I'd like to comment of the Collegian Board of Editor's flawless use of a logical fallacy. Yesterday's editorial column argues: The surveillance cameras downtown were installed to prevent riots. There were no riots in the last year where the cameras are. Therefore, the cameras prevented any riots from occurring downtown. This is a classic affirmation of the consequent logical fallacy. Second, the opinion seems to suggest that the purpose of the cameras is to be the sole law enforcement in the area and "walk the beat" in the Canyon. Somehow you argue that the cameras were ineffective in the last year because there were too many police officers deterring crime already. You argue that if the borough keeps the cameras, and police officers behind desks, where they all belong, crimes will occur downtown, undeterred; therefore the cameras would become effective. Third, the Collegian's credibility comes into question because the board states the cameras operate on "tape." Just like VHS and audio cassettes, video surveillance, including the cameras downtown, have moved beyond the analog world. It is recorded digitally. Fourth, the only people acting more cautiously around the cameras are persons worried about getting tickets for j-walking. Riotous students in a drunken stupor don't have surveillance cameras on their mind, but a live police officer ten feet away changes their demeanor quickly. Cameras don't respond to crimes, police officers do. The cameras were a bad idea to begin with; they have been ineffective, created more student-town tension and shown no results. Sell them for scrap to recoup whatever costs they can now.