When University President Jehuda Reinharz decided last month to arm campus police officers, he made a choice necessary to ensure the safety of this campus. However, in matters such as that which affect the day-to-day lives of every student, staff and faculty member here, more than just the merits of the actual decision matter. While Mr. Reinharz made the right call, he hasn't been sufficiently transparent with the community about his decision-making process.Mr. Reinharz made the decision after a firearms committee consisting of students, faculty and staff convened over the summer and recommended the course of action to him, but he said he could have proceeded even without that level of approval.

"I could have come to this decision without a committee," he said last week. "But I decided to have a committee, and it did not make sense to me to waste a single moment once I had their recommendation, which was a unanimous one."

The community at large, however, is far from a consensus on this issue. The newly formed Students Opposed to the Decision to Arm presented to Reinharz a petition signed by 830 undergraduates, 16 staff members and 20 faculty members protesting the decision arguing that students and faculty should have been consulted about the decision before it was made.

Mr. Reinharz can't go back in time and change how he reached the decision, but he should explain his rationale to the entire community. On top of that, the administration hasn't revealed details on new protocols regarding how officers will use or access the guns.

We appreciate Mr. Reinharz e-mailed out the advisory committee's report. We also appreciate that Mr. Reinharz plans to form a firearms policy group that includes students faculty and staff as well as hold a forum sometime before the end of the spring semester. We hope these events will welcome community input. We also hope that Mr. Reinharz will speak to the campus about the decision and allow for a question-and-answer session. Whether or not we agree with major administrative decisions, transparency is a necessary courtesy on the University's part.

The decision is also more complex than Mr. Reinharz has acknowledged. This page has argued that campus officers must be armed in order to protect themselves and the community, especially in light of April's shootings at Virginia Polytechnic Institute. But we admit that there are potentially harmful consequences of having guns on campus, such as the promotion of a culture of fear and anxiety, as well as the possibility of weapon abuse by some officers.

While these factors aren't enough to hold back the arming initiative, Mr. Reinharz-instead of just stating the benefits of arming the police-must admit the existence of these potential pitfalls and state how the University will deal with them.

With Mr. Reinharz's decision to arm officers, we know that he is doing his best to protect our campus from violence. Now, however, it's important that he protect community dialogue. Be open with us, and explain your decision. Without giving us that knowledge, you are leaving us in the dark.