Sfu Security: Saviour Or Culprit Of Common Interest?
For as long as the campus has been established, it has been known for its security personal. The Sfu surrey campus especially has two security guards patrolling the campus 24*7 in order to ensure the safety and well being of the students, staff and general public. It is generally viewed that in case of any issue of theft it’s the guard’s responsibility to punish the accused instantly, which is not true. There have been incidents around the campus that have drawn light towards the responsibility of the security personal on duty around any scene of crime.
Now, the question is that if the security is so perfect in its job then why the people would still grumble about its duty? I have observed over my time at Sfu, that, the perception of the security guards is totally different among the general public. We at the university sit relaxed and comfortable in our study rooms or learning centres only because we are assured that the security guards would keep a watchful eye for us. This would have been entirely different scenario if each student was given his/her personal responsibility. Then, they would not have been able to blame the guards for their safety. Now, the irony of this situation is that sometimes the students consider the fire alarms as jokes and laugh over them. This is entirely anti to the safety procedures. Even though, most of the times the alarms are created by some false reason of fire in the mall but still they are there to ensure the wellbeing of students. They should be taken a bit more seriously than they are now as that could be a cause of unforeseen disaster in the near future.
Interestingly, the security never aims to hurt the general public. Much, opposed to the general view of security as armed or trained they are totally in the cover of safety procedures. The maximum they can do is asking the person in crime to stop doing what he is doing and if that doesn’t help they can call the police. As I talked to some of the guards I realized that students around the campus have a misguided notion that security is there to stop the violence going around. Rather, the security only monitors the various odd behaviours and reports them to respective authorities. Oftentimes, by acting in the common interest of the Sfu students the security are perceived as weak or unarmed. Last but not the least, I think we should all accept that without the constant scrutiny of the security on us we might live troublesome lives.