9 ms·

I feel like this experience is so common it’s almost cliche, but I ended up moving with my family out of the city in mid 2020 mostly due to the major influx of

I feel like this experience is so common it’s almost cliche, but I ended up moving with my family out of the city in mid 2020 mostly due to the major influx of homeless into our neighborhood, which had very little before. I didn’t like my kids facing that every time we walked to the park or the grocery store. There was also a rise in petty crime that made the neighborhood feel a lot less safe. It’s a tough situation. At the end of the day, mental health shouldn’t fall to any one city to be responsible for, but we have to start somewhere. I hope for the best and that SF can come up with an effective way to help people off the streets.

mnouquet 5y ago
> I didn’t like my kids facing that every time we walked to the park or the grocery store. Be careful, such thinking is very frowned upon around here...
ergocoder 5y ago
Petty and non-violent crime is only petty and non-violent because the victims don't fight back. I don't know what the solution is, but calling these petty/non-violent feels like an unfair take. A victim is often traumatized about this kind of experiences, but that is never taken into account. I feel San Francisco is such a screwed up place. But many would disagree with me. I don't live there anymore, but it seems people there like restorative justice, and outsiders should help cheer for that to see whether it will work. We need this kind of experiments anyway. Whether it works or not, it will be a great experience to learn for outsiders... So... Go Chesa Boudin! Fighto! We support you 200%!
- flatiron 5y ago
  Sometimes there is no direct victim. Whose the direct victim of public urination or jay walking? I’m not saying they should be legal it’s just nobody really gets traumatized if someone crosses the street without right of way.
  - ergocoder 5y ago
    We talked about different kind of crimes. For example, the Walgreen robbing incident is a non-violent crime because nobody confronted the thieves. I have no idea if breaking car window is considered a violent crime.
    - NeverFade 5y ago
      Shoplifting to that extent - pouring the contents of several shelves into a garbage bag and taking off - threatens the sustainability of businesses. All these crimes have victims.
      - josephcsible 5y ago
        A crime can be non-violent without also being victimless.
        NeverFade 5y ago
        True, but a person barging into a business with their bike, emptying several shelves into a garbage bag, then barging out, forcefully shoving everyone out of their way - that crosses into a borderline violent crime. I would feel very unsafe if I was at the Wallgreens when that happened. The people in the video certainly felt unsafe as well.
        smnrchrds 5y ago
        Yeah. Like all white collar crimes. Madoff had many victims, but the fraud was nevertheless a non-violent crime.
      - creamytaco 5y ago
        Besides, acts like this normalize moral and ethical rot. Do you want your kids to witness this behavior week in / week out? What do you think this does to their development? I took my family out of that cesspit years ago, when my little girl starting asking uncomfortable questions stemming from witnessing this sort of behavior.
    - 5y ago
- wyager 5y ago
  I personally would be terrified to stop a thief in CA, because I suspect that the way CA laws are written, I would be crucified in court for daring to defend property, and most likely I would end up with an assault conviction or something. I'd be hesitant to take that risk even for my own property.
  - ergocoder 5y ago
    It isn't worth it. I wouldn't intervene if my stuff isn't like 1M USD or something. Spending time going to court justifying whether you use the exact appropriate amount of force to stop the incident (who would have time to think that through??) is just really wasteful and psychologically damaging.
  - adrianN 5y ago
    I would be terrified to stop a thief anywhere in the US, because I assume that they have a gun and will just shoot me. I don't own stuff that is worth the risk.
    - kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 5y ago
      This will be unpopular, but have you ever heard the phrase "an armed society is a polite society"? Just as you're afraid to stop someone committing a crime because they might be armed (wait, I thought there were strict gun control laws, how can they be armed?! You mean criminals don't obey laws?! /s), an attacker will be hesitant to assault you if they think you are armed.
      - adrianN 5y ago
        The statistics about death-by-gun for the US that I've heard seem to indicate that this theory doesn't translate very well to practice.
        kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 5y ago
        Oh, I dunno. 330+ million people, over that many guns in the US, and what percentage are gun deaths?
- IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago
  i dont understand you at all - chesa boudin is in favor of letting all the "non violent" criminals you mention , to avoid jail time and prosecution. He's more of the same SF lawyer we had for decades , but on steroids? What is expected to change exactly?
  - ergocoder 5y ago
    Yeah but different stages require different attitudes. 10y ago, this wasn't an issue, so it was okay. Now it is an issue.. but we double down on this same approach, which makes it even worse. Sociological problem like this is tricky to solve. SF residents believe that restorative justice will eventually win in the end, so we should cheer for them to follow through with this experiment. Whether it will work or not, we will all get to learn. For an outsider, we will get to learn without investing much. I don't think it will work, but I'm not an expert here, and I would love to know the result of the experiment.
    - zozbot234 5y ago
      > SF residents believe that restorative justice will eventually win in the end, so we should cheer for them to follow through with this experiment. Doesn't restorative justice usually involve restoration, though? As in, making victims "whole" by paying them fair compensation for the harm they've incurred? How often does that happen in SF?
    - creamytaco 5y ago
      You are already seeing the result of this multi-year experiment. At what point does one lift the veil from his/her eyes? Does the entire city need to become a no-go zone? It won't take long.
- MrBuddyCasino 5y ago
  Whether it works or not, it will be a great experience to learn for outsiders... So... Go Chesa Boudin! Fighto! We support you 200%! extraordinary
Consultant32452 5y ago
The theory is that if people like you are forced to see the homeless you’ll be more willing to fund helping them. Tuck those homeless into shelters and you’ll forget. The problem is people with options leave. They might be willing to help but not at the cost of their own children. The thing 2020 taught me is 90% of the population considers me an acceptable sacrifice. I’m going to have to live with that now and act accordingly.
- dmead 5y ago
  > The thing 2020 taught me is 90% of the population considers me an acceptable sacrifice. I’m going to have to live with that now and act accordingly. what?
- macspoofing 5y ago
  >The theory is that if people like you are forced to see the homeless you’ll be more willing to fund helping them. Whose theory is this? Also, why do you think fighting homelessness is just a function of funding? What if activists and the solutions they propose actually exacerbate the problem.
  - Consultant32452 5y ago
    I wasn’t suggesting the theory works. I was pointing out the discomfort is intended.
    - aksss 5y ago
      The problem with the theory is that the people who have a choice to avoid it just move out. The wealthy who stay can live behind gates and walls with paid protection. The people who promote these theories live in such a disconnected reality, relearning basic lessons in ways that cost societies as a whole and tragically create even more inequality and inequity than was present when they started. Now you preside over a piss-stained, violent[0] city with an eroding tax base and a widening chasm between the haves and the have-nots. Congrats. [0] I tend to agree with another poster that the threat of violence is still violent even if the victim acquiesces to avoid violence (by not confronting, fighting back, intervening, either from direct threat of retaliation by criminal or punishment from state/society for daring to be intolerant of antisocial behavior).

mnouquet 5y ago

> I didn’t like my kids facing that every time we walked to the park or the grocery store. Be careful, such thinking is very frowned upon around here...

ergocoder 5y ago

Petty and non-violent crime is only petty and non-violent because the victims don't fight back. I don't know what the solution is, but calling these petty/non-violent feels like an unfair take. A victim is often traumatized about this kind of experiences, but that is never taken into account. I feel San Francisco is such a screwed up place. But many would disagree with me. I don't live there anymore, but it seems people there like restorative justice, and outsiders should help cheer for that to see whether it will work. We need this kind of experiments anyway. Whether it works or not, it will be a great experience to learn for outsiders... So... Go Chesa Boudin! Fighto! We support you 200%!

flatiron 5y ago
Sometimes there is no direct victim. Whose the direct victim of public urination or jay walking? I’m not saying they should be legal it’s just nobody really gets traumatized if someone crosses the street without right of way.
- ergocoder 5y ago
  We talked about different kind of crimes. For example, the Walgreen robbing incident is a non-violent crime because nobody confronted the thieves. I have no idea if breaking car window is considered a violent crime.
  - NeverFade 5y ago
    Shoplifting to that extent - pouring the contents of several shelves into a garbage bag and taking off - threatens the sustainability of businesses. All these crimes have victims.
    - josephcsible 5y ago
      A crime can be non-violent without also being victimless.
      - NeverFade 5y ago
        True, but a person barging into a business with their bike, emptying several shelves into a garbage bag, then barging out, forcefully shoving everyone out of their way - that crosses into a borderline violent crime. I would feel very unsafe if I was at the Wallgreens when that happened. The people in the video certainly felt unsafe as well.
      - smnrchrds 5y ago
        Yeah. Like all white collar crimes. Madoff had many victims, but the fraud was nevertheless a non-violent crime.
    - creamytaco 5y ago
      Besides, acts like this normalize moral and ethical rot. Do you want your kids to witness this behavior week in / week out? What do you think this does to their development? I took my family out of that cesspit years ago, when my little girl starting asking uncomfortable questions stemming from witnessing this sort of behavior.
  - 5y ago
wyager 5y ago
I personally would be terrified to stop a thief in CA, because I suspect that the way CA laws are written, I would be crucified in court for daring to defend property, and most likely I would end up with an assault conviction or something. I'd be hesitant to take that risk even for my own property.
- ergocoder 5y ago
  It isn't worth it. I wouldn't intervene if my stuff isn't like 1M USD or something. Spending time going to court justifying whether you use the exact appropriate amount of force to stop the incident (who would have time to think that through??) is just really wasteful and psychologically damaging.
- adrianN 5y ago
  I would be terrified to stop a thief anywhere in the US, because I assume that they have a gun and will just shoot me. I don't own stuff that is worth the risk.
  - kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 5y ago
    This will be unpopular, but have you ever heard the phrase "an armed society is a polite society"? Just as you're afraid to stop someone committing a crime because they might be armed (wait, I thought there were strict gun control laws, how can they be armed?! You mean criminals don't obey laws?! /s), an attacker will be hesitant to assault you if they think you are armed.
    - adrianN 5y ago
      The statistics about death-by-gun for the US that I've heard seem to indicate that this theory doesn't translate very well to practice.
      - kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 5y ago
        Oh, I dunno. 330+ million people, over that many guns in the US, and what percentage are gun deaths?
IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago
i dont understand you at all - chesa boudin is in favor of letting all the "non violent" criminals you mention , to avoid jail time and prosecution. He's more of the same SF lawyer we had for decades , but on steroids? What is expected to change exactly?
- ergocoder 5y ago
  Yeah but different stages require different attitudes. 10y ago, this wasn't an issue, so it was okay. Now it is an issue.. but we double down on this same approach, which makes it even worse. Sociological problem like this is tricky to solve. SF residents believe that restorative justice will eventually win in the end, so we should cheer for them to follow through with this experiment. Whether it will work or not, we will all get to learn. For an outsider, we will get to learn without investing much. I don't think it will work, but I'm not an expert here, and I would love to know the result of the experiment.
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    > SF residents believe that restorative justice will eventually win in the end, so we should cheer for them to follow through with this experiment. Doesn't restorative justice usually involve restoration, though? As in, making victims "whole" by paying them fair compensation for the harm they've incurred? How often does that happen in SF?
  - creamytaco 5y ago
    You are already seeing the result of this multi-year experiment. At what point does one lift the veil from his/her eyes? Does the entire city need to become a no-go zone? It won't take long.
MrBuddyCasino 5y ago
Whether it works or not, it will be a great experience to learn for outsiders... So... Go Chesa Boudin! Fighto! We support you 200%! extraordinary

Consultant32452 5y ago

The theory is that if people like you are forced to see the homeless you’ll be more willing to fund helping them. Tuck those homeless into shelters and you’ll forget. The problem is people with options leave. They might be willing to help but not at the cost of their own children. The thing 2020 taught me is 90% of the population considers me an acceptable sacrifice. I’m going to have to live with that now and act accordingly.

dmead 5y ago
> The thing 2020 taught me is 90% of the population considers me an acceptable sacrifice. I’m going to have to live with that now and act accordingly. what?
macspoofing 5y ago
>The theory is that if people like you are forced to see the homeless you’ll be more willing to fund helping them. Whose theory is this? Also, why do you think fighting homelessness is just a function of funding? What if activists and the solutions they propose actually exacerbate the problem.
- Consultant32452 5y ago
  I wasn’t suggesting the theory works. I was pointing out the discomfort is intended.
  - aksss 5y ago
    The problem with the theory is that the people who have a choice to avoid it just move out. The wealthy who stay can live behind gates and walls with paid protection. The people who promote these theories live in such a disconnected reality, relearning basic lessons in ways that cost societies as a whole and tragically create even more inequality and inequity than was present when they started. Now you preside over a piss-stained, violent[0] city with an eroding tax base and a widening chasm between the haves and the have-nots. Congrats. [0] I tend to agree with another poster that the threat of violence is still violent even if the victim acquiesces to avoid violence (by not confronting, fighting back, intervening, either from direct threat of retaliation by criminal or punishment from state/society for daring to be intolerant of antisocial behavior).