3 ms·

> I am genuinely curious to know how SF residents feel about this. Based on the subreddit, which is usually a trash fire, it's what you'd expect I guess? Every

> I am genuinely curious to know how SF residents feel about this. Based on the subreddit, which is usually a trash fire, it's what you'd expect I guess? Everyone thinks murder is bad, so we start at that baseline, and from there it's a couple classes of people arguing with eachother: those that are happy to consider san francisco "a shithole" or whatever hot reactionary word of the day the rest of the country is using to label SF as enemy #1 of traditional american values and are essentially exuberant to have a new single point of data to sling around, and those that are overcorrecting against this and diminishing the real problems in SF in an attempt to whitewash while to be fair making things seem more true to reality, that is to say, portray SF as, statistically speaking, relatively safe and boring for a US metropolitan area. As a former SF resident I think it's really sad that someone got murdered and I'm really angry about it. I'm mad at whoever did it, what a scumbag. I'm hopeful that there will be justice. I'm also afraid that this might give ammunition to reactionaries that want to overfund or overarm the SFPD, and that this will lend further political strength to politicians like bloodthirsty DAs that get their rocks off to throwing young POC in prison for minor drug offenses. Cynically, part of me knows that finally some of the issues SF has been facing and the various leaders have been ignoring or handling poorly will probably be handled properly now that a rich person has been murdered. Well, no, cynical me again, probably this just means the cops will be cut loose a bit more and ineffective, punitive policies will be enacted / enforced / tightened.

zamnos 4y ago
If they're able to tie this back to a seedy tale of a crypto millionaire gone wrong, and can't blame it on the homeless, then what will they do?
shuckles 4y ago
Most criminal justice reform is implemented at the state level so hopefully you are assured that punitive sentences for petty crimes is not actually possible anymore in California. In any case, even the most pro-incarceration DA electable in San Francisco would be a reform candidate in almost every jurisdiction of the country.
bart_spoon 4y ago
It seems strange to me that when a person is murdered the first concern is how it will affect criminals. I mean I understand the concerns of an over active and under regulated police force, but my understanding is that San Francisco’s issues are largely the exact opposite: the police and the DA office have essentially legalized many forms of crime by refusing to prosecute people. It hasn’t seemed to make San Fransisco any better for it. At what point does the idea of punishing individuals for criminal activity stop being taboo?
- godzillabrennus 4y ago
  When the local population stops electing people who think it’s a good idea to legalize crime.
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    It's not legalized by the legislature. It's just not enforced by default by the prosecutor. There's a big difference. The prosecutor can still choose to enforce as they see fit or in "special" circumstances. On one hand I can respect the check and balance against an out of touch state legislature that prosecutor discretion provides. But a state policy to not prosecute certain classes of property crimes that have a victim(!!!) because of demographic make up of the people who engage in them hearkens back not to a prohibition era sheriff saying "alcohol isn't my job" but to a Jim crow era sheriff enforcing inequality under the law.
    - anon291 4y ago
      Prosecutors are elected
- rhaway84773 4y ago
  > It seems strange to me that when a person is murdered the first concern is how it will affect criminals. Funny, I have never seen the “first concern” being how it will affect criminals. What I have seen, instead, is a weird fetish by most Americans, but most importantly, politicians, to increase punishment for criminals and expand police powers and protections, despite tons of evidence this doesn’t work and the US already having more punishment and more police powers than peer countries with far lower crime. Some people respond by suggesting that we should try changes that actually help reduce crime and homicides as opposed to those that just help satisfy a knee jerk animalistic desire for punishment.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

zamnos 4y ago

If they're able to tie this back to a seedy tale of a crypto millionaire gone wrong, and can't blame it on the homeless, then what will they do?

shuckles 4y ago

Most criminal justice reform is implemented at the state level so hopefully you are assured that punitive sentences for petty crimes is not actually possible anymore in California. In any case, even the most pro-incarceration DA electable in San Francisco would be a reform candidate in almost every jurisdiction of the country.

bart_spoon 4y ago

It seems strange to me that when a person is murdered the first concern is how it will affect criminals. I mean I understand the concerns of an over active and under regulated police force, but my understanding is that San Francisco’s issues are largely the exact opposite: the police and the DA office have essentially legalized many forms of crime by refusing to prosecute people. It hasn’t seemed to make San Fransisco any better for it. At what point does the idea of punishing individuals for criminal activity stop being taboo?

godzillabrennus 4y ago
When the local population stops electing people who think it’s a good idea to legalize crime.
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago
  It's not legalized by the legislature. It's just not enforced by default by the prosecutor. There's a big difference. The prosecutor can still choose to enforce as they see fit or in "special" circumstances. On one hand I can respect the check and balance against an out of touch state legislature that prosecutor discretion provides. But a state policy to not prosecute certain classes of property crimes that have a victim(!!!) because of demographic make up of the people who engage in them hearkens back not to a prohibition era sheriff saying "alcohol isn't my job" but to a Jim crow era sheriff enforcing inequality under the law.
  - anon291 4y ago
    Prosecutors are elected
rhaway84773 4y ago
> It seems strange to me that when a person is murdered the first concern is how it will affect criminals. Funny, I have never seen the “first concern” being how it will affect criminals. What I have seen, instead, is a weird fetish by most Americans, but most importantly, politicians, to increase punishment for criminals and expand police powers and protections, despite tons of evidence this doesn’t work and the US already having more punishment and more police powers than peer countries with far lower crime. Some people respond by suggesting that we should try changes that actually help reduce crime and homicides as opposed to those that just help satisfy a knee jerk animalistic desire for punishment.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]