Operation Don’t-Whiz-on-the-Field

It was a frigid November morning. Spirits were high, beer was on tap, and victory was in the air. But little did we know that our excitement spelled horror for the Boston Police Department (BPD). It was Harvard-Yale—the day of The Game. And it was the catalyst for a new “crack-down” on drinking, a reinvigoration of the puritanical principles that are the bane of every student’s existence.

The edict came from on high, the brainchild of BPD Capt. William Evans, and it takes the form of a new police program: Operation Student Shield (OSS). Already implemented in Brighton and Allston, the program aims to do away with the dirty drinking habits of underage revelers. At a meeting last week with local college officials, Evans asserted that OSS will soon be extended to the entire Boston area, affecting thousands of undergraduates who’ve yet to attain their 21st year. And according to the captain, Harvard students’ behavior at last year’s tailgate was exactly the type of behavior OSS will seek to eliminate.

But not only is Evans’ continued focus on Harvard students’ “disgraceful” behavior at our traditional tailgate entirely unwarranted—after the event, Evans himself stirred up a media frenzy demonizing Harvard students for their public urination, belligerent behavior, and general unseemliness—it has potentially harmful consequences for the encouragement of healthy drinking habits. And while BPD has no jurisdiction over Cambridge, the University’s eventual expansion into Allston means students will undoubtedly be affected.

November’s tailgate by no means deserves Evans’ overly harsh assessment, whether regarding alcohol consumption or students’ general behavior. In an interview with The Crimson, Evans said, “I was there, and what I witnessed, I thought was some crazy behavior—drinking was out of control…what I saw was very disturbing.” This is simply untrue. As opposed to years past, there were no life-threatening incidents related to alcohol—likely due to some proactive steps on the part of University Health Services, which set up a medical attention tent at the tailgate. More important than the tailgate itself, over-enforcing drinking laws will only encourage unhealthy drinking. Underage students will not stop drinking because of OSS, but they will be more likely to do it in private, more quickly, and in more extreme amounts via concentrated pre-gaming before heading out for the night.

Yet Evans has concerns beyond the over-consumption of alcohol, focusing more on Harvard students’ disrespectful behavior at the tailgate. “How about the public urination?” asked Evans, “It was a disgrace. I’ve had guys working events for 20 years, they haven’t seen such poor behavior.” This is a ridiculous assertion, but is in line with the captain’s consistently cartoonish characterizations of the event. Yes, unfortunately there were cases of public urination, but that was due to the lack of public toilets available at the event, a logistical flaw that can be easily fixed in preparation for 2006’s Game. To say that public urination constitutes the poorest behavior the BPD has ever witnessed suggests that the department has rather selective memory.

To cap his crumbling argument, Evans claims that there was “a lot of misinformation out there” in the weeks leading up to the notorious tailgate. According to the captain, “You can’t tell us 4,000 [people will attend] and have 10,000 show up.” The BPD was also apparently led to believe that there would be “no entertainment, but kids were carrying boom-boxes and singing karaoke.” If this is the case, Evans has every right to be upset with the handling of some aspects of the tailgate’s preparation. But these are changes that can be made with a little trouble; they do not necessitate an entire “operation” aimed in part to prevent “incidents” like The Game’s tailgate from happening again.

Promoting more vigilance in confiscating fake IDs and harsher punishment for errant students, Evans’ program will encourage colleges to inform students’ parents of their drunken malfeasance, thus effecting a double punishment—one at the university level, the other in the form of parental wrath. The threat of this retribution has caused many from Boston-area colleges to question BPD’s logic: why should someone’s student status confer upon them extra punishment? Young professionals’ parents aren’t notified of their drunken antics, yet they presumably exist and cause distress for their neighbors when parties turn wild.

We understand the BPD’s need to enforce the law. And we sympathize with the concerns of citizens about witnessing the drunken behavior and public urination of a bunch of crazy kids. But initiating OSS, a move that will increase restrictions, is not an effective way to stop students from drinking. College students will never stop drinking, no matter how many acronyms are thrown in their way. Until the BPD takes a more pragmatic stance towards underage alcohol consumption, the correlated problems of binge drinking and raucous behavior will only worsen as students who wish to drink are pushed farther underground, out of the reach of the BPD and college health officials.

Beyond the program’s double standard for students and overzealous enforcement, OSS is a misguided initiative founded on an unfair characterization of the Harvard-Yale tailgate. It should be abandoned before it fulfills its promise of doing more harm than good.