My gut sense is that Lawrence and Al may be right. I am profoundly conflicted 
by the whole "light up the night" approach to urban crime.

As a country boy, I deeply value darkness. I like many things about city life 
-- that's why I chose it as an adult -- but its lighting addiction is way 
overdone, and getting even more excessive over time. Also, unnecessary burning 
of bulbs is destroying the entire planet, rather rapidly. We face larger 
problems than "Might I be mugged?" during our lifespans, and global warming is 
one of them. As for crime prevention, eyes that swiftly adapt to the dark after 
nightfall are stronger and safer than eyes that are chronically dazzled by 
streetlights. So I think today's American cities are too bright and we should 
cut back on that.

But "perception of safety" is a virtue in itself. Even when it is mistaken, it 
takes a psychological toll, which in turn affects other real values: the value 
of your real estate, the cost of your insurance, the willingness of all sorts 
of others to interact with you for business or for pleasure when their chief 
source of information is your address. And if you suffer from bad press on 
crime, brighter streets absolutely will change that.

-- Tony West
  as the head of the University's own Center for Criminology (Lawrence Sherman) 
pointed out in a published study a few years back, evidence is strong that 
lighting has an effect on the perception of safety but is lacking on whether it 
actually deters crime (that is, some studies suggest that it does, others 
suggest that it doesn't, and a few even suggest that it may serve a 
facilitating rather than a debilitating role).

  Al Krigman

Reply via email to