Unless you’re wandering around at two in the morning, what about the Loop do you have to fear? Everyone knows that St. Louis is a dangerous city (we’re number one! …in violent crime), but it’s easy to slip into a mindset of false security. I mean, robbery or rape can’t happen to me, can it?

Not that I’ve suddenly become wary of venturing down to Delmar, but there has been a disturbing trend of increased violence close to campus. There have been incidents of robbery, assault and even rape in the neighborhoods surrounding Wash. U. On April 9, a University City police officer was attacked near the Delmar Metro stop, drawing a large crowd. Police came to stop the attacker.

I was on the Loop when the altercation was going on. Traffic was backed up, and people were lining the streets.

To be honest, I was a little nervous. People were running out into the streets and one guy even jumped against my boyfriend’s car. This was not a riot, and I didn’t feel like I was in danger. But it was still a strange sight on a street that I tend to view as safe. A few of my friends commented later that they were a little scared by the incident.

The assumption that because we go to Wash. U. we are immune to crime makes very little sense and only encourages obliviousness. It’s always important to be aware of the goings-on in the surrounding area. At the same time, however, it’s important to remember not to use incidents like this as an excuse to stay on campus.

From what I’ve seen, the police presence has stepped up on the Loop. I saw two men arrested in front of Church’s Chicken on Thursday night and an undercover cop (I assume) parked in front of a restaurant. Don’t get me wrong; I love cops. But when I see about a dozen of them hanging out at the Shell station, I have to wonder whether or not I should be worried.

Wash. U., as a university that sells itself not only based on substance but also on image, would be ill served to play up that questionable, yet impressive safety statistic. The University does a decent job of keeping everyone safe, but reports from around campus tend to be more low-key.

“So what’s your point?” you might ask. I am not advocating taking a fearful attitude toward the Loop or St. Louis in general, just a sensible one. Fear is stifling in every sense of the word. Both St. Louis and Wash. U. students would benefit from more cross-engagement. More than a few Student Life editorials have made the same point, but I think it bears repeating

While we need to be aware of potential risks, staying in “the bubble” inhibits the experiences you could be having in St. Louis, cultural and otherwise—this means stepping even beyond the Loop and going downtown for events. Take the Metro somewhere—it’s free with a U-Pass.

On the evening of Jan. 13, six computers were stolen from the lab.

Although WUPD believes that Seigle Hall itself was open on Thursday evening, the computer lab was locked.

“They forced open the door to the computer lab, and then they removed the computers from the building,” WUPD Chief Don Strom said.

The computers were recovered within 12 hours of being reported missing Friday morning.

The police department found a computer that matched the description of the missing ones on Craigslist. WUPD contacted the sellers, pretending to have interest in purchasing the computer.

“They gave us enough identifying information about the computer that we were convinced it was one of the stolen computers, and so we agreed to meet them to purchase the computer from them,” Strom said.

As part of the investigation, WUPD followed the men back to where the other computers were, and all six were recovered.

“They showed up with the computer, and we arrested them,” Strom said.

Neither of the two men arrested for the burglary is affiliated with the University.

“Our investigation is still continuing, but as of right now, I think we have the people most directly involved,” Strom said. “It was a good piece of investigative work.”

The St. Louis Police Department is also participating in the ongoing investigation.

The publications that you mention in your Dec. 2 article (“St. Louis ranked again as most dangerous city”) and editorial (“St. Louis: Most dangerous, but still our city”) did indeed report St. Louis to have the nation’s highest crime rate, and they also failed to explain this rather odd finding.

So just how did St. Louis get to be so dangerous?

The short answer is that it didn’t. Like many American cities, St. Louis has inner city neighborhoods with high crime rates surrounded by areas with lower crime rates, making up a metropolitan area. The locations of the boundaries of city proper within these metro areas vary widely, reflecting accidents of local history. St. Louis just happens to have one of the country’s smallest city areas compared to its whole metro area. So the crime “rankings” aren’t really rankings at all; they are just the meaningless numbers that you get when you compare, for instance, crime in St. Louis’s inner city to crime in Memphis’s inner city and suburbs. Your article discussed crime around the campus, but actually the campus area was mostly excluded in these rankings because it is in University City and Clayton.

Why do publications use crime rates for cities instead of metro areas? They are easier to calculate and understand. Their aim is to sell copies, not to shed light on social phenomena. Metro areas may be messy to analyze; look at Miami, New York and the San Francisco Bay Area. But in most cases the standard metropolitan statistical areas are recognizable cities, and can be easily analyzed by anyone with a spreadsheet. Wikipedia and other sources provide the latest FBI crime stats along with city and metro populations. Dump the data into a spreadsheet and you will see the following:

With a population of 355,208, the city of St. Louis is no. 52 in the country. But the metro area population of 2,828,990 ranks no. 18. Do the math: St. Louis city only includes 13 percent of the metro population, located in the relatively high-crime inner core. Comparably sized cities include New Orleans, where the city includes 28 percent of the metro area; Raleigh, where the figure is 36 percent; Tulsa at 41 percent and Wichita with 60 percent. No wonder “St. Louis” city ranks high in crime.

Is the St. Louis metro area also the most crime-ridden in America? No, that would be Detroit. Maybe we are no. 2? No, that’s Pine Bluff, Arkansas. No. 3 maybe? Nope, Memphis. Where does St. Louis metro rank? In the 2010 metro crime rankings St. Louis is listed as “N/A,” but in 2009 it was no. 103.

That’s right, not even in the top 100.

Sincerely,

Glenn Davis Stone
Prof. of Anthropology and Environmental Studies

St. Louis recently reclaimed its spot as the most dangerous city in the United States, according to CQ press. Every year, the discussion comes down to one essential question: Can crime rankings truly capture a representative portrait of a city?

We returned from Thanksgiving Break to find tours of prospective students crossing our campus—students whose parents will likely be concerned upon haring St. Louis’ ranking. Our own families ask us if we feel safe, and given this fall’s influx of crime-related emails from the Washington University Police Department, this strikes us a valid question.

Our take

Bordering America’s purported “most dangerous city,” Washington University’s campus is often characterized as a “bubble.” Venturing into the city becomes increasingly rare every year, especially for freshmen and sophomores, and most students choose social activities that are either on or immediately off campus.

While we are grateful for all that our campus has to offer, we also recognize the often-overlooked opportunities that can be found around St. Louis. We fear that these crime rankings could result in strengthening the Wash. U. bubble and further separating our community from those right next door.

Moving forward

Personal safety is of the utmost importance, and the Washington University Police Department reminds students to always be aware of their surroundings and walk with friends in well-lit areas.

We believe that not only are there safe ways for students to venture into the city, but also that this willingness to explore could have positive effects for St. Louis as a whole.

Words like “safe” and “dangerous” are to some extent a matter of perception, and calling a city “dangerous” can ultimately make it more so. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, increased pedestrian traffic usually helps prevent street crime as witnesses deter potential robberies or assaults. If students are afraid to use the Metro or walk down Delmar, these areas could potentially become even more dangerous than they are now.

In a recent TIME Magazine article about improving Detroit, urban historian Kenneth T. Jackson suggested outdoor dining as a simple first step towards reducing crime. In order to make a city safe, he said, citizens must first feel safe on the streets. But initiatives like these require that pedestrians be willing to venture out in the first place.

We don’t claim to have all the answers, but we do know that any city is, to some degree, dangerous. St. Louis has a pretty nasty reputation, but it is also a unique and vibrant city. To miss out on the cultural opportunities St. Louis presents because of crime rankings would be to extinguish our potential for growth and discovery.

St. Louis also stands to benefit from Wash. U., and engaging in service projects in the St. Louis community—projects such as Books & Basketball, Big Brothers Big Sisters and Out of the Blue—stands to benefit the communities that surround us.

We encourage students to take the crime rankings seriously, but at the same time, to safely explore—and shape—the city we all call home.

A CQ Press report from Nov. 22 named the city America’s most dangerous for the second time in five years.

The report offers the latest grim assessment of safety in the areas around the University. It comes months after The Daily Beast ranked the University as the nation’s 13th most dangerous campus. And St. Louis was ranked America’s most dangerous city in 2006 by Morgan-Quitno, which was acquired by CQ Press in 2007. Both rankings have come under fire, with some critics saying their methodologies are biased.

Many students say that they feel safe around the Danforth Campus, which is located partially in the city but mostly in neighboring St. Louis County. But some said the CQ report may discourage prospective students from applying to a university in a city they perceive as dangerous.

“I feel like parents are going to be more concerned than students are,” freshman Brendan Daly said. “I know a prospective student whose parents are discouraging her from applying because of the recent ranking of St. Louis.”

The report is based on statistics on murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary and motor vehicle theft reported to the FBI for all U.S. cities with more than 75,000 residents. St. Louis was ranked second most dangerous in 2009 and 2007 and fourth most dangerous in 2008.

University spokesman Steve Givens called the rankings flawed, saying in a statement Tuesday that the administration puts no stock in them.

“As our students know, the University has worked very hard over the past several years to make our campus and the neighborhoods surrounding it as safe as possible,” Givens added. “We will continue those efforts with the utmost diligence.”

The Daily Beast took heat for its campus safety rankings. In September, the University called the rankings misleading because they included crimes around the Medical Campus. The Daily Beast has defended its report, saying that its methodology was consistent across schools.

Kara Bowlin, a spokeswoman for St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay, responded to the CQ report by telling CBS News that city crime has fallen each year since 2007 and by 7 percent so far in 2010.

The city criticized past years’ rankings for drawing on crime figures only in the city instead of in the whole region. Morgan-Quitno and CQ have defended its rankings throughout the years.

Some students said that they see St. Louis as dangerous but feel safe on campus and that the new rankings don’t make them worry more. Some became more cautious near campus after a spate of muggings this fall, however.

“Although St. Louis itself may be dangerous, I do not feel particularly unsafe on campus and in the surrounding area,” junior Corey Donahue said. “As long as I am careful of when and where I’m walking, I don’t feel in danger.”

Freshman Megan Conn said that any city comes with the risk of crime. She added that the campus is in a safer part of the area. “I don’t think students at Wash. U. are in significantly more danger than those at similar universities in Chicago, New York or Boston.”

With additional reporting by Puneet Kollipara.

Burglaries fell sharply on campus but almost doubled off-campus between 2008 to 2009, according to new statistics on crime at Washington University.

On-campus burglaries dropped from 30 in 2008 to seven in 2009. While this difference appears drastic, it is in large part due to a single incident, when Hitzeman and Hurd residential halls were burglarized over winter break in 2007 and reports were filed in January 2008.

The statistics also show a significant increase in non-campus property burglaries in 2009. A total of 28 burglaries occurred on non-campus properties that year, with 16 the year before.

Campus crime statistics from across the nation for 2009 were released Oct. 1 and are now available on the U.S. Department of Education website.

The statistics, whose public release is mandated by the Clery Act of 1991, show arrests and criminal offenses at the University over a three-year period.

The statistics include figures for murder, sex offenses, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, vehicle theft and arson. The report also includes arrests and referrals for drugs, alcohol and weapons violations.

Most of the reported crimes for Washington University were property-related, with a very low incidence of interpersonal crime.

Increases in off-campus crime have contributed to heightened concern about security on campus, especially in comparative ratings with other universities, such as the one recently issued by the online publication The Daily Beast, in which Wash. U. was ranked the nation’s 13th most dangerous campus.

Non-campus property includes the West Campus, North Campus, South Campus, about 165 apartment buildings owned by Quadrangle Housing and the Residential Life (ResLife) apartments, as well as some University-owned commercial establishments.

The Washington University Police Department has expanded security measures in response to the rising concern about campus safety, adding closed-circuit television surveillance to investigate on-campus incidents and monitor unwelcome visitors from the outside.

“I feel like once you leave the Wash. U. campus and step outside its borders, it gets dramatically less controlled and less safe,” sophomore Joanne Li said. “Also the fact that Wash. U.’s campus is an open campus makes me feel like I always have to be on the lookout and just be smart.”

Chief of Police Don Strom warned that the statistics are complex and can be misleading for comparison with other schools. Wash. U. statistics include numerous off-campus properties, but other campuses may not have any such properties to include.

There were no weapons violations reported for any of the three years covered in the statistics. The number of drug- and alcohol-related arrests ranged from one to five; they do not show any significant increase over the three years.

There is, however, an upward trend in the number of referrals for alcohol violations, which rose from less than 200 referrals in 2007 to more than 300 in both of the following two years. In the case of a referral, the incident is reported to the police but handled outside the police department, usually by a mandated reporter such as a residential adviser, residential college director or athletic coach. This increase indicates a tightening of ResLife alcohol policies in recent years.

The number of reported sexual offenses on campus remained low, declining from seven in 2008 to five in 2009. Strom finds this figure to be suspect.

“Five or seven is way too many, but I think it under represents the problem,” Strom said. “That’s what our dialogue needs to be about. I’m glad to see that the University now has a sexual assault [prevention] coordinator who can take that issue head-on.”

Overall, the crime statistics show a positive trend in the direction of a safer campus community over the past three years. Strom also indicated that the figures for 2010 have maintained that trend thus far.

“We feel like we have a pretty safe campus,” Strom said. “I think most people feel that way. But we also talk about that ‘Wash. U. bubble,’ and that doesn’t mean we can let our guard down. We live in an urban area, and we’re an open campus. We have to take those steps that make sense to protect our property, to protect ourselves and to use the services that are available.”

The victim was walking on Kingsbury alone at approximately 7:20 p.m. when three people walking in the opposite direction to the victim disrupted the victim’s walk. One suspect hit him and another suspect took his backpack. The three perpetrators, whom the victim was unable to describe to the police, then fled without injuring the victim.

This robbery adds another crime to this semester’s list: Two students were robbed at the corner of Big Bend and Lindell boulevards earlier this month.

In a crime advisory sent out to the student body on Thursday, Washington University Police Department urged students to walk in groups and in well-lit areas. According to WUPD, students being robbed should give the thief what he or she wants and call the police immediately. WUPD encourages students to report suspicious activities and people, both related to this crime and in all cases, to the police by dialing 911.

Here at Student Life, we are not shocked, but puzzled. The methodology with which The Daily Beast approached these rankings is inherently flawed, and thus we feel that our position in these rankings is invalid, and not an accurate representation of campus safety or of the opinions of our student body.

The ranking methodology uses data collected from 2006-2008, from sources including the U.S. Department of Education, the FBI, the Secret Service and information disclosed in accordance with the Clery Act. According to The Daily Beast, the data were collected in nine different categories, including burglary, car theft, assaults, robberies, arson, non-forcible rapes, forcible rapes, negligent homicides and murders. Each type of crime is weighted by severity. The rankings also combine data collected from all campuses that belong to the universities. In our case, that means that data from the Danforth Campus, North Campus, West Campus and the Medical Campus are all factored into The Daily Beast’s interpretation of our campus safety.

One could see where this could lead to some issues. Included in our crime statistics was a 2008 murder at Children’s Hospital, which is considered to be part of the Medical Campus. Not only was the murder the result of a domestic dispute, but it is not at all related to the safety of the undergraduate student body. With murders weighted 40 times more than burglaries, the rankings simply represent a distorted look at our campus’s crime statistics. They also fail to distinguish between crimes committed on campus and crimes in the surrounding neighborhoods, skewing the crime statistics even further.

The Daily Beast has unfairly placed us among the most dangerous schools in the country. Not only is it an injustice to Wash. U., but it is also unfair to the other institutions that are inaccurately represented in the security rankings. The Daily Beast simply did not conduct due diligence in devising its methodology. Given the cursory analysis of the data collected, it seems the online news source’s intention was simply to garner unique Web page visits.

Our campus and the surrounding neighborhoods in which students live are diligently patrolled by Washington University police and by campus security. With services like Campus2Home and personal escorts, Wash. U. has ample security offerings for its students. Given that our campuses are located in urban areas, some more dangerous than others, crime is inevitable. It is a reality that we as students readily accepted when we decided to attend this institution. What we do not accept is a skewed representation of our campus’ safety.

The Washington University Police Department is currently investigating the circumstances surrounding McMillon’s enrollment and the issuance of his ID card and could not be reached for comment on the issue. We are troubled, however, by the routine practice of issuing ID cards to University College students who have not yet registered for classes. We believe that this case highlights the potential danger in doing so.

A Wash. U. ID card is a ticket to enter our community. It allows its holders late-night access to protected spaces on campus, such as Whispers. It conveys a message of security to other members of our community. How many of us would refuse to hold the door to a dorm on the South 40 to someone who flashed their ID card, even if we never verified that it was capable of swiping into buildings on the 40?

Wash. U. police officers take student status into account when evaluating potentially suspicious individuals on campus and often use ID cards as verification. If student ID cards end up in the wrong hands, this puts the entire student body—and the safety of the University as a whole—in jeopardy.

McMillon had a long criminal history, including charges of first-degree burglary and theft. While it is difficult to evaluate potential steps toward making the process of ID card issuance more secure, the University should consider making background checks on its applicants. And requiring potential students to pay tuition before receiving an ID card would go a long way toward deterring individuals who might seek access for criminal purposes.

Hindsight is 20/20, and McMillon’s indiscretions demonstrate a hole in our campus security. Going forward, we urge the University to consider revising its student ID policy.

Erin Mitchell | Student Life

We were only a week into class when two students were mugged at gunpoint, practically on campus. The police report sent around to the Wash. U. community says the incident occurred on Big Bend Blvd. near Lindell—roughly a one-minute walk from Seigle Hall and the business school and perhaps two minutes on foot from the South 40. This incident brings up the question that worries freshman parents as their students embark on their collegiate journey and the rest of the parent population as everyone returns once more for a year of school. Are we safe at Washington University?

The answer? No, we’re not safe, at least not as safe as we could be. A good starting point analyzing why is the school’s own policy, which states in part that: “The possession, storage, or use of firearms, pellet/bb/airsoft guns, knives, ammunition, or other dangerous weapons is prohibited on all University property. Students and visitors are strictly prohibited from carrying concealed weapons on University property…” This is just too vague.

This policy was read by RAs all around campus during year-beginning meetings. When asked to clarify exactly what a “dangerous weapon” is, some RAs were unclear about specifics, giving only vague descriptions that weapons are things you could use to harm others. This could, in theory, be understood by someone trained in martial arts to include the mechanical pencils handed out to 40-dwellers on the first day of class—anything can be a weapon.

To drive home the point, it should be noted that a call to the campus police and a very specific question, “Are we allowed to carry mace or pepper spray on campus to protect ourselves in light of the recent crime alert?” was met with an uncertain answer from the department representative, who advised asking around. Not just the residential staff, but also the campus police are not entirely clear about the scope of the policy.

Additionally, the university’s offerings for helping students to protect themselves are lackluster. The “In Defense of SELF” program is a good start but only scratches the surface by teaching students, in a one-hour session, strategies for protecting themselves. These include “the importance of using your voice, the best ways to protect yourself by recognizing danger signs and taking defensive action prior to a physical attack, [and] additional resources that are available to you.” These are important principles in self-defense, but classes do not cover most hand-to-hand combat techniques should de-escalation tactics fail.

Also, the whistle program that provides free, extremely loud whistles to students seems ineffectual; nobody has the opportunity to blow a whistle if there is a gun in their face, and if people blow the thing every time someone is nearby to scare the assumed predator away, they’re just going to Pavlovianly train others to ignore the signal.

Since the university will never yield on its illogical anti-gun policy (if some unhinged individual wants to kill lots of people, where better to do it than a place that doesn’t allow its law-abiding residents to return fire), it should at least clarify its policies on less lethal yet equally effective tools. The Kimber JPX is a high-velocity, subject-specific chemical pistol packed into a small instrument that discharges at 270 mph, putting an end to any confrontation up to two-dozen feet away and, hopefully, before it can escalate. However it is L-shaped and mildly resembles a gun. Couple that with an unclear stance on chemical repellants, and that idea is toast. Similarly, Tasers are not covered in the weapons policy.

The school needs to step up to the plate and take on the crime that inevitably hits very close to Washington University’s campus. It would be to everybody’s benefit if the university offers an intensive defensive combat class and clarifies its policies regarding less-than-lethal arms.