Reel Time/Real Justice discusses the case of Rodney King, an African American man, who was brutally beaten by police officers. This violent act was caught on camera, and was analyzed thoroughly to determine whether this was a case of police brutality or if the police officers were justifiably protecting themselves. In court, a decision was made stating that the police did not use excessive force. Racial profiling and police brutality are still problems we face in today’s society. Some examples in today’s news include Eric Garner, who was put in a illegal chokehold by police which led to his death, and Freddie Gray who suffered a spinal injury when the police restrained him and who also died from his injuries.  A high percentage of those facing racial discrimination are young black and Latino men. This is causing much tension between communities and the law enforcement. We do not know when and if racial profiling will stop occurring, but we can create more laws and regulations that will ensure that people who are stopped by police actually show suspicious activity when they are being stopped, and that the police officers are not using brutal force when they are doing their job.

How do you think we can stop racial profiling from occurring?

According to “Canaries of the Creative Age,” Greenwich Village received an influx of gay and lesbian youth of color, who helped to organize a group called ‘FIERCE’ in order to protest against increased policing and police brutality as well as the fact that there was no public space on the piers. This was not the only group to form that centered on “pier youth culture” including youths of color. ‘FIERCE’ also tried to decrease how vulnerable gay and lesbian youth were to the violence and crime in Greenwich Village. The pier was a place that LGBT youth frequented as the areas surrounding it succumbed to privatization. ‘FIERCE’ wanted to have nonresidents have more of a “claim to the neighborhood,” while residents and police wanted them to leave and to increase policing. This argument between multiple parties is similar to the policy of stop-and-frisk today and how the community and police are in disagreements with each other.

What I found interesting was how this article contrasts with last week’s article in terms of “quality of life” policing. While the LGBT community fights to stop the increase policing, the residents of Greenwich Village actually want to increase the “quality of life” policing for increased safety. Last week’s article discussed this type of policing more negatively, explaining how this policing is centered on the low-income neighborhoods and how police brutality is often involved.

Question: Are there more pros or cons to “quality of life” policing now that we have seen two perspectives of how it can both be helpful and negative?

“Quality of life” policing first started in the 1990s when Giuliani was mayor, and it has been adopted into broken windows policing which Mayor Bill de Blasio currently advocates. This form of policing focuses on arresting those who commit misdemeanors in order to prevent more serious crimes from occurring. I believe that this form of policing is doing more harm than good. Police brutality has been increasing, even for the smaller crimes such as drinking in public or urinating. “Quality of life” also targets minority groups as well as the homeless. I think this is unfair. Those who are homeless should not be getting harassed by the police for sleeping in public. I think the police should not waste their time on making arrests for crimes that are not making the city unsafe. A person urinating in public is not as serious of a crime as rape or murder is. The police should be focusing on these more serious crimes that affect the safety of an individual. The broken windows policy and police brutality contributed to the death of Eric Garner, who was arrested for selling cigarettes on a Staten Island street. He was put into an illegal chokehold that ended his life. Another important thing the city should focus on besides crime is how the police are conducting themselves while on the job.

Question: Do you think that the broken windows policy is helping to prevent more serious crimes from occurring?

Kavner’s “For Public Housing Residents After Sandy, ‘A Slow Motion Katrina,’ details how people living in public housing suffered the most during the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. The NYCHA failed to restore the heat and electricity lost after the hurricane hit while the wealthier neighborhoods in Brooklyn had all of their amenities. It is upsetting to read about how people with medical problems could not use their oxygen machines or nebulizers because of the electricity being down for over a week. Elderly residents were sitting at home freezing and relying on volunteers to give them food and flashlights. It is unacceptable that it would take so long to help the people living in public housing complexes. I also found it confusing that NYCHA workers had differing explanations as to why it was taking so long to help the residents. Some workers said that communication was lacking, others said that the infrastructure of the public housing complexes was outdated making it difficult to repair the damages, and even some workers had no explanation at all. I think that NYCHA should be reevaluated and improved because there can be other natural disasters in the future, and the poor service that was provided cannot be repeated again. There were many people going nights without knowing when they would have heating and power, and worst of all, they were not getting any real answers as to why it was taking so long to fix the situation.

Question- Why do you think it took so long for the NYCHA to help those living in public housing after Hurricane Sandy?

Climate change and the rise of sea levels continue to be a growing concern for the planet, and I believe that more action needs to be taken. While there have been proposals and plans to decrease greenhouse gases and better handle global warming, each year I see expert analyses of how the sea levels and temperatures will continue increasing in the future decades. PlaNYC’s official statement mentions that New York City will experience more heat waves and an increase in flooding. New York City was already hit by Hurricane Sandy and if there is no change and global warming continues, the chances of hurricanes occurring will increase. Graham’s Cities Under Siege states that the warming of the sub-surface of the ocean can cause “hurricanes to continue heating-up” which will make them more powerful. Everyone has the ability to help decrease global warming simply by using less energy and burning less fossil fuel. If there isn’t major action taken soon, the Earth will continue to worsen as more carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere.

Question: What do you think is the best method to get more people to participate in helping the planet?

There are different ways to define gentrification as explained in the article by Lees. One way of describing gentrification is when middle class families move into urban areas and as a result, cause an increase in price of property and the removal of the poor families living there. Homesteading is another word that was used in place of gentrification, and it was a vital part to the development of the Lower East Side. Single-family houses were sold to families who would rehabilitate them. In the mid-1970s, the neighborhood of Park Slope was deteriorating and landlords did not have much involvement with keeping housing conditions in order. Smith’s “Mapping the Gentrification Frontier” states that this deterioration is “an essential part of urban development.” Not only does gentrification impact property prices, it also helps to establish a variety of cultures within a neighborhood. While gentrification does help neighborhoods update the housing conditions, bring new communities of people, and also helps introduce new businesses, there are downsides. The major downside is the fact that people who cannot keep up with the cost of living are forced to move elsewhere.

Question: Do you think that the gentrification of neighborhoods has more benefits or downsides?

After reading Samuel Stein’s De Blasio’s Doomed Housing Plan, I felt disappointed with how de Blasio is trying to handle creating more affordable housing. He believes inclusionary zoning is the key, but this solution might do more harm than good. While inclusionary zoning allows there to be more affordable housing that targets households with lower incomes, the private developers and real estate companies are the ones getting benefits by making more money. This plan is not even targeting households with the lowest incomes which is even more upsetting. The government decides on how the inclusionary zoning will be handled based on their calculation of the Area Median Income, which was calculated to be $77,310. This is almost $30,000 higher than what the average household makes. This inclusionary zoning plan does not sound promising at all.

I agree with the article’s alternative plan to helping those that need more affordable housing. This plan is to build more public housing and to properly manage it. The price of rent should also be managed better. I do not understand how the price of housing can increase at such high rates when people’s wages are not increasing at those rates too. It is not fair that people have to spend over half of their income just to pay for the rent. The first paragraph of the article stated that the idea to use inclusionary zoning came from its popularity in other cities including San Francisco. San Francisco is one of the most expensive places to live in the U.S. so I do not see how this method is working. The number one focus for creating more public housing should not be how to make the most money but how to help the people who are struggling to pay their rent or who are currently without a home.

Question: What do you think Mayor De Blasio should do to overcome the housing crisis?