To the editor:

I reluctantly feel that DPS should carry guns. I am reluctant because, from what I remember, most of the crimes committed in Ames were underage drinking, soft-core drug use and domestic incidences. They are mostly non-violent crimes except for the occasional brawl.

However, as a police officer for the New York City Police Department, I understand the need for a law enforcement officer to have all the necessary equipment to carry out his or her duties. It only takes that one time for a DPS officer’s weapon to be unavailable for tragedy to occur.

However, I have some points to remember if DPS are allowed to carry guns.

First, if a police officer is involved in an altercation while performing their duty, that gun is one more thing the perpetrator can try and grab and use it on the officer or another innocent bystander.

Second, if the police officer has to use that gun, ISU better be ready to indemnify that officer because that victim’s family will be sure to sue that officer as well as ISU for as much money as they can get.

Third, if the officers are allowed to carry their weapons off duty and get involved in an incident, will ISU be willing to indemnify them? What most people don’t realize, thanks to cop shows, is the most important equipment a police officer has on his or her belt is a radio or whatever means of communication that officer has to get backup. Last I checked, DPS had portable radios.

All the training in the world doesn’t remove the fact that DPS officers are human beings. They are not infallible. Think about these things when deciding if DPS should get guns or not.

---

Kenneth Casey

Alumnus

New York