Sidewalks and Parks

In The Uses of Sidewalks - Safety, Jacobs introduces some very valid points about the relatedness of population and crime. I use the term population here in a very local, relative sense, meaning, those persons who frequent the "sidewalks" of discussion. Jacobs' points do stand to reason. When was the last time you heard of anyone being shot in Times Square? A mugging at Epcot? A stabbing in Philadelphia International? No one is going to commit these types of social crimes where there are so many people to not only witness, but prevent such an attack. I believe that what Jacobs is really saying here is that it doesn't matter what location is studied or at what time of day, the (maybe not sole, but certainly most prevailant) factor is simply a function of how many people are present. When a community is told to stay inside after hours, and similar things, then they will. They will also tend to shun the outdoors altogether in favor of their homes or the homes of family and friends in other areas. This reduces the number of, as Jacobs says, eyes on the streets, and therefore makes anyone who does wander around for whatever reason, more vunerable because of a lack of that social protection. "Power in numbers" is a great way to explain the phenomenon, suffice it to say that the power is generated not by an actively assailant group of farmers with pitchforks, but simply the knowledge that one is being watched.

As for the essay Wooddruff Park and the Search For Common Ground, I believe this is a specific example of a broader concept. Being a future teacher, I have my own educational philosophy. Something to the effect of "Whenever an action is taken without the specific goal of benefiting the students, it will harm them in the long run." After having read this article, I believe that the arguments presented there, along with my philosophy about education, are both simply examples of a more generic concept, that applies to any situation consisting of an administrative power and a population of "lay people" in which, any action taken or decision made without the explicit intention of benefitting said population as a whole, will, eventually, impair and deprive the population as well as weaken and defame the administration. It seems that this idea is the vehicle with which Davis makes his argument for the case of Atlanta.