5 ms·

> SFC has very-overpowered tools to remove heroin dealers from society, within the due-process framework of criminal law. Therein lies the problem. The distric

by wahern 5y ago

> SFC has very-overpowered tools to remove heroin dealers from society, within the due-process framework of criminal law. Therein lies the problem. The district attorney refuses to seek jail time for drug dealing or most any other offense not involving direct, physical violence. Thus the gambit by the city attorney, who handles the city's civil administrative matters. The SF district attorney finally published statistics on case disposition. He's long been claiming that his case prosecution rate (as judged by the filing of charges) remains high and comparable to his predecessors. (Note that his immediate predecessor, Gascon, was perhaps the 2nd most liberal district attorney in the country.) But that says nothing about case disposition. It turns out that, as suspected, the percentage of cases resulting in jail time have dramatically dropped over his tenure. In particular, the percentage of criminal cases shunted into pretrial diversion programs has nearly doubled under his tenure. 43% of criminal cases are diverted. But things could be even worse than that because 1) for convictions we don't have metrics on punishments and sentencing, which by most accounts have been significantly softened, and 2) the data says "successful diversion", yet all numbers add up to 100%, so we can either assume that "non-successful" diversions end in convictions, or the definition of "success" is extremely loose. Also note that because diversions don't result in convictions they have less weight on subsequent charges--particularly less weight under this city attorney, by most accounts. To those who say that less jail time is good, I would point out a fallacy in the common criminal justice reform narrative. If you compare person prison years, the U.S. is an extreme outlier. However, by prison admittances per year, we're actually not extreme at all, even compared to Europe. (Unsurprisingly by that metric we look alot like other Anglo countries, modulo crime rate.) IOW, what was extreme about the U.S. was the duration of jail sentences (i.e. severity), not the rate at which we used jail time for penal purposes. That fallacious narrative is leading us down a perverse, equally extreme road--we're swinging from extreme amounts of jail time to no jail time. Just another manifestation of a classic American dynamic, I guess. Neither the people nor their institutions are very good at modulating their behavior--it's all or nothing with us.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> The district attorney refuses to seek jail time for drug dealing or most any other offense not involving direct, physical violence. To the extent that's true, the solution is to replace the DA. The DA not prosecuting the way other city leaders would like does not empower those leaders to assume dictatorial power and impose arbitrary punishment without due process.
- adamrezich 4y ago
  surely at this point the problem runs deeper than just a single DA, and it's safe to assume that the entire government apparatus as a whole is rotten with corruption? you really think that just replacing one single public servant is going to cause any kind of dramatic shift for things over there?
- wahern 4y ago
  I agree the most appropriate solution to this particular aspect of the problem is to replace the DA. The recall is actually scheduled for next month, but the city attorney initially sought these injunctions over 18 months ago. I was addressing what seemed like a point of confusion regarding the roles of the district attorney and city attorney, and providing some context regarding how things are playing out. I don't think any official in the city wants to bring back 1980's LA-style gang injunctions. But the district attorney is an elected, independent office whose policies are exacerbating an already extreme situation. He simply will not budge, and the mayor believes it would be counterproductive to use the city's purse strings to "punish" the office financially. While Boudin can't be faulted for all the contributive policy problems, over 1300 people have died from drug overdoses over the past two years (his tenure began January 2020) and the rate is increasing. It's a humanitarian crisis with a legitimately astonishing body count which city hall is trying to get a handle on despite the Board of Supervisors' political paralysis and denial, and the District Attorney's counterproductive, ideologically extreme policies. It's a rare, extreme situation where it's not hyperbole to say that practical matters of life-and-death are bumping up against abstract principles. And it should go without saying that it's not helpful to point out that "the city" (as an abstract entity) is reaping what it sowed. The city is slowly coming to that realization, and unwinding those horrible policies to the extent it can will take time, especially in the context of democratic governance, while in the meantime the body count is accelerating. In such situations it's not uncommon for the law to give some temporary allowance for dealing with exigent, extreme situations with clear outcomes that are undeniably horrible (i.e. it's not a matter of, say, racking up a monetary debt for bad finances, or losing a few prosecutions--we're talking daily deaths). And in that sense the strategy of seeking injunctions isn't as objectionable as it might seem on its face. We should be careful about applying a national policy lens on a very local matter. The folly and hubris of applying abstract, nationally-framed narratives to local matters is part of how city ended up in the situation it has.
BeefWellington 4y ago
If you compare person prison years, the U.S. is an extreme outlier. However, by prison admittances per year, we're actually not extreme at all, even compared to Europe. (Unsurprisingly by that metric we look alot like other Anglo countries, modulo crime rate.) IOW, what was extreme about the U.S. was the duration of jail sentences (i.e. severity), not the rate at which we used jail time for penal purposes. IOW, what was extreme about the U.S. was the duration of jail sentences (i.e. severity), not the rate at which we used jail time for penal purposes. That fallacious narrative is leading us down a perverse, equally extreme road--we're swinging from extreme amounts of jail time to no jail time. Are you able to cite this? Per the World Prison Brief the US leads the way in incarceration rate, so I'm not sure how to square that with your claims.[1] Per the World Prison Brief: - The Highest in Europe on that chart is Turkey, at just over half of the US rate (368 vs 629 per 100k). - It's not clear what "Anglo country" is referring to specifically but if we look at CANZUK for comparison, we can see the next highest rate of the entire group is Australia at 165. I'm not sure how that's comparable. You mention modulo Crime rate but for example Canada has more total crimes per 1000[2] than the US, just less violent crime. It's not as easy as an off the cuff answer because there are so many different cultural factors even between former British colonies in regards to laws that the data will generally skew wildly. [1] https://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison_population_rate?field_region_taxonomy_tid=All https://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison_popul... [2] https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/Uni...
- mlyle 4y ago
  > so I'm not sure how to square that with your claims.[1] ? If the US puts X/100000 people in prison per year, and country B puts 1.1X/100000 people in prison per year... but the US imprisons people for 5x as long, then the US incarceration rate would be 4x higher, even though country B puts people in prison more often.
braingenious 4y ago
>Therein lies the problem. The district attorney refuses to seek jail time for drug dealing or most any other offense not involving direct, physical violence. I’m not really clear how this restraining order helps what you’re describing. Do you support the ability of the police to impose jail time in a way that circumvents the (elected) prosecutor’s office? >If you compare person prison years, the U.S. is an extreme outlier. However, by prison admittances per year, we're actually not extreme at all, even compared to Europe. This is factually wrong. It entirely hinges on extremely warped interpretation of data that can only be generated by a person or organization that starts with a desired version of reality and works backward to justify that position. Out of curiosity, in general do you view yourself as somebody that could at some point —in any way whatsoever— piss off a cop? I’ve noticed that people that advocate for longer jail sentences and does the whole “humans won’t adjust their behavior unless every cop gets a rocket launcher and a teleporter to send criminals directly to prison forever” bit answer “No.”
- mlyle 4y ago
  > I’ve noticed that people that advocate for longer jail sentences I'm a bit confused. I read the above poster as advocating for shorter prison sentences, but not to overcorrect in making the change. Did you misread the person you're replying to?
  - braingenious 4y ago
    How do you interpret this point (and subsequent paragraph) from the post I was responding to? > To those who say that less jail time is good, I would point out a fallacy in the common criminal justice reform … At another part in that post this person brought up issues with lack of prosecution (which by definition means less jail time) and diversion (ditto). So… in your estimation the author was… advocating for more people to go to jail but also supporting the idea of shorter sentences while pointing out that people that say that advocating for shorter sentences means to fall for a fallacy? This poster wants to point out that the push for less jail time is the result of a fallacy, but thinks it’s good?? Did you read the post I responded to? What did you think was trying to be expressed?

by wahern 5y ago

dragonwriter 5y ago

> The district attorney refuses to seek jail time for drug dealing or most any other offense not involving direct, physical violence. To the extent that's true, the solution is to replace the DA. The DA not prosecuting the way other city leaders would like does not empower those leaders to assume dictatorial power and impose arbitrary punishment without due process.

adamrezich 4y ago
surely at this point the problem runs deeper than just a single DA, and it's safe to assume that the entire government apparatus as a whole is rotten with corruption? you really think that just replacing one single public servant is going to cause any kind of dramatic shift for things over there?
wahern 4y ago
I agree the most appropriate solution to this particular aspect of the problem is to replace the DA. The recall is actually scheduled for next month, but the city attorney initially sought these injunctions over 18 months ago. I was addressing what seemed like a point of confusion regarding the roles of the district attorney and city attorney, and providing some context regarding how things are playing out. I don't think any official in the city wants to bring back 1980's LA-style gang injunctions. But the district attorney is an elected, independent office whose policies are exacerbating an already extreme situation. He simply will not budge, and the mayor believes it would be counterproductive to use the city's purse strings to "punish" the office financially. While Boudin can't be faulted for all the contributive policy problems, over 1300 people have died from drug overdoses over the past two years (his tenure began January 2020) and the rate is increasing. It's a humanitarian crisis with a legitimately astonishing body count which city hall is trying to get a handle on despite the Board of Supervisors' political paralysis and denial, and the District Attorney's counterproductive, ideologically extreme policies. It's a rare, extreme situation where it's not hyperbole to say that practical matters of life-and-death are bumping up against abstract principles. And it should go without saying that it's not helpful to point out that "the city" (as an abstract entity) is reaping what it sowed. The city is slowly coming to that realization, and unwinding those horrible policies to the extent it can will take time, especially in the context of democratic governance, while in the meantime the body count is accelerating. In such situations it's not uncommon for the law to give some temporary allowance for dealing with exigent, extreme situations with clear outcomes that are undeniably horrible (i.e. it's not a matter of, say, racking up a monetary debt for bad finances, or losing a few prosecutions--we're talking daily deaths). And in that sense the strategy of seeking injunctions isn't as objectionable as it might seem on its face. We should be careful about applying a national policy lens on a very local matter. The folly and hubris of applying abstract, nationally-framed narratives to local matters is part of how city ended up in the situation it has.

BeefWellington 4y ago

If you compare person prison years, the U.S. is an extreme outlier. However, by prison admittances per year, we're actually not extreme at all, even compared to Europe. (Unsurprisingly by that metric we look alot like other Anglo countries, modulo crime rate.) IOW, what was extreme about the U.S. was the duration of jail sentences (i.e. severity), not the rate at which we used jail time for penal purposes. IOW, what was extreme about the U.S. was the duration of jail sentences (i.e. severity), not the rate at which we used jail time for penal purposes. That fallacious narrative is leading us down a perverse, equally extreme road--we're swinging from extreme amounts of jail time to no jail time. Are you able to cite this? Per the World Prison Brief the US leads the way in incarceration rate, so I'm not sure how to square that with your claims.[1] Per the World Prison Brief: - The Highest in Europe on that chart is Turkey, at just over half of the US rate (368 vs 629 per 100k). - It's not clear what "Anglo country" is referring to specifically but if we look at CANZUK for comparison, we can see the next highest rate of the entire group is Australia at 165. I'm not sure how that's comparable. You mention modulo Crime rate but for example Canada has more total crimes per 1000[2] than the US, just less violent crime. It's not as easy as an off the cuff answer because there are so many different cultural factors even between former British colonies in regards to laws that the data will generally skew wildly. [1] https://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison_population_rate?field_region_taxonomy_tid=All https://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison_popul... [2] https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/Uni...

mlyle 4y ago
> so I'm not sure how to square that with your claims.[1] ? If the US puts X/100000 people in prison per year, and country B puts 1.1X/100000 people in prison per year... but the US imprisons people for 5x as long, then the US incarceration rate would be 4x higher, even though country B puts people in prison more often.

braingenious 4y ago

>Therein lies the problem. The district attorney refuses to seek jail time for drug dealing or most any other offense not involving direct, physical violence. I’m not really clear how this restraining order helps what you’re describing. Do you support the ability of the police to impose jail time in a way that circumvents the (elected) prosecutor’s office? >If you compare person prison years, the U.S. is an extreme outlier. However, by prison admittances per year, we're actually not extreme at all, even compared to Europe. This is factually wrong. It entirely hinges on extremely warped interpretation of data that can only be generated by a person or organization that starts with a desired version of reality and works backward to justify that position. Out of curiosity, in general do you view yourself as somebody that could at some point —in any way whatsoever— piss off a cop? I’ve noticed that people that advocate for longer jail sentences and does the whole “humans won’t adjust their behavior unless every cop gets a rocket launcher and a teleporter to send criminals directly to prison forever” bit answer “No.”

mlyle 4y ago
> I’ve noticed that people that advocate for longer jail sentences I'm a bit confused. I read the above poster as advocating for shorter prison sentences, but not to overcorrect in making the change. Did you misread the person you're replying to?
- braingenious 4y ago
  How do you interpret this point (and subsequent paragraph) from the post I was responding to? > To those who say that less jail time is good, I would point out a fallacy in the common criminal justice reform … At another part in that post this person brought up issues with lack of prosecution (which by definition means less jail time) and diversion (ditto). So… in your estimation the author was… advocating for more people to go to jail but also supporting the idea of shorter sentences while pointing out that people that say that advocating for shorter sentences means to fall for a fallacy? This poster wants to point out that the push for less jail time is the result of a fallacy, but thinks it’s good?? Did you read the post I responded to? What did you think was trying to be expressed?