6 ms·

This article is heavy on the victim-blaming. Are we really supposed to shift some of our blame to the company suffering the thefts? When the LA Prosecutor has

This article is heavy on the victim-blaming. Are we really supposed to shift some of our blame to the company suffering the thefts? When the LA Prosecutor has made it clear that they aren't prosecuting the thieves, it almost doesn't matter how many or how few patrol officers Union Pacific has. If there are no consequences, catching someone in the middle of a theft is only a minor delay and inconvenience.

vkou 5y ago
Depends on whether it took reasonable precautions. If you left a pile of gold bars in an unlocked shed at your vacation property, that you visit three times a year, I can be sympathetic to you if someone steals them, but I'm not quite so sympathetic that I'm ready to volunteer my taxes to fund 24/7 security for your shed. I'm not an expert on what's reasonable when it comes to railway security (and neither are you), but from my layman's take on it, firing 85% of their security, and observing a 160% increase in theft seems like a "Union Pacific problem", not a "me problem". They do seem to have a financial incentive, to the tune of 52 salaries to try to turn it into a "me problem."
- kyrra 5y ago
  You do realize that the thieves are using bolt cutters and breaking into a containers. Some container owners are now welding their containers closed to prevent contents from being stolen. Union Pacific is also turning information over and helping get people arrested, but they're back on the street within 24 hours.
Lammy 5y ago
Yes, capital is complicit in building a society that allows people to suffer to the point that they need to steal to survive. Artificial scarcity is artificial: https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/economic-education/wishes-and-rainbows.aspx https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/economic-education/wi...
- Manuel_D 5y ago
  There's plenty of shortages caused not by capital, but by government. Like restrictive zoning and price controls suppressing housing construction. I fail to see how UP railroad is complicit in the scarcity that may be driving some to steal from trains.
  - Lammy 5y ago
    > not by capital, but by government These are the same thing though. The former is the incentive mechanism to achieve the designs of the latter. It's just filtered through enough layers like Vanguard and Berkshire and friends that people don't notice. Hands up if you've worked somewhere funded by In-Q-Tel, for example (I have!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-Q-Tel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-Q-Tel
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 5y ago
  People kept making that point in SF about the sub-$900 CVS shoplifting rampage until they found out that the whole thing was run by organized large-scale crime rings. Those fine folks in charge of operations are not very likely to be suffering of much of anything, but you could argue that they are taking advantage of the homeless crisis to recruit foot soldiers for their enterprise.
  - Lammy 5y ago
    > but you could argue that they are taking advantage of the homeless crisis to recruit foot soldiers for their enterprise. https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-announces-sentencing-group-involved-organized-retail https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bont... "Over the course of the investigation, $1,874,633.65 was seized from the defendants’ various bank accounts." Yeah, if a two-million-dollar crime organization is supposed to be some "gotcha" then let's compare their possible ratio of crime-boss versus street-thug pay to the ratio of Silicon-Valley-engineer TC versus Tech-CEO TC. Do yours first :D
  - techdragon 5y ago
    Not really sure in this case, but it’s worth remembering that just as people organise into groups and hierarchies for other things like business and politics, so too do they organise for crime. While organised crime is demonstrably capable of engineering situations beneficial to their ongoing criminal endeavours… it’s important to remember that the organised crime rings involvement may just be an emergent property of crime being allowed to happen enough that the people involved in it begin to organise. Of course the situation may devolve from that point but the organising force coming from within before being co-opted is still reflecting a different situation than one where the whole endeavour was started and run by some kind of gang/kingpin/mafia to begin with.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
wolverine876 5y ago
> This article is heavy on the victim-blaming. Victim-blaming is about blaming the vulnerable and powerless. Union Pacific might be 'victims' of crime, but they are not vulnerable and powerless. As one dramatic example, we wouldn't be talking about this issue if it was a vulnerable, powerless individual; they have the power to get their point of view into the public eye.
- mlindner 5y ago
  > Victim-blaming is about blaming the vulnerable and powerless. Oh please. We're attempting to redefine victims based on power theory just like we tried to redefine racism based on power theory? Please don't do this. It entirely isn't a factor whether you have power or not when determining a victim. (Or are we going to say men can't be raped because they could have resisted?)
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    It's not redefining it, and I don't know what "power theory" is nor have I heard of it. Those are the definitions. Discrimination means nothing without the power to make it consequential. Protected classes in law have always been defined around power, as have been laws protecting minorities and women. There's no reason to think a sexually assaulted male is in a position of power.
    - mlindner 5y ago
      Protected classes being defined around power is a brand new concept and not something that is used in law. We are equal under the law.
- n_plus_1 5y ago
  Victim-blaming is about blaming the victim. It has no other qualifiers attached. Having it mean anything else runs counter to the composition of this composite term.
  - 5y ago
mlindner 5y ago
Yes I agree. This sets a dangerous precedent saying basically the police won't enforce laws.
mc32 5y ago
To add to that UP and LAPD have arrested perps and re-arrested the same perps, but the DA/Prosecutor aren't holding water. They aren't following through. In any event, this outlet was likely on the "defund the police" bandwagon, and now, they have the gall to say, oh, it's because you reduced policing (despite the fact that the DA is not doing their job making the argument moot.)

vkou 5y ago

Depends on whether it took reasonable precautions. If you left a pile of gold bars in an unlocked shed at your vacation property, that you visit three times a year, I can be sympathetic to you if someone steals them, but I'm not quite so sympathetic that I'm ready to volunteer my taxes to fund 24/7 security for your shed. I'm not an expert on what's reasonable when it comes to railway security (and neither are you), but from my layman's take on it, firing 85% of their security, and observing a 160% increase in theft seems like a "Union Pacific problem", not a "me problem". They do seem to have a financial incentive, to the tune of 52 salaries to try to turn it into a "me problem."

kyrra 5y ago
You do realize that the thieves are using bolt cutters and breaking into a containers. Some container owners are now welding their containers closed to prevent contents from being stolen. Union Pacific is also turning information over and helping get people arrested, but they're back on the street within 24 hours.

Lammy 5y ago

Yes, capital is complicit in building a society that allows people to suffer to the point that they need to steal to survive. Artificial scarcity is artificial: https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/economic-education/wishes-and-rainbows.aspx https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/economic-education/wi...

Manuel_D 5y ago
There's plenty of shortages caused not by capital, but by government. Like restrictive zoning and price controls suppressing housing construction. I fail to see how UP railroad is complicit in the scarcity that may be driving some to steal from trains.
- Lammy 5y ago
  > not by capital, but by government These are the same thing though. The former is the incentive mechanism to achieve the designs of the latter. It's just filtered through enough layers like Vanguard and Berkshire and friends that people don't notice. Hands up if you've worked somewhere funded by In-Q-Tel, for example (I have!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-Q-Tel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-Q-Tel
8f2ab37a-ed6c 5y ago
People kept making that point in SF about the sub-$900 CVS shoplifting rampage until they found out that the whole thing was run by organized large-scale crime rings. Those fine folks in charge of operations are not very likely to be suffering of much of anything, but you could argue that they are taking advantage of the homeless crisis to recruit foot soldiers for their enterprise.
- Lammy 5y ago
  > but you could argue that they are taking advantage of the homeless crisis to recruit foot soldiers for their enterprise. https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bonta-announces-sentencing-group-involved-organized-retail https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bont... "Over the course of the investigation, $1,874,633.65 was seized from the defendants’ various bank accounts." Yeah, if a two-million-dollar crime organization is supposed to be some "gotcha" then let's compare their possible ratio of crime-boss versus street-thug pay to the ratio of Silicon-Valley-engineer TC versus Tech-CEO TC. Do yours first :D
- techdragon 5y ago
  Not really sure in this case, but it’s worth remembering that just as people organise into groups and hierarchies for other things like business and politics, so too do they organise for crime. While organised crime is demonstrably capable of engineering situations beneficial to their ongoing criminal endeavours… it’s important to remember that the organised crime rings involvement may just be an emergent property of crime being allowed to happen enough that the people involved in it begin to organise. Of course the situation may devolve from that point but the organising force coming from within before being co-opted is still reflecting a different situation than one where the whole endeavour was started and run by some kind of gang/kingpin/mafia to begin with.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

wolverine876 5y ago

> This article is heavy on the victim-blaming. Victim-blaming is about blaming the vulnerable and powerless. Union Pacific might be 'victims' of crime, but they are not vulnerable and powerless. As one dramatic example, we wouldn't be talking about this issue if it was a vulnerable, powerless individual; they have the power to get their point of view into the public eye.

mlindner 5y ago
> Victim-blaming is about blaming the vulnerable and powerless. Oh please. We're attempting to redefine victims based on power theory just like we tried to redefine racism based on power theory? Please don't do this. It entirely isn't a factor whether you have power or not when determining a victim. (Or are we going to say men can't be raped because they could have resisted?)
- wolverine876 5y ago
  It's not redefining it, and I don't know what "power theory" is nor have I heard of it. Those are the definitions. Discrimination means nothing without the power to make it consequential. Protected classes in law have always been defined around power, as have been laws protecting minorities and women. There's no reason to think a sexually assaulted male is in a position of power.
  - mlindner 5y ago
    Protected classes being defined around power is a brand new concept and not something that is used in law. We are equal under the law.
n_plus_1 5y ago
Victim-blaming is about blaming the victim. It has no other qualifiers attached. Having it mean anything else runs counter to the composition of this composite term.
- 5y ago

mlindner 5y ago

Yes I agree. This sets a dangerous precedent saying basically the police won't enforce laws.

mc32 5y ago

To add to that UP and LAPD have arrested perps and re-arrested the same perps, but the DA/Prosecutor aren't holding water. They aren't following through. In any event, this outlet was likely on the "defund the police" bandwagon, and now, they have the gall to say, oh, it's because you reduced policing (despite the fact that the DA is not doing their job making the argument moot.)