While the United States has become familiar with terrorist threats, the bombing in Boston introduced a new dynamic to attacks on American soil. With past attacks, symbols of financial and military power were targets, but now with the attacks at the finish line of the Boston Marathon, Americans in celebration have fallen in the crosshairs. And after all major disasters, from the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, to Hurricane Katrina, reform is expected to address areas shown to be in need of improvement.

When Massachusetts Institute of Technology police officer Sean Collier was gunned downed by one of the alleged Boston Marathon attackers, terrorism in an urban area spilled over onto a college campus. Georgetown considered the ramifications of the attacks on Boston, and the Department of Public Safety announced that they would be heightening security measures, including having an increased number of police officers on campus and greater coordination with the Metropolitan Police Department. This somewhat tempered move was an appropriate one.

Heightening campus security even further — by arming DPS officers, for example — would have been inappropriate and would have caused more harm than good. Arming DPS officers would not only involve a drastic structural overhaul, as each officer would have to undergo the appropriate training, but it could also foster a sense of unease among the student body. The sight of a DPS officer with a handgun, whether he or she is breaking up a party or simply patrolling campus, may sooner incite a feeling of concern or panic than security.

Continuously evaluating safety measures is a necessary task to ensure a well-prepared campus. In the wake of tragedies, maintaining a balance between security and liberty becomes even more challenging, and college communities — and the rest of the nation — are best suited with a response that is proactive, not reactive.