Night shuttle overlooked again
by Dan O'Brien
March 22, 2004
On a recent Saturday night, after being wicked awesome and kicking ass at beirut and Super Mario Bros. 3, I left my friend's Puffton Village apartment at 1:25 a.m., only to realize that I had missed the last PVTA bus back to campus. I stood at the bus stop for a few agonizing minutes, contemplating my fate. I decided to take my inconvenience in stride and make an adventure out of my mile-and-a-half walk back to my dorm.
"What new and exciting discoveries can I make in the mysterious town of Amherst?" I thought.
(All I found was a small stream that runs underneath N. Pleasant St.)
Anyone who has ever walked up N. Pleasant St. on a Friday or Saturday night knows how many students rely on public transportation to take them to the Puffton Village/Hobart Lane area. Yet, with all the proposed changes the University of Massachusetts administration would like to make its alcohol policy, the idea of a free-of-charge late night shuttle for students, also referred to as the "drunk bus" idea, has not been a topic of debate. Neither has extending the hours for PVTA bus routes.
Right now, too many students are faced with looking uncool by leaving a friend's apartment or a party by 1 a.m. just because they have to catch the last bus out of Puffton by 1:20 a.m. A late-night shuttle would ensure these students would arrive home without having to walk for two miles.
Aside from walking that far late at night just plain sucks, the primary reason this shuttle should exist is in the name of safety. Students should not be attacked or raped simply because they missed the bus. Fortunately, crimes like these have not been happening too often around Amherst, but they have happened in the not-so-distant past.
The shuttle should be in place to help individuals who are extremely intoxicated and might need hospitalization. Too often, people drink excessively and consequently, suffer alcohol poisoning. What if the person who is extremely intoxicated misses the bus? If there were a late night shuttle, the driver could call for medical attention.
There are many controversial recommendations being made by the UMass Alcohol Task Force to the University's alcohol policy. Some of these changes include sending letters home to parents of students who have been found in violation of the policy, having faculty members speak to fraternities and sororities about the dangers of alcohol use, billing dorm residents for vandalism done to their buildings, implementing a new "professional" security task force (which may include searching students' bags,) and restructuring living areas, which would separate freshmen students and students over 21 years old from the rest of the campus.
There are many flaws with these recommendations. First, sending a letter home to parents should be considered a civil rights violation. The act of a college or university sending a letter home to parents of a student who faced disciplinary action was illegal from 1976 until 1997, when an amendment was made to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. If a student is legally an adult, then any consequences should be subject to him/her. Isn't the point of college to try to get students ready for the real world?
Second, the faculty members speaking to frats and sororities on the dangers of drinking seems unnecessary because members of frats and sororities already have to attend alcohol education events.
Third, billing dorm residents for damage caused to their building seems unfair, but there probably is not any real fair way to pay for the damage unless the vandals are caught. It seems dumb, but students are already paying for it through their student fees. A fair way to implement community billing would be to decrease student fees that are already used to make repairs to vandalism damage. Either way, students are already paying.
Forth, a the professional security task force has real benefits and downfalls. It's probably a good idea to have real security, and not a five-foot one-inch, 100 pound girl working the security desk, especially in the wake of the rapes in the dorms last year. However, I think students, (the vast majority of whom are older than 18) should have the right to make their own decisions. Searching a student's bag in his own building seems like a civil rights violation.
Finally, the restructuring of campus living areas leads to many pros and cons. It might lead to making it easier for freshmen to meet other students and for students over 21 to drink. However, it could also lead to more isolationism on campus.
Some of the ideas that the administration might implement seem to only be good for curving the activities of problem drinkers, while punishing those who are just looking to responsibly enjoy a couple of brews with friends. If the University is committed to stopping problem drinkers, I don't understand how sending a letter home to Johnny's parents is going to get him to stop drinking. All of the Task Force recommendations are certainly not going to help bring Johnny to the hospital when he is passed out on the pavement of Hobart Lane because he has alcohol poisoning.
I applaud the Alcohol Task Force for trying to improve the quality of life on campus and for publicly discussing their ideas, leaving them open for debate. However, I do believe that walking alone at night does not leave many students feeling safe. A late night shuttle is a practical solution to a problem that scores of students have to deal with every weekend.
Dan O'Brien is a Collegian columnist.
BACK TO COLLEGIAN OPINION COLUMNS
BACK TO MAIN PAGE