Liberal policing and policies in San Francisco

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have specific, credible citations for the talk of "ending policing" - like specific language from Mayor, Chief of Police or Council?

Oakland had put a freeze on officers since they wanted to transition some type of woke non-solution, and one city council member is pushing for them to stop that since they desperately need more officers, not less. Does that count?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SF is an utter hellhole. Have you been there recently? It is dangerous and scary. Go walk around the city early in the morning on a Sat. or Sun. There will be TONS of homeless junkies meandering around absolutely high out of their minds. It literally looks like the Walking Dead zombie apocalypse. Even their parks are trashed with losers....just go through what was once a beautiful park.....completely overrun with homeless and people parking their crappy campers and winnebegos indefinitely because they use it as a base to live in while working in the city in order to save money. Trash is everywhere. So many streets smell like human feces and urine, because you can literally see people crapping in the streets in the middle of the day like it is a 3rd world hell hole. You have to constantly dodge hyperdermic needles on top of the feces bombs...what a great way to spread hepatitis C. Homeless and junkies have more rights than taxpaying citizens in SF. Car break-ins are a massive problem. The city's only solution is to keep legalizing open drug use, tie the hands of the police behind their backs from being able to arrest anyone, and continues to openly embrace homeless who keep coming and coming. And guess what? You get to pay upwards of 13% state income tax for the privilege of living in a 3rd world hell hole with crappy schools and out of control crime and moral decay. CA and SF are the most overrated places on the planet.

Here’s a solution. Don’t live there. MYOB. I assure you the the people of San Francisco could care less about you or whatever suburban he!!h0!e you live in. See how easy that is?

Apparently no one should visit either

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s crazy how people jump on the bandwagon for these, obviously less effective criminal justice laws, and then are shocked when their political party loses power as crime rises. Like shocked pikachu face how did I not know that ending policing in a violent neighborhood would result in a 30% murder increase? Or who knew taking shoplifting less than $1000 would only result in a misdemeanor would somehow spur a shoplifting crimewave?

This has me concerned because I am liberal. Not a progressive a moderate liberal.

What happens when republicans win and the pendulum swings the other way and there is a massive crack down on crime that disproportionately hits people…basically it’s hard to find a good policing middle ground, but this lax crap needs to stop.

Honest question though. Why is it considered a massive Republican crackdown when it is literally enforcing the law and protecting property rights? This is an opportunity to stop playing partisan games and identify bad policy and do something about it.

+1

It’s disgusting that caring about our laws and not wanting a business robbed or looted or people to be assaulted is apparently a “republican” idea now.

You might not like “stop and frisk”, and I think there’s a valid discussion to be had about that. But we’d better start cracking down hard on criminals or next year there’s gonna be a red wave like we’ve never seen before.

Bring back law enforcement and policing practices that lead to inherently unequal justice outcomes? Yea keep trying to reimpose this through fear-mongering.

Here’s a newsflash for you and really think on this……if more blacks people shoplift then more black people will be arrested and prosecuted. Do you see how that works?

[Anonymous]

The repubs on here want America to turn back the clock on inequitable policing and bring back the mass incarceration of the lower classes and poc so as to defend their privilege.
Plus it’s in San Francisco and they’ll handle it has they see fit.
Your wasteful, precious suburban McMansions are safe.

[Anonymous]

I agree that progressive policies are too lax towards crime and troubling. The problem is that conservatives don’t offer a good enough alternative. Stop and Frisk is not an option. The cavalier way in which some would throw out our constitutional rights for lower crime outcomes is scary. We need to uphold order and constitutional protections simultaneously. This should not be rocket science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The repubs on here want America to turn back the clock on inequitable policing and bring back the mass incarceration of the lower classes and poc so as to defend their privilege.
Plus it’s in San Francisco and they’ll handle it has they see fit.
Your wasteful, precious suburban McMansions are safe.

Blah, blah, blah…….the usual pseudo-progressive drivel from crime apologists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that progressive policies are too lax towards crime and troubling. The problem is that conservatives don’t offer a good enough alternative. Stop and Frisk is not an option. The cavalier way in which some would throw out our constitutional rights for lower crime outcomes is scary. We need to uphold order and constitutional protections simultaneously. This should not be rocket science.

It’s not violating anyone’s constitutional rights to lock them up after we know they’ve committed a crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The repubs on here want America to turn back the clock on inequitable policing and bring back the mass incarceration of the lower classes and poc so as to defend their privilege.
Plus it’s in San Francisco and they’ll handle it has they see fit.
Your wasteful, precious suburban McMansions are safe.

Yes, because enforcing laws against SHOPLIFTING promulgates the racist structural issues underneath society. .......or you know, you can simply also not break the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s crazy how people jump on the bandwagon for these, obviously less effective criminal justice laws, and then are shocked when their political party loses power as crime rises. Like shocked pikachu face how did I not know that ending policing in a violent neighborhood would result in a 30% murder increase? Or who knew taking shoplifting less than $1000 would only result in a misdemeanor would somehow spur a shoplifting crimewave?

This has me concerned because I am liberal. Not a progressive a moderate liberal.

What happens when republicans win and the pendulum swings the other way and there is a massive crack down on crime that disproportionately hits people…basically it’s hard to find a good policing middle ground, but this lax crap needs to stop.

Honest question though. Why is it considered a massive Republican crackdown when it is literally enforcing the law and protecting property rights? This is an opportunity to stop playing partisan games and identify bad policy and do something about it.

+1

It’s disgusting that caring about our laws and not wanting a business robbed or looted or people to be assaulted is apparently a “republican” idea now.

You might not like “stop and frisk”, and I think there’s a valid discussion to be had about that. But we’d better start cracking down hard on criminals or next year there’s gonna be a red wave like we’ve never seen before.

Bring back law enforcement and policing practices that lead to inherently unequal justice outcomes? Yea keep trying to reimpose this through fear-mongering.

Dude, California is seeing mobs of people looting stores day after day after day. It’s not fear-mongering when it’s actually happening.

You know what the definition of looting is. Here is a hint. It is not organized gangs breaking in to high end stores to steal things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s crazy how people jump on the bandwagon for these, obviously less effective criminal justice laws, and then are shocked when their political party loses power as crime rises. Like shocked pikachu face how did I not know that ending policing in a violent neighborhood would result in a 30% murder increase? Or who knew taking shoplifting less than $1000 would only result in a misdemeanor would somehow spur a shoplifting crimewave?

This has me concerned because I am liberal. Not a progressive a moderate liberal.

What happens when republicans win and the pendulum swings the other way and there is a massive crack down on crime that disproportionately hits people…basically it’s hard to find a good policing middle ground, but this lax crap needs to stop.

Honest question though. Why is it considered a massive Republican crackdown when it is literally enforcing the law and protecting property rights? This is an opportunity to stop playing partisan games and identify bad policy and do something about it.

+1

It’s disgusting that caring about our laws and not wanting a business robbed or looted or people to be assaulted is apparently a “republican” idea now.

You might not like “stop and frisk”, and I think there’s a valid discussion to be had about that. But we’d better start cracking down hard on criminals or next year there’s gonna be a red wave like we’ve never seen before.

Bring back law enforcement and policing practices that lead to inherently unequal justice outcomes? Yea keep trying to reimpose this through fear-mongering.

Dude, California is seeing mobs of people looting stores day after day after day. It’s not fear-mongering when it’s actually happening.

You know what the definition of looting is. Here is a hint. It is not organized gangs breaking in to high end stores to steal things.

Yep it’s like saying Tommy DeVito is a looter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s crazy how people jump on the bandwagon for these, obviously less effective criminal justice laws, and then are shocked when their political party loses power as crime rises. Like shocked pikachu face how did I not know that ending policing in a violent neighborhood would result in a 30% murder increase? Or who knew taking shoplifting less than $1000 would only result in a misdemeanor would somehow spur a shoplifting crimewave?

This has me concerned because I am liberal. Not a progressive a moderate liberal.

What happens when republicans win and the pendulum swings the other way and there is a massive crack down on crime that disproportionately hits people…basically it’s hard to find a good policing middle ground, but this lax crap needs to stop.

Honest question though. Why is it considered a massive Republican crackdown when it is literally enforcing the law and protecting property rights? This is an opportunity to stop playing partisan games and identify bad policy and do something about it.

+1

It’s disgusting that caring about our laws and not wanting a business robbed or looted or people to be assaulted is apparently a “republican” idea now.

You might not like “stop and frisk”, and I think there’s a valid discussion to be had about that. But we’d better start cracking down hard on criminals or next year there’s gonna be a red wave like we’ve never seen before.

Bring back law enforcement and policing practices that lead to inherently unequal justice outcomes? Yea keep trying to reimpose this through fear-mongering.

Dude, California is seeing mobs of people looting stores day after day after day. It’s not fear-mongering when it’s actually happening.

You know what the definition of looting is. Here is a hint. It is not organized gangs breaking in to high end stores to steal things.

Can you clarify why you see this distinction as important?

[Anonymous]

Target left Baltimore because of shoplifting. Then they have the gall to whine about retail redlining. Maybe people just need to stop stealing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Target left Baltimore because of shoplifting. Then they have the gall to whine about retail redlining. Maybe people just need to stop stealing.

Just call it wealth transfer or social safety net and keep it moving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone have specific, credible citations for the talk of "ending policing" - like specific language from Mayor, Chief of Police or Council?

Oakland had put a freeze on officers since they wanted to transition some type of woke non-solution, and one city council member is pushing for them to stop that since they desperately need more officers, not less. Does that count?

A freeze on new hires is not even remotely "ending policing" - it does contribute to a slow, gradual loss of officers though. But they can't do things like that without putting their other plans into effect. Camden NJ rebuilt their police force from the ground up and saw a lot of success. That's what a lot of other cities need to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s crazy how people jump on the bandwagon for these, obviously less effective criminal justice laws, and then are shocked when their political party loses power as crime rises. Like shocked pikachu face how did I not know that ending policing in a violent neighborhood would result in a 30% murder increase? Or who knew taking shoplifting less than $1000 would only result in a misdemeanor would somehow spur a shoplifting crimewave?

This has me concerned because I am liberal. Not a progressive a moderate liberal.

What happens when republicans win and the pendulum swings the other way and there is a massive crack down on crime that disproportionately hits people…basically it’s hard to find a good policing middle ground, but this lax crap needs to stop.

Honest question though. Why is it considered a massive Republican crackdown when it is literally enforcing the law and protecting property rights? This is an opportunity to stop playing partisan games and identify bad policy and do something about it.

+1

It’s disgusting that caring about our laws and not wanting a business robbed or looted or people to be assaulted is apparently a “republican” idea now.

You might not like “stop and frisk”, and I think there’s a valid discussion to be had about that. But we’d better start cracking down hard on criminals or next year there’s gonna be a red wave like we’ve never seen before.

Bring back law enforcement and policing practices that lead to inherently unequal justice outcomes? Yea keep trying to reimpose this through fear-mongering.

Dude, California is seeing mobs of people looting stores day after day after day. It’s not fear-mongering when it’s actually happening.

You know what the definition of looting is. Here is a hint. It is not organized gangs breaking in to high end stores to steal things.

Can you clarify why you see this distinction as important?

There's definitely organized crime going on, whether gangs or otherwise. I recall a video from Chicago during the height of BLM protests, where someone at 2AM filmed an entire fleet of U-Hauls and a crew of around 20 people breaking in to and cleaning out a CVS store. Clearly organized and preplanned.