IBJNews

Bill would expand powers of campus police officers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Police officers at Indiana colleges and universities could have the same authority as city and county officers under a bill introduced in the General Assembly.

Republican Rep. Randy Truitt of West Lafayette says lawmakers need to remove jurisdictional obstacles that prevent local law enforcement officials from tapping resources available within university police departments.

Indiana law limits police powers for campus officers to their respective schools. That means campus officers can't stop an impaired driver off campus or loan resources such as drug-sniffing dogs to city and county departments without fearing it could jeopardize a case, police officials say.

Purdue University Police Chief John Cox said eliminating those barriers is a matter of common sense.

"I'm a sworn officer, I graduated from the Indiana Law Enforcement Academy," Cox told the Journal & Courier. "If I'm working and going down I-65 and get behind a driver who I suspect is impaired, I need to be able to pull that person over."

Purdue has an agreement with other Tippecanoe County law enforcement agencies that gives its officers arrest and other police powers beyond campus. But Cox said the campus department had to deny a Montgomery County request to borrow the department's narcotics-sniffing dog because if an arrest were made based on what the dog found, it could have harmed the prosecutor's case.

Cox and West Lafayette Police Chief Jason Dombkowski said the ability to share resources is crucial in times of leaner resources.

"We need that cooperation because we do not have the number of police officers that the FBI recommends," Dombkowski said. "We're fortunate to have another 40 officers in the middle of our city."

Truitt's bill is scheduled to get a hearing Tuesday, as is a similar measure filed in the Senate.

"I think this is a really positive thing because it's going to enhance public safety," Truitt said. "It'll get rid of any boundary disputes, jurisdictional disputes — any ambiguity."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Dangerous Idea
    Here's what might happen if this gets passed.
    Smaller towns will eliminate police officers and rely on the university police to cover the neighborhoods around the school.
    That means the college or university will be paying, through student fees for police coverage that the taxpayers are already paying for.
    Imagine North Manchester, Indiana saying hey we can eliminate the third shift police officer and save $30,000 a year. Manchester College will then cover for us. The MC students win the Quiddich championships and celebrations get out of hand but the police are off in town writing up a lost 76 year-old Alzheimers patient. Both important for police presence, but which one gets dropped or delayed? I am sure you can come up with better scenarios, but you get the idea.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Irvington is up and coming much like Fountain Square. We would love to have something like this in our neighborhood!

  2. Why do we care who has submitted proposals if we can't review the proposals? It's publicly owned land, but the public has zero say in what gets chosen to be built there. Yep, that sounds about right.

  3. Perhaps May 21 is "Evangelical Day" over at the IBJ?

  4. I don't know what's more depressing: that this passes for a defensible elective in a publicly funded SCIENCE class, or that more than half of the posters here are defending this charlatan. Intelligent design is creationism. Creationism is religion. Yes, we have freedom of religion, which deserves to be protected. Now someone kindly show Professor Hedin his freedom by escorting him over to the Religion department at BSU. Carry on.

  5. I hope people realize that the 'vocal' opposition at the meeting represent the minority of people against this project. As with any controversial project - those who don't want it are the loudest, while those who like it or really don't care one way or the other don't come to such meetings. Unfortunately the same may be true of the survey now being offered by the BRVA. I live less than a 5 minute walk from BR Avenue and can tell you that I and most of my neighbors are support this exciting project, or are ambivalent. And how great that it includes quality apartments - something that BR sorely lacks. This is a first class opportunity that we should embrace (and no, I'm not with the BRVA or the developer.) As for the fellow who owns the Good Earth store, if he doesn't want competition then let him pull together his own investors and out bid Whole Foods to operate the proposed grocery component! Come on folks - let's move ahead.

ADVERTISEMENT