Sehvilla is right (was Re: [Imc] twisted locks, twisted security)

[Chas. 'Mark' Bee]

   Not that I have any particular standing in the community, but I think
it's past time to speak out, member or no.  

   On the several occasions I've had to visit the IMC, I noticed that
there is a counter in the front room, and it seems that at various times
there are staffers assigned thereabouts (which apparently makes the IMC
'staffed' at those times)..?

   I fail to see why the IMC (or any other organization) should be open
to street folk during times at which there is no staffer in the front
room.  Likewise, those using the production room should probably not be
considered staffers, without a doorbell or annunciator (these beep when
someone comes in).  If a community member without a key wants to use the
space, they should simply plan to arrive during a staffer's shift or
make special arrangements.  Then, of course, there's always the call
ahead, or from a pay phone upon arrival.

   The onus of security should not be placed on doors/locks not visible
from the street.  The production room doors, if I recall correctly, are
primarily constructed of window glass and thin wooden struts - easy
pickings for any individual wielding a chair - with the required ruckus
effectively shielded from police/passersby observation or later notice. 
This sounds unlikely, true.  Whose life/health are folks willing to
stake this wager with?  I could get through those doors in 30 seconds,
and I'm supposed to be 'disabled', fer chrissake.

   Basically, if the IMC wants production to go on after hours, it needs
to assuage the concerns of its producers by creating a no-compromise
safe environment.  After-hours access by folks without keys should not
be available without front room oversight.

   After hours, no staffer, no appointment, no access.  Anything else is
foolhardy and places personnel at risk with minimal return.  Lone
producers should be allowed to lock the front door, no question about
it.  If this causes a real problem, wireless doorbells are available for
around $20, and I think I saw someone offer one anyway.  Otherwise, I
suggest producers refuse to produce there/then, deadline or no.

   That's about it - sorry if this harshes anyone's groove!  --CMB





Clint Popetz wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 03:31:37PM -0600, Sehvilla wrote:
> >
> >
> > The UCIMC's sense of security seems as twisted as the broken lock on the
> > door. While Steering Committee is taking serious steps to protect the
> > UCIMC's equipment, sensibly regulating the equipment usage policy, it
> > defends the silly idea that volunteers shouldn't keep the IMC door locked,
> > no matter what, because the IMC must be open to everyone. Many of the
> > volunteers at the IMC will not feel safe using the UC-IMC space unless
> > they are able to lock the door behind themselves. THE IMC IS NOT OPEN TO
> > EVERYONE IF ITS VOLUNTEERS/PRODUCERS CAN'T WORK THERE SAFELY!
> > It has been suggested that a volunteer could avoid security problems by
> > working in the production room with the door locked. Some IMCistas feel
> > like this is a solution, but it probably won't resolve the security
> > concerns of most concerned volunteers. How is the volunteer to staff the
> > IMC effectively, if they're locked in the production room?
> 
> Similarly, how could they possibly staff the IMC effectively if the
> front door is locked?  I think the point of the suggestion to lock the
> production room door was not to provide safety while staffing, but
> rather later at night.
> 
> > What will they
> > do if a person comes up and knocks on the production room door and asks
> > for help with something?
> 
> Use common sense and their own feeling of personally safety to decide
> how to act?
> 
> > Yes, the production room has a phone - if someone
> > is disrupting the IMC, the volunteer who is locked in the production room
> > can call 911. But if an attacker wants to hurt someone who's working in
> > the production room, the deadbolt on the production-room door offers
> > little protection to the volunteer.
> 
> The production room deadbolt is actually a much more secure lock than
> that on the front door.
> 
> > They're far away from the front door,
> > and they're blocked, visually and acoustically, from anyone passing-by on
> > the street. The production room is full of windows. Three of these windows
> > are just large sheets of glass. What's stopping an attacker from breaking
> > a window to attack someone in the production room? No one can hear them
> > from the street. What protection does the IMC volunteer have in that
> > situation?
> 
> Ditto for an attacker approaching the front door, no?
> 
> No amount of locks/procedures/safeguards can make someone feel safe
> in any situation.  The suggestions that have been made by the steering
> committee and others have been an attempt to balance the needs of
> individuals using the space late at night without allowing the space
> to be monopolized, which is essentially what happens when the door is
> locked from the inside.
> 
> My suggestion would be: if you don't feel safe working at the IMC late
> at night without locking everyone else out, then use the buddy system
> and/or come in to work during hours when others are present.  Safety
> in numbers...
> 
>                                 -Clint
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IMC mailing list
> IMC at urbana.indymedia.org
> http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/imc