residents by looking at their Bruin card photos. If we’re going to visually verify IDs in residential halls, why not do so in plazas and suites, too?
Alexa Cartwright, a second-year sociology student, said she was hindered from studying when a friend who lived off-campus tried to visit her but didn’t bring an ID.
“We couldn’t go up to my room, and we had to sit in the very front little place to study,” she said. “It was just like, “˜Okay, this isn’t really helpful.'”
On the other hand, residents of Saxon and Hitch suites, which are considerably more expensive than residential halls, have no physical barriers other than their own front door, and they have complete control over guests.
The freedom given to these residents is certainly nice, but given that they’re in a dimly lit and rather isolated part of the hill adjacent to Gayley, I’m surprised there isn’t more security.
I live in a plaza, which doesn’t have any pesky access monitors or require guest passes, but I still need to swipe my BruinCard once before reaching my room.
This would be fine, except that anyone who lives outside of my immediate vicinity ““ but still on the Hill ““ cannot enter my building with their BruinCard.
“It’s a problem, because sometimes you have study groups at night and you can’t get into your friend’s building,” said Amie Campos, a second-year history student.
“And we’re all students on campus anyway, so I don’t see why we can’t visit other housing areas.”
Restricted access provides little extra security anyway, since guests loiter outside until the next resident swipes them in.
Restrictive BruinCard access isn’t the only superfluous part of on-campus security. Another “feature” of on-campus security are alarmed front doors ““ found in every building and even at the De Neve dining hall ““ which create a huge ruckus if they are left open for more than a few seconds.
This might be slightly helpful in the unlikely event that a hapless burglar gets stuck in the doorway. In my building, it usually serves as an indicator that the door’s either been left open a hair or an excessively talkative person is chatting in the doorway.
The best security on campus probably comes from RAs who dutifully help secure buildings by reporting suspicious behavior during their nighttime patrols. As a consequence, nothing exceptional has happened in our building, except perhaps the maintenance of happier residents with greater autonomy.
Plazas and suites are known for having quieter, more hospitable environments, which just goes to show that the rambunctious residents of halls are often more disruptive than any outsiders.
Many of UCLA’s safety measures, though a noble effort, are unfair or annoying.
The university should either eliminate the monitoring system in the residence halls or expand it, get rid of those door alarms and replace them with security cameras, and liberate residents by granting them access to all buildings.
Money should be put into useful programs such as the Community Service Officer escort service (which could use longer hours), more RA patrolling, better lighting, and cameras and signs in vulnerable areas.
Funds could also go toward lockable desk drawers, which are currently only available in some buildings, or in in-room safes.
For now, if you live in a residence hall, just try not to get too frustrated. And if you live in Saxon ““ well, lock your door.
If you’re feeling insecure, then e-mail Nijhawan at anijhawan@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.