Worried About Theft? Lock Your Doors

A recent spate of thefts in student dorms has triggered the creation of a new College subcommittee within the Harvard Security Committee to explore options for how to curtail the uptick in stolen laptops and other valuables. We have sympathy for the students whose expensive, often hard-to-replace items were taken from their dorms, and understand that these thefts violate students’ sense of security and privacy. However, we believe that the responsibility to better protect valuables falls on the student body rather than the administration.

Many of the recent thefts from student dorms have occurred primarily as a result of lax attitudes towards securing rooms. Students do not take the appropriate precautions to prevent strangers from entering dorms and often leave their rooms unlocked even when their valuables are inside. Stopping these thefts is thus relatively easy. If students simply lock their doors as advised by the College, the problem will likely dissipate.

While we support increased security measures such as installing security cameras, as we previously opined, we believe that the ultimate responsibility to secure personal items lies with each student. For many students, college is the first time that they are living independently. We hope that one of the main takeaways from these thefts is that locking your door is a basic part of residing in your own apartment or home.

We also question the College’s decision to create a new subcommittee to further examine this issue. Historically, committees have been shown to be inefficient at quickly and smoothly solving problems. It is improbable that this new subcommittee will result in action and likely that it will add an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. However, we do understand that Harvard undergraduates and the College may wish to seek out a sense of closure by solving the thefts, and that this subcommittee has been created with the best of intentions.

This staff editorial solely represents the majority view of The Crimson Editorial Board. It is the product of discussions at regular Editorial Board meetings. In order to ensure the impartiality of our journalism, Crimson editors who choose to opine and vote at these meetings are not involved in the reporting of articles on similar topics.