Leniency in policy appreciated

In my limited experience with parking tickets, I find SPU parking regulations and enforcement, from registering to ticketing, to be somewhat of a joke.

Thirty minute parking signs are merely a recommendation. Visitor parking is fair game for any length of time as long as you switch spots every day or so. SPU parking ticket fines are nothing more than a suggested donation. Something around here is slightly askew. Or perhaps things are precisely as they should be.

It is no fun getting a parking ticket that you actually have to pay. At SPU, there is scarcely a worry of that. There is nothing more pleasing to the eye than to see that your car is still present in the 30 minute parking zone 30 hours after parking it. Everyday joys such as this lead me to sing the praises of our Campus Security and their gracious negligence of our refusal to comply with their parking regulation.

In the visitors’ section of the lower Dravus parking lot there is a friendly sign requesting that visitors please register their cars with Campus Security.

That sounds like a fine opportunity to welcome our guests and wish them a pleasant stay here at SPU.

However, if I were visiting, I think I would do well to remain anonymous. If Security knows which car is mine, and they know who I am, they can easily send me a lovely surprise in the mail. I will probably ignore it and then they will kindly charge it to my student account.

See what I mean? Announcing one’s presence on the campus of SPU is an open invitation for undesirable consequences, but if you’re smart, you will never have a problem.

Unlike Campus Security, the Seattle Police Department has access to personal information, including home address, simply by scanning the license plate. It’s probably not a good idea to chuckle out loud as you tear up the little paper gift on your windshield. However, I do not understand what keeps one from doing so on the campus of SPU.

Those who have paid to rent a parking space for the quarter may know this already, but I recently was made aware of something that I find quite humorous.

Say someone decides to park in the parking spot you have paid to have access to exclusively. You get mad and you growl at the car for a minute or so, and then you decide to take action. You can actually have a car towed from your parking spot, at the owners’ expense.

This may not sound very funny, but if someone parked in my spot, I would have a blast with it. I can just see myself crouched down in the bushes awaiting the comical scene in which the owner discovers their car is missing. OK, so I’m a sick person.

Is this the way to show our neighbors the love of Christ? Is this how we are to build a community full of grace? I should say not.

This method of peer law enforcement could be revolutionary; however, it should be reserved for more serious matters on this campus. The indecent man comes first to my mind. He could benefit from a good tar and feathering inflicted by our strapping young male students. A special bond is formed when people hold each other accountable that is matched by nothing else.

I am in no way advocating any form of dishonesty in trying to dodge due payment of fines, and so forth. That is not the case at all. I suppose I am just trying to save my peers, as well as myself, from unnecessary charges and inconveniences. We are college students and supposedly poor, so no one wants to deal with parking tickets. Am I right?

As I call these "weaknesses" to your attention, I hope that we can all learn to appreciate the leniency in the lack of parking enforcement. Who would really benefit from additional stringency? Certainly not you, my fellow students, nor I.

Furthermore, I have no complaints about Campus Security’s fine job of keeping us all safe, secure, happy and healthy.

This article was imported from The Falcon’s Records
If you find an error, mistake, or omission due to the import process, please contact us.
Original Metadata about the article can be found below

Title: Leniency in policy appreciated | Author: Emily Schnetz | Section: Opinions | Published Date: 1999-02-24 | Internal ID: 501