5 ms·

Context for those unfamiliar: under California Prop 47, thefts under $950 in San Francisco are rarely prosecuted. This has effectively decriminalized shopliftin

Context for those unfamiliar: under California Prop 47, thefts under $950 in San Francisco are rarely prosecuted. This has effectively decriminalized shoplifting, leading to an extraordinary increase in shoplifting at stores like Walgreens: https://www.wsj.com/articles/san-francisco-shoplifters-theft-walgreens-decriminalized-11634678239 https://www.wsj.com/articles/san-francisco-shoplifters-theft...

dragonwriter 4y ago
> Context for those unfamiliar: under California Prop 47, thefts under $950 in San Francisco are rarely prosecuted Prop 47 makes them misdemeanors, but lots of misdemeanors are prosecuted. What makes them not prosecuted in San Francisco is a combination of police refusing to arrest (in part, as a political protest against Prop 47 and to create pressure for greater criminalization) and the DA choosing not prosecute (and these two things reinforce each other, as nonprosecution of what arrests happen leads to even fewer arrests and even investigations, which leads to fewer opportunities for the DA to even consider prosecution.)
- binarynate 4y ago
  Thanks for clarifying this.
- bubblethink 4y ago
  Why don't stores hire security then ? It's expensive, but what isn't in SF ? Having a guard or two is quite common in other parts of the country.
  - geebee 4y ago
    They do, now. Many stores in SF malls that formerly had 2 entrances now close one, and post a security guard by the other.
- closeparen 4y ago
  Even if there's a prosecution, a likely outcome is a fine. It's extremely unpopular to lock up indigent defendants over unpaid fines or to actually collect against people who need the money for subsistence calories. Quality of life crimes are effectively only illegal when committed by people in a specific window of financial security (can spare the amount of the fine, but not by so much that it's immaterial).

dragonwriter 4y ago

> Context for those unfamiliar: under California Prop 47, thefts under $950 in San Francisco are rarely prosecuted Prop 47 makes them misdemeanors, but lots of misdemeanors are prosecuted. What makes them not prosecuted in San Francisco is a combination of police refusing to arrest (in part, as a political protest against Prop 47 and to create pressure for greater criminalization) and the DA choosing not prosecute (and these two things reinforce each other, as nonprosecution of what arrests happen leads to even fewer arrests and even investigations, which leads to fewer opportunities for the DA to even consider prosecution.)

binarynate 4y ago
Thanks for clarifying this.
bubblethink 4y ago
Why don't stores hire security then ? It's expensive, but what isn't in SF ? Having a guard or two is quite common in other parts of the country.
- geebee 4y ago
  They do, now. Many stores in SF malls that formerly had 2 entrances now close one, and post a security guard by the other.
closeparen 4y ago
Even if there's a prosecution, a likely outcome is a fine. It's extremely unpopular to lock up indigent defendants over unpaid fines or to actually collect against people who need the money for subsistence calories. Quality of life crimes are effectively only illegal when committed by people in a specific window of financial security (can spare the amount of the fine, but not by so much that it's immaterial).