Jennifer Kearney Illustrator

The administration's decision to make safety sessions offered at orientation voluntary brings into question the sincerity of the UA's claim that student safety is a top priority.

After failing to renew a program grant, these informative sessions, which can be seen as an extension of student safety, were for the first time made voluntary. As a result, attendance dropped by 85 percent.

Further consequences of this decision are potentially dangerous, and will likely put the well-being of the student body at risk. Even while the meetings were mandatory, false impressions floated around campus. Just look at the notorious "rape whistles" students know so little about.

Just days before school began, the Tucson Police Department and the University of Arizona Police Department handed out blue plastic whistles to students near the UA as part of a crime prevention program.

TPD Sgt. Ron Zimmerling said, "The whistles were designed to help potential victims draw attention to themselves and to ward off attackers."

Are you kidding me? I can see it now. Drunk girl leaves party. SafeRide refuses to take her home because of intoxication. Her friend left with some "hot" guy. She stands alone on the corner. Off in the distance she sees a campus blue light. "Wow, I feel sssafe," she slurs to herself.

Suddenly, she hears footsteps approaching. She whirls around. As her eyes focus, she notices a large figure creeping towards her with arms extended. She whirls again and dashes toward the blue beacon 100 yards away. As she sprints, she digs through her purse, desperately attempting to find the whistle to save her life.

Right, like that would ever happen. Would it ever occur to her that screaming would be more effective than searching frantically for a lost whistle? Of course - any rational person would scream, which brings into question the entire efficacy of the rape whistle.

But what is more, not only is this scenario in itself implausible, but sexual assault, or assault in general, doesn't usually occur in this fashion, where ruthless attacker chases poor, defenseless girl. Instead, according to UAPD spokesman Sgt. Eugene Mejia, the vast majority of assaults, especially sexual assaults, are committed by friends, acquaintances, or people we trust.

If this is all true, then what's with the whistles?

Scott Patterson columist

According to Mejia, the whistle program's goal is not to stop an attack while in progress, but to prevent it from occurring. The whistles themselves are symbols.

They are to remind a person to stay alert and to be aware of one's surroundings. They symbolize the responsibility one has to call the police, and serve as reminders of what one should do to be safe today.

Students, however, missed this message.

Instead, they mistakenly believe the only threat they face is some crazy guy on the street. In all honesty, all this talk about the threat of assault is exaggerated.

According to UAPD statistics, from 2001 to 2004 the number of sexual assaults each year was four, five, six and two, respectively, while theft numbers for those years were 786, 717, 717 and 688, respectively. While the victims who don't report attacks may skew these numbers, the number that goes unreported couldn't possibly significantly alter this difference.

Students, however, don't realize this, and fret more about assault. As a result, they spend less time worrying about common sense things like locking doors and slipping CDs under car seats, which could, according to Mejia, "reduce theft by up to 50 percent." This is where orientation's safety meetings come into play.

In theory, the aforementioned misconceptions should be dispelled at these meetings. Students should learn that "the most common crimes on campus are theft and burglary" (direct quote from session's PowerPoint slide). The above statistics also came from that presentation.

Misconceptions, nevertheless, persist, and that's when 93 percent of incoming freshmen were exposed to the above information at their mandatory meetings. This year, however, a mere 7 percent attended the meeting. You can imagine what kind of gross misconceptions will develop if this policy remains unchanged.

While it is extremely difficult to measure the amount of crime prevented (after all, you cannot measure something that did not take place), there is no doubt that something is better than nothing. And as long as students have the option to choose "nothing," they will, and misconceptions will grow. Consequently, crime will rise right along with them.

Thus, in order prevent this, we must nip the problem in the bud: Orientation administrators must push to reinstate the mandatory safety presentation.

Scott Patterson is an international studies senior. He can be reached at letters@wildcat.arizona.edu.