Position Statements

Position Statements Adopted in 2008

Lockdowns vs. Containment (Shelter). May 2008

Concealed Weapon Carry Proposals. March 2008

The Board of Directors, in the fall of 1990, endorsed nineteen position statements on the management of campus law enforcement. These statements are noted below and may be referred to if you are asked for IACLEA’s official position on any of the topics covered.
1.	Law Enforcement on Campus — Every person has the right to access the criminal justice system to seek redress of personal wrongs. Whether law enforcement is a proprietary function of the campus or the public services offered through the state/province or municipality, citizen access to the criminal justice system is to be ensured.   Campus law enforcement should have law enforcement officers with sufficient expertise to investigate allegations of criminal wrongdoing, make arrests and referrals to the local criminal justice system as appropriate.
2.	Enabling Legislation — Each state or province should provide legislation permitting the operation of a campus law enforcement agency and establishing standards for the operation of such departments.
3.	Administration Oversight — The campus law enforcement agency should report to the central administration of the institution with clear and precise reporting lines. There should be no confusion as to whom the campus law enforcement agency is responsible. This office should have broad campus responsibilities and should not have a specific campus constituency such as a specific service or area of advocacy. All members of the community should be made aware of this reporting channel.
4.	Openness of Operation — Campus law enforcement operations in a free society must not be shrouded in secrecy. There should be public disclosure of policy and an openness on matters of public interest.
5.	Crime Statistics and Campus Law Enforcement Records — Campus law enforcement should maintain a record of criminal activity occurring within their jurisdiction. The community should be made aware of criminal incidents occurring so that each member of the community may take those precautions, as appropriate for his/her function in the community, to avoid becoming a crime victim.     Statistical information developed from campus law enforcement records and crime reports should be made available to members of the community. Through the analysis of the statistical information, other departments, agencies and groups within the community may develop programs to enhance the safety of the community and its members. The campus law enforcement agency should also use these records to evaluate the needs of the community in developing proactive crime prevention programs and law enforcement intervention programs.
6.	Crime — Crime is a community problem, not a problem for law enforcement alone. Campus law enforcement officers can be given the responsibility of suppressing crime and solving crime once it has occurred, but they can neither prevent every crime from happening nor solve every crime that occurs. Campus law enforcement requires the active cooperation, assistance, and support of the community which it serves. The university community must recognize its responsibility for conditions which nurture or result in crime.     For a crime to occur, two factors must be present: opportunity and desire. It is the function of campus law enforcement to minimize opportunities through crime prevention activities and interception patrol. Desire is a factor controlled by the potential offender and those who influence his/her thinking. Desire is a factor over which law enforcement is encouraged to develop and implement proactive crime prevention programs which deter crime.
7.	Bias Violence — All persons are entitled to courteous and respectful treatment without regard to race, religion, national origin, handicap, or sexual orientation. Campus law enforcement should ensure the rights guaranteed in the United States or Canadian constitutions to all persons regardless of their race, ethnicity, religion, or beliefs. When such rights are infringed upon by violence, threats, or harassment, the officers should respond rapidly to identify the perpetrators and bring them before the judicial system. Acts of bias violence generate fear and concern among the victim groups and the public which is detrimental to the objectives of higher education in a diverse and multi-cultural world.
8.	Criminal Arrests — It is better to prevent a crime or disturbance than to deal with it after it occurs. To the extent that prevention and repression fail, law enforcement must address itself to identifying those persons responsible. Identification and arrest of violators of the criminal law should be undertaken when it can be done with reasonable safety and with a minimum of hazard to the community. The decision to file criminal charges is based upon the interest of justice, the availability and desires of the victim, and whether or not the community and/or the offender would benefit from such action.
9.	Diversion from the Criminal Justice System — The university community is uniquely equipped to divert appropriate offenders from the criminal justice process. The diversion of offenders from the criminal justice process may be considered when the institution is the victim, when the victim of the offense so desires or declines to testify in public proceedings, or when such actions would be in the best interest of the community. The decision for diversion should be made in conjunction with the appropriate prosecutor’s office and should not use a relationship with the institution as the only criterion.
10.	Discretion — Individual campus law enforcement officers must necessarily exercise discretion in enforcement of the law and be guided as to what is practical with regard to basic law enforcement responsibilities. These include, but are not limited to, protection of life and property, the spirit of the criminal law, the objectives of the criminal justice system, and the limitations of resources at the time.
11.	Enforcement of the Laws — Campus law enforcement should impartially apply the same standards to all persons regardless of race, beliefs, position, financial circumstances, social status, appearance, attitude, or other unrelated considerations.
12.	Arming — The decision whether or not to arm campus officers is one related to program. If the campus provides a full service law enforcement agency to members of the campus community, the officers should be armed.     Campus law enforcement personnel who are provided any defensive weapon should be trained to the standards required for public-sector law enforcement personnel within the political sub-division. Campus law enforcement or security personnel provided with weapons should meet the standards established for use of those weapons as determined by the state or province in which the community is located. Clear policy statements should be implemented establishing such weapons as defensive weapons.
13.	Use of Force — The campus law enforcement agency should develop a policy on use of force which is consistent with the public expectation as expressed in law, court decisions, and community sentiment.
14.	Training and Professional Development — In order to meet the needs of an ever-changing society, campus law enforcement must be ever changing. Each campus law enforcement department and officer must engage in the continuing process of professional development.     Campus law enforcement officers should be trained to the standards established for public-sector law enforcement personnel. Depriving persons of their liberty is one of the most serious actions to be undertaken by the government in a democratic society. It is no less serious on a campus. Campus police personnel should be provided with a course of training which includes that required of the public sector and of the special considerations of the campus.
15.	Accountability and Discipline — A campus law enforcement agency is accountable to the community which it serves. The actions of individual members of the agency must conform to community standards and expectations. Review systems need to be established which will ensure this accountability.     Discipline is not synonymous with punishment. A well-disciplined campus law enforcement organization is one which voluntarily conforms to the community level of expectation. Punishment is normally resorted to only when other forms of leadership and supervision have failed. The objective of discipline is to correct and modify behavior in a positive manner. Discipline is a function of the management of a campus law enforcement agency.
16.	Errors in Judgment — Campus law enforcement by its very nature involves interaction with all members of the campus community and the community at large. Each of these actions involves a prior decision. Law enforcement personnel are required to make many decisions each day and to choose from a host of alternatives. Inevitably there will be an alternative selection which is not in the best interest of the operation. The campus law enforcement agency and its personnel must profit from alternative review and be constantly critical of their own policies and actions. When a mistake occurs, openly admitting the mistake is the first step in correcting it.
17.	Engaging in Unlawful or Deceptive Practices — The employment of an illegal means, no matter how worthy the objective, is certain to encourage disrespect for the law and the agency which enforces it. If the law is to be respected, it must first be respected by those who administer its enforcement. Violations of the law or disregard for the safety or property on the part of an officer is intrinsically wrong and self-defeating.
18.	Law Enforcement and Service Requirements — While a primary function of campus law enforcement is to provide the basic functions for the criminal justice services, on a campus there are many related service functions which can serve to reduce the opportunity for crime. The campus law enforcement agency should engage in these supportive service functions which meet the expectations of the community. Such functions as educational programming, crime prevention, analysis and enhancement of physical facilities such as lighting, access control, and escort services serve to reduce individual apprehensions of crime and facilitate functioning of the community.     Campus law enforcement should undertake those services which support the community and reduce concern for crime and victimization.
19.	Non-Commissioned Personnel in Law Enforcement Duties — The complex nature of law enforcement demands knowledge, skill, training, and experience. Judgments frequently required are beyond the preparation, responsibility, or authority of private citizens. Personnel who do not have the necessary judgment resulting from the acquisition of this knowledge and skill acquired through law enforcement training should not be assigned to functions which may require them to question, detain, or restrain the movements of citizens.

Resolutions

From time to time, the Board of Directors adopts resolutions on issues and topics of concern to the membership and the campus public safety profession. The date of adoption is listed under each resolution.

Resolution on Alcohol Marketing

(Adopted November 2001)

Members of the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators (IACLEA) are keenly aware of the hazards caused by alcohol use on campuses. We recognize the serious threat to health and safety of youth who use alcohol. Students and society as a whole suffer the consequences of alcohol abuse ranging from trauma, injury and death to poor grades and dropping out of school.

Institutions dedicate vast amounts of time, energy and money to promote healthy and positive student development, especially as it relates to use of alcohol. At the same time, alcohol advertising has become, perhaps, the most powerful force for teaching, young adults how to drink, when to drink, where to drink, and what drinking will accomplish. Alcohol use is promoted by associating it with heroes, peer acceptance, sexual attractiveness, success, increased self-esteem, winning, and rewards. The connection between these things and alcohol is often exaggerated. Abuse of alcohol often produces results opposite to the images advertising and promotional activities present.

Many consequences surround the use and abuse of alcohol on campus and in society. Calls to provide some controls to this significant problem are reasonable. Accordingly, we adopt the following resolution:

Whereas,alcohol abuse poses a serious threat to health and safety on college and university campuses; and

Whereas, marketing and promotion of alcoholic beverages on campuses may contribute significantly to problems of alcohol use; and

Whereas, marketing and promotion of alcoholic beverages reaches many youth who are under the legal drinking age; and

Whereas, many of these promotions neglect to provide balanced information including the serious risks to health and safety of those who abuse alcohol; and

Whereas, development and implementation of prudent policies to protect health and safety on campus is a critical responsibility of persons engaged in college and university administration; therefore

Be it resolved that IACLEA calls upon its member institutions to adopt guidelines promoting responsible alcohol marketing on campus. Be it further resolved that we call on our member institutions to continue to adopt policies and implement programs that promote healthy lifestyles and responsible use of alcohol. Be it further resolved that members of IACLEA are dedicated to providing assistance in any responsible way to reduce the negative impact of alcohol on students and to promote a safe and healthy campus environment.

Resolution on the Use of Marijuana on U.S. University and College Campuses

(Adopted March 2004)

The members of the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators are extremely concerned about the widespread use of marijuana on university and college campuses. According to the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, marijuana is the most widely abused and readily available illicit drug in the United States, with an estimated 11.5 million current users.

The Core Institute's annual data on alcohol and other drug use at colleges and universities indicate that the trend of increased marijuana use holds true among college students. Surveys at colleges and universities across the country indicate that 32.3 percent of students ussed marijuana within the past year. The Core Institute's 1995-1996 data also suggests that marijuana use is higher among students who engage in other high-risk behaviors. The Harvard School of Public Health conducted these surveys between 1993 and 1999, examining the drug and alcohol use of 44,265 college students nationwide. The study found that 91 percent of students who use marijuana participate in other high-risk activities such as heavy drinking or cigarette smoking.

IACLEA members, who daily deal with the negative consequences of the use of marijuana on campus, call on colleges and universities to take proactive steps to address this growing and debilitating problem on our campuses. Accordingly, we adopt the following resolution:

Whereas, IACLEA believes that the research on marijuana use proves that a nexus exists between marijuana use and incidents which affect the quality of life on campus. Marijuana and other drugs are associated with a wide range of negative consequences, including sex offenses, fights, vandalism, and other crimes, as well as unprotected sex, hospitalizations for overdoses, and deaths; and,

Whereas the use of drugs may also be associated with decreased academic performance. Illicit drug use is frequently a key factor when students encounter problems with their coursework; and,

Whereas, students who use marijuana are not just harming themselves, but are also harming those around them. Students who do not use marijuana frequently suffer secondhand effects from the behavior of other students who do not use illicit drugs.

Whereas, college and university administrators have a duty to develop and implement policies to protect the health and safety on campus; therefore

Be it resolved that IACLEA calls on its member institutions to adopt guidelines requiring strict enforcement of local, stsate, and federal drug laws through appropriate instutional judicial and/or criminal justice action. Be it further resolved that we call on our member institutions to continue to adopt policies and implement programs that promote healthy lifestyles and make counseling available to those who have problems with illicit drugs. Be it further resolved that members of IACLEA are dedicated to providing assistance in any responsible way to reduce the negative impact of marijuana use on students and to promote a safet and healthy campus environment.

Resolution on Campus Law Enforcement and Public Safety

Access to Homeland Security Resources

(Adopted June 2004)

Whereas, the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators (IACLEA) represents law enforcement and public safety administrators on university and college campuses around the world; and,

Whereas, university and college public safety agencies are on the front lines in adddressing our nation's security needs at our institutions of higher education; and,

Whereas, universities and colleges house sensitive research and medical facilities, equipment, and personnel, as well as a variety of chemicals and experimental compounds used by the scientific community; and,

Whereas, universities and colleges serve as hubs for significant amounts of computerized data that connect researchers and educators with their counterparts around the world; and,

Whereas, universities and colleges serve as gathering places for thousands of citizens attending educational, cultural, and athletic events; and,

Whereas, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security, Office of Domestic Preparedness, recognize that university and college campuses are targets of foreign and domestic terrorists; and,

Whereas, federal grants and programs designed to assist state and local law enforcement agencies have played a vital role in confronting threats to homeland security; and,

Whereas, financial resources from these grants and programs, and the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Grant Program are being withheld from univeristy and college public safety agencies in lieu of distribution to state, county, and municipal police agencies; therefore be it

Resolved, that the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators (IACLEA) duly assembled at its 46th Annual Meeting in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, strongly urges the United States Congress to pass legislation dedicating portions of these grants and funds to U.S. universities and colleges; and be it

Further resolved, that IACLEA joins the IACP University and College Policing Section in encouraging the United States Congress and the Department of Homeland Security to support the provisions of this resolution.