4 ms·

Increased police funding, increased surveillance, and harsher sentencing... Not exactly the public safety reforms that many were hoping for.

by seoaeu 5y ago

PhoenixReborn 5y ago
Perhaps not, but it's clear that reduced police funding and enforcement hasn't been working...so I think it's a natural shift in the other direction from leadership. While I'm sure many in SF will be disappointed by this, many others will probably be much happier.
- DoctorNick 5y ago
  This is misleading. Police funding was never actually reduced. The proposed funding shift, as paltry as it was (only 120 million), never actually happened: https://www.sfweekly.com/news/is-san-francisco-re-funding-the-police/ https://www.sfweekly.com/news/is-san-francisco-re-funding-th...
  - PhoenixReborn 5y ago
    Ah, thanks for the correction. The policy I had in mind when writing the above comment was the one on petty theft: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1273848 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1273848
- beeboop 5y ago
  >but it's clear that reduced police funding and enforcement hasn't been working based on what evidence?
thehappypm 5y ago
Yeah, these might actually work.
- Tiktaalik 5y ago
  Just like how Regan's War on Drugs worked.
  - thehappypm 5y ago
    Because every societal issue is identical.
    - thevardanian 5y ago
      Because other countries like Singapore or Japan, which have world class cities, actually care about their citizens and provide them with real support. This kind of dogmatic thinking in America will literally be the end of it. "Beatings will continue until morale improves", was not meant to be advice.
      - thehappypm 5y ago
        Singapore is basically a police state
      - egg1 5y ago
        Sorry, but if Singapore and Japan are your ideas of what liberal reform looks like, I've got a bridge to sell you. The kind of lawlessness you see in American and European cities is shocking to anyone coming from these places. Both countries are paternalistic, statist societies controlled by right-wing governments since WW2. Singapore's safety comes from harsh punishment for antisocial behaviors, from caning for vandalism all the way to execution for drug trafficking. Japan is a bit softer on this front but strict cultural norms are enforced by society as a whole. They have freedom of speech but start rioting the way BLM did in 2020 and you can expect the government to use a few "emergency powers" with overwhelming support from the public. Yes, they've implemented a few social safety nets here and there that resemble the welfare system in Western Europe, but they also don't hesitate to use the full power of the state (and public shaming) to crack down on deviant behavior.
diogenescynic 5y ago
Really? Who has been to San Francisco and actually thought we need to further reduce sentencing or that there was too much police? I think most feel the opposite and SF doesn’t exactly mass-incarcerate… I am all for applying the rule of law for once but I am skeptical this is anything more than a PR tactic. Nothing of consequence will change until leadership in SF is thrown out and that will likely never happen.
- jjj123 5y ago
  I live in SF and think that there’s an okay amount of police. I don’t want enhanced police presence. Increased social services sounds like a better way to spend that money to me.
  - diogenescynic 5y ago
    Do you really think SF is lacking in social services? I think the problem is people don’t really want them and can’t be forced to use them so it’s just a waste of resources. Every year millions more are dumped into social programs and the problem has only gotten worse. SF has shown the road to hell is paved in good intentions. I moved out of SF because there were constantly tweakers camping in my garage area and cops took hours to respond and they didn’t even do anything, drug users just came back repeatedly after cops left. SF is fine for the champagne liberals living on Nob Hill with private security but everyone else is living in a place where rule of law barely exists.
    - jjj123 5y ago
      I think we probably have a difference of opinion of what problem we should solve. Correct me if I’m wrong, but this sounds like the problem you want to solve: drug users and homeless people make you feel unsafe, and you want to feel more safe. I don’t personally feel unsafe in SF, at all. The problem I’d like to solve is this: how can we get help to people who need it? Be that unhoused people, people struggling with mental health issues, people who are addicted to drugs. I don’t know if more social services will help solve my problem, you’re right that we spend a lot of money on it and it doesn’t seem to work all that well. But I do know that more policing will absolutely not solve my problem, it will only make it worse. It might solve yours though, as there won’t be as much drug use and theft with increased police presence. I’m not saying either problem is objectively the right or wrong one. I don’t think there is an objective answer. Just want to show you why people like myself are not looking for an increase in SFPD funding. Edited for clarity.
suyash 5y ago
Increase surveillance sounds right out of sci-fi movie..remember "pre-crime" ?
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
  Putting up more cctv cameras is not remotely in the realm of science fiction. It's present-level tech more widely deployed. Privacy advocates won't like it, but that doesn't make it anything like precrime.
DoctorNick 5y ago
"It's the only way to keep those "people" off the streets." – San Francisco resident, 2024 ("Past Tense, Part I")
- emikulic 5y ago
  Great episode. I rewatched it recently and it was just a bit too real.
darth_avocado 5y ago
Isn’t this always the case with ANY government? Use crisis to get access to more funding that they can waste like the rest and more power to control more of its citizens. I’d for once like them to more efficiently use the billions that they already spend and amend policies that have created this crisis in the first place.

Increased police funding, increased surveillance, and harsher sentencing... Not exactly the public safety reforms that many were hoping for.

by seoaeu 5y ago

Increased police funding, increased surveillance, and harsher sentencing... Not exactly the public safety reforms that many were hoping for.

PhoenixReborn 5y ago

Perhaps not, but it's clear that reduced police funding and enforcement hasn't been working...so I think it's a natural shift in the other direction from leadership. While I'm sure many in SF will be disappointed by this, many others will probably be much happier.

DoctorNick 5y ago
This is misleading. Police funding was never actually reduced. The proposed funding shift, as paltry as it was (only 120 million), never actually happened: https://www.sfweekly.com/news/is-san-francisco-re-funding-the-police/ https://www.sfweekly.com/news/is-san-francisco-re-funding-th...
- PhoenixReborn 5y ago
  Ah, thanks for the correction. The policy I had in mind when writing the above comment was the one on petty theft: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1273848 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1273848
beeboop 5y ago
>but it's clear that reduced police funding and enforcement hasn't been working based on what evidence?

thehappypm 5y ago

Yeah, these might actually work.

Tiktaalik 5y ago
Just like how Regan's War on Drugs worked.
- thehappypm 5y ago
  Because every societal issue is identical.
  - thevardanian 5y ago
    Because other countries like Singapore or Japan, which have world class cities, actually care about their citizens and provide them with real support. This kind of dogmatic thinking in America will literally be the end of it. "Beatings will continue until morale improves", was not meant to be advice.
    - thehappypm 5y ago
      Singapore is basically a police state
    - egg1 5y ago
      Sorry, but if Singapore and Japan are your ideas of what liberal reform looks like, I've got a bridge to sell you. The kind of lawlessness you see in American and European cities is shocking to anyone coming from these places. Both countries are paternalistic, statist societies controlled by right-wing governments since WW2. Singapore's safety comes from harsh punishment for antisocial behaviors, from caning for vandalism all the way to execution for drug trafficking. Japan is a bit softer on this front but strict cultural norms are enforced by society as a whole. They have freedom of speech but start rioting the way BLM did in 2020 and you can expect the government to use a few "emergency powers" with overwhelming support from the public. Yes, they've implemented a few social safety nets here and there that resemble the welfare system in Western Europe, but they also don't hesitate to use the full power of the state (and public shaming) to crack down on deviant behavior.

diogenescynic 5y ago

Really? Who has been to San Francisco and actually thought we need to further reduce sentencing or that there was too much police? I think most feel the opposite and SF doesn’t exactly mass-incarcerate… I am all for applying the rule of law for once but I am skeptical this is anything more than a PR tactic. Nothing of consequence will change until leadership in SF is thrown out and that will likely never happen.

jjj123 5y ago
I live in SF and think that there’s an okay amount of police. I don’t want enhanced police presence. Increased social services sounds like a better way to spend that money to me.
- diogenescynic 5y ago
  Do you really think SF is lacking in social services? I think the problem is people don’t really want them and can’t be forced to use them so it’s just a waste of resources. Every year millions more are dumped into social programs and the problem has only gotten worse. SF has shown the road to hell is paved in good intentions. I moved out of SF because there were constantly tweakers camping in my garage area and cops took hours to respond and they didn’t even do anything, drug users just came back repeatedly after cops left. SF is fine for the champagne liberals living on Nob Hill with private security but everyone else is living in a place where rule of law barely exists.
  - jjj123 5y ago
    I think we probably have a difference of opinion of what problem we should solve. Correct me if I’m wrong, but this sounds like the problem you want to solve: drug users and homeless people make you feel unsafe, and you want to feel more safe. I don’t personally feel unsafe in SF, at all. The problem I’d like to solve is this: how can we get help to people who need it? Be that unhoused people, people struggling with mental health issues, people who are addicted to drugs. I don’t know if more social services will help solve my problem, you’re right that we spend a lot of money on it and it doesn’t seem to work all that well. But I do know that more policing will absolutely not solve my problem, it will only make it worse. It might solve yours though, as there won’t be as much drug use and theft with increased police presence. I’m not saying either problem is objectively the right or wrong one. I don’t think there is an objective answer. Just want to show you why people like myself are not looking for an increase in SFPD funding. Edited for clarity.

suyash 5y ago

Increase surveillance sounds right out of sci-fi movie..remember "pre-crime" ?

asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
Putting up more cctv cameras is not remotely in the realm of science fiction. It's present-level tech more widely deployed. Privacy advocates won't like it, but that doesn't make it anything like precrime.

DoctorNick 5y ago

"It's the only way to keep those "people" off the streets." – San Francisco resident, 2024 ("Past Tense, Part I")

emikulic 5y ago
Great episode. I rewatched it recently and it was just a bit too real.

darth_avocado 5y ago

Isn’t this always the case with ANY government? Use crisis to get access to more funding that they can waste like the rest and more power to control more of its citizens. I’d for once like them to more efficiently use the billions that they already spend and amend policies that have created this crisis in the first place.