Trying to get the full image in without the multimedia embedding code deleted my blog post. That is why the images are small.
I found this
recently and I think it's pretty interesting to note. For
the most part, cities with enforced curfew had a crime rate that lowered
from 1999. San Jose and Long Beach are the exception, and so is
Oakland (which had no curfew).
This is a pretty good year for the curfew law, since it is a very recent
thing and lots of officials are right on board with it. After all,
everybody enjoys lowering the crime rate, right? Right. The curfew is a
very active piece of legislation, and it is constantly being revised
now: for example, the curfew times being different for certain age groups
I don't necessarily agree with this since it encourages judging people
by appearance, but a curfew is better than none and if this is what
needs to happen, then so be it. However, the public seems to think
differently: they think we should be trying to change these kids,
educating them perhaps, and not punishing them. On the other hand, some
very important people support the curfew.
The best thing for me/supporters is, the mayor supports the curfew and actively seeks to improve it
. For someone in favor of the curfew (someone like me
for instance), he is a very powerful ally. Because he is the mayor.
While Clarke represents my district, he is not quite as influential or
powerful as Mayor Michael Nutter. Nutter recently won his re-election
, which is a very fortunate thing for supporters of the curfew. It extends the time frame quite a bit, actually.
A mayor who does not support the curfew might throw a wrench into the
whole plan. That's why it's important to act quickly. That's why it's
important to convince the people of Philadelphia that the curfew is a
good idea that improves our city. No matter what stance the mayor after
Nutter takes, the curfew would have the support of the people and would
be very hard to get rid of without any sort of backlash. In a system
that encourages winning the admiration of the public for the sake of
reelection, it's important to appease the people. If the curfew comes
to be well-received, it would likely stay in place. Nutter getting
another four years has extended the time frame considerably. Before, it
was a matter of working with a few months. Now, it's a matter of a few
more years. We have much more time to make people come to see that the
curfew is mostly a glorious thing.
It's also important to influence Darrell Clarke, the representative of
my district. It doesn't seem like he ever spoke to the curfew, but he said people have the right to voice their opinions
It's hard to gauge his opinion from that, but at least if I ever speak
to him I might have the chance to get my point across to him. During
the Cold War, the government held an idea known as the domino theory
They believed that if one country fell to Communism, others would
follow in some sort of menacing red chain of dominoes. Not that the
domino theory comes into play quite
the same way here, but I
think it's reasonable that influencing a district representative would
partially influence others. Any representatives not quite on board with
the curfew would likely come to support it if the other representatives
do. It might just take a little push and a bit of convincing, is all.
Dominoes with fancy degrees and legal knowledge.
Since this is such a big issue, it's a reasonable assumption that the curfew is going to come up at every city council meeting, just as it did right around the time we left during our class trip.