Editor’s Note: The following is the third in a series of columns about underage drinking, by Matt Wier.

As I mentioned in previous articles, it seems NIU has resigned itself to the fact that underage drinking will happen and it’s better to make it “safe” than to attempt to eradicate it. I agree it is good to be realistic and acknowledge that drinking is going to occur, but I cannot bring myself to understand why action should not be taken against it.

This was evident to me when I interviewed Lt. Matt Kiederlen of the University Police about the late night ride service. I feel the service is an excellent program, but I have mixed emotions when confronting the issue of giving intoxicated students a ride without recourse of any sort. When viewed from the underage drinking perspective, the late night ride service is the lesser of two evils. It at least allows for a greater amount of safety for the students and those around them than if the student were to walk or drive themselves home. But on principle, I cannot justify that knowing underage drinkers are taking advantage of its no-questions-asked philosophy.

What the issue really boils down to is, which of two strategies would offer the most effectiveness in student safety while maintaining university integrity? These two strategies are “safety-first” and zero tolerance. In respect to integrity and safety, I strongly feel the latter is what is most needed.

Before I continue, I feel the need to point out that this change is not needed in every area of enforcement. NIU’s Judicial Affairs Office follows a strict guideline in its policies concerning underage drinking violations that allow second chances for the student, while still enforcing some consequences. But the case must be reported to them before they can actually do anything about it. This reveals the two organizations which I believe need the most reform: the University Police and the Residence Hall Association. By demonstrating their degree of leniency, a lack of concern for the students is more visible than anything else.

Is it really better to ask a student just to dump out a beer than to punish the student for breaking the law? What is there to discourage a student from that behavior unless it can be guaranteed there will be consequences for violations? There must be a firm, united front of NIU’s leadership that will stick to its guns and actually apply the rules which have been established in the best interests of the student.

You, NIU, should do this out of concern for your student body. As much as we have a responsibility to this campus, it has a responsibility to us. Out of concern for its students, it has a responsibility to keep us in check in regard to the rules we agreed with when we decided to come here. If we are not willing to adhere to your rules, why not treat us as we deserve, with consequences? All that’s being taught now is that you can get away with it.

We need you to take some action and show us some results. There was an alcohol task force created last year between the community and school in response to an alcohol-related stabbing on Greek Row. Since then, no new far-reaching programs have been implemented and shown results. It’s time to become proactive instead of reactive. Why not implement some mandatory alcohol education? Granted, many would continue to drink nonetheless, but it would be worth it for the few who may carry away some of that information and avoid many mistakes they might have otherwise made.

Is it “safe” to allow us to break rules or to do your best to stop us? I’m asking a lot of questions, NIU, and it’s high time you provide answers through action.

Matt Wier is an opinion columnist for the Northern Star.