As we all know, a dry campus doesn’t eliminate the consumption of alcohol at our university or any university for that matter. 

The effort of creating rules that prohibits students in college from consuming alcohol is unrealistic. What is more impractical is contradicting the law by restricting 21-year olds and older their legal right of publicly possessing alcohol. 

Coming to the realization that the majority of students at Ashland are going to come into some encounter with alcohol during their collegiate years can only allow for improvement of on-campus safety. 

According to Ashland University’s handbook the use and/or possession of alcoholic beverages and/or containers anywhere on university property is forbidden. 

Behavior that is judged irresponsible or inconsiderate while under the influence of alcohol is considered to be an abuse of alcohol and a violation of the policy. 

Being present in a room where alcohol and/or alcohol paraphernalia are found is an infringement of the policy as well. 

Having such a strict approach to alcohol on campus can scare students away from seeking help when it is necessary. 

If a student consumes too much alcohol and is in need of medical attention they may risk their health in fear of facing punishment. Less severe cases of alcohol intake can also pose safety concerns.

 If a student does consume alcohol off campus as preferred by the university, how will they return from their night of partying? 

A student walking long distances late at night to return to campus puts them at risk of possible abduction, sexual harassment, assault, or even getting hit by a drunken driver. 

The difficulty of finding a designated driver (DD) can increase the amount of impaired drivers that get behind the wheel. 

Senior Sam Stepp comments on the issue.

“I’m aware that people get put in the circumstance and they drive drunk whether they want to or not,” she said. 

During spring semester of the 2011-2012 academic year, a track recruit was hit late at night by a vehicle driven by a drunken resident of Ashland. 

Also, during 1994 two students under the influence chose to drive back to campus after partying elsewhere. 

The result of the decision they made that evening was one car crash and two fatalities.  

If provided with an alternative means of getting to campus, their situations could have all ended differently.  

These are only two examples of situations that have endangered students at the university over the years due to the policy of a dry campus. 

Students so strongly fear the consequences of getting caught with possession of alcohol or intoxication. 

As a result of the intensity of punishment, students may make irrational decisions in order to prevent negative ramifications. 

Punishment for first offense alcohol violation includes a $100 dollar fine, ten hours of community service, four months of probation and a $35 alcohol education course online. 

This excessiveness leads to students trying to avoid university officials at all costs when in an alcohol-related predicament when they should be seeking their assistance instead. 

If we attended a wet campus and support was offered by Safety Services to get students home safe, it could protect students under the influence from potential harm.

This transportation system could keep the people that could be affected by intoxicated student’s poor decisions safe as well. 

Many universities offer cab services to ensure a student’s safety, such as Kent State University and The Ohio State University.

Granting students the right to drink on campus would put students in a much more controlled environment that could be monitored by the university. 

This would also decrease the amount of underage students that are getting away with illegal consumption of alcohol. 

Overall, this is a preferred situation to keep students in closer proximity to their dorm rooms/senior apartments, away from controlling a vehicle while impaired, and under supervision for possible health concerns. 

No matter how many rules and regulations are created, the reality is that students are going to engage in alcohol-related activities and consume alcoholic beverages, legally or not. 

Statistics show that at Ashland between 2010 and 2012 there have been 362 alcohol violations on campus. 

Research shows that the number of violations is rising from year to year. Instead of trying to bust students in the act, Safety Services should be the higher concern for the university. 

Declaring a wet campus could create a unity and trust between the university and students which could decrease self-endangerment as well as danger presented by others and increase the security provided for students.