The crime prevention situation on the Lower East Side as described by Jessica Cattelino reminded me of the situation in Crown Heights we discussed earlier. Cattelino described two groups of people – white middle-upper class and the colored lower class – living in the Lower East Side facing similar problems of crime. She gave examples from both groups of people who wanted to volunteer for crime prevention for almost the same reasons – to help their community. Cattelino emphasized the difference in syntax – the white middle-upper class stated that they wanted to help “the community” while the colored people of the lower class wanted to help “my community”. The lower class of colored people  chose to express themselves in such a way, stated Cattelino, because they did not want to associate themselves with a general community that didn’t emphasize the different people inhabiting it. When I surveyed the situation, I realized that the group did have a lot of similarities in their argument for volunteerism. Still, the lower class demanded police presence but protested police brutality at the same time. To them, this situation occurred due to their status in society but they failed to realize that crime prevention in the upper class society thrived due to civilian involvement. For the middle-upper class, crime prevention was their duty as a citizen rather than a burden put among them. (As a side note, I found this thought process interesting because of our discussion on the meaning of citizenship. These people almost redefined it completely and made me rethink it as well. Citizenship, to them, meant receiving governmental aid while actively participating in society for the good other others. They chose to volunteer as a moral obligation as opposed to a legal one like jury duty, tying in the moral aspect of citizenship.)  Just as in Crown Heights, the two groups of people had varying views on the same situation due to societal differences.