When safety for you means danger for me: the racial politics of carceral public safety discourse.

Safety is a human right and universal need, and yet we as researchers and practitioners often take for granted the conditions that help people feel safe. In this conceptual review, we focus on factors that contribute to people's sense of safety in service of understanding how, when, and where people feel safe. Moreover, we consider how race, power, and privilege shape people's sense of safety and danger. In doing so, we highlight how public safety is not an objective or static reality but rather a political project that reflects dominant ideologies and serves state interests. We begin this conceptual review with a discussion of how public safety is a social construct whose meaning varies across time, space, and place. Next, we discuss three dominant ideologies that are embedded within collective public safety discourse: permanent bad guy syndrome, the victimization-fear paradox, and the politics of ideal victimhood. Together, these ideologies help to shape carceral public safety frameworks, which is the dominant paradigm in our culture. We then illuminate some of the underlying assumptions within carceral public safety frameworks and their implications for responses to public safety concerns, including elevating the safety concerns of dominant groups while criminalizing undesirable bodies, undermining stigmatized communities' ability to access public safety and justice, legitimizing suspicion and surveillance, incentivizing carceral responses while diverting resources from safety promotion programs, and altering public spaces. In doing so, we highlight how carceral public safety frameworks reflect and reinforce existing injustices while also contributing to the stigmatization, marginalization, and manufactured precarity of social groups deemed undesirable and therefore unworthy of protection. We conclude with a discussion of alternative models of public safety which are rooted in life-affirming frameworks, which focus on improving people's material conditions as a means of lessening and preventing the likelihood and impact of interpersonal violence.

Social determinants of mental health: the roles of traumatic events, financial strain, housing instability, food insecurity, and commute time.

OBJECTIVE: To identify social determinants of mental health embedded within college students' living and learning conditions. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 215 mostly undergraduate (95%) business students at a diverse, urban west coast public university (48% women; mean age 24). METHODS: Participants completed an online self-report survey measuring affective state, global mental health, anxious and depressive symptoms, as well as social determinants of mental health. Data were analyzed using multiple regression controlling for self-esteem, gender, and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Results suggest that higher family income is positively related to mental health, whereas more adverse events (e.g., assault, robbery, serious illness or injury), food insecurity, and commute time are negatively related to mental health. Moderation results indicate a moderate buffering effect of belonging on global mental health among students who experience zero adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Social determinants can shed light on student's precarious living and learning conditions and resultant effects on students' mental health.