5 ms·

Oh for goodness sake. He felt safer than when he was walking. Renting a car to drive a block and a half is just ridiculous - unless maybe he's displaying obviou

Oh for goodness sake. He felt safer than when he was walking. Renting a car to drive a block and a half is just ridiculous - unless maybe he's displaying obvious signs of wealth? I stayed in the hilton union square in Feb and yes there are a lot of homeless people and addicts around but none of them even looked at me crossways

zoky 3y ago
I don't know SF all that well personally, so I really can't say. I do know that where the person I know stayed was in the Mission District, which was (and still is) widely known to be among the more dangerous parts of San Francisco. I also know he was routinely coming and going at odd hours, 23:00 or later. I also know that he had a permit to carry a gun, which (at the time) was near impossible to get in California, and that he in fact did so. Nevertheless, he chose to drive the block and a half rather than walk, because the last thing he ever wanted to do was be forced to use his gun. I personally don't consider that to be an “obvious display of wealth”, but take it for what you will.
- light_hue_1 3y ago
  People love the Mission, move there for the night life specifically. It's lively and fun at 11pm. This person sounds like they have some mental issues.
- HWR_14 3y ago
  People who go out of their way to carry guns in cities usually strike me as "more paranoid" and not "more cautious". I am far less likely to trust their assessment of danger.
  - tourmalinetaco 3y ago
    So because someone values their life and belongings, and has the proper training to wield a firearm, you are less likely to trust their assessment of danger? So then who do you trust? And for the record, Mission has almost 4x the crime rate as California, which is already above the national average.[1] So it seems as though their “paranoia” was paying dividends. [1] - https://www.areavibes.com/san+francisco-ca/mission/crime/ https://www.areavibes.com/san+francisco-ca/mission/crime/
    - HWR_14 3y ago
      People who bring guns into urban areas have a bad assessment of danger, yes. There is almost no urban situation, especially on the street, where a concealed gun will help. It's not like anyone will give you a chance to draw your weapon if you are ambushed. And every mugger I've experienced or heard of starts with their weapon out or at least their hand on it. If you think you can quick-draw and beat them, you have watched too many movies. And, for the record, the source you cited shows that crimes where you would be morally or legally justified to use deadly force to defend yourself (e.g. rape, murder, assault), are less frequent in California than the national average and less frequent in San Fransisco than in California's average. Absolutely, if you think using a gun is a valid response to someone breaking your car window you are absolutely not a good judge of threats. Nor are you a responsible gun owner and should be forced to surrender your gun.

zoky 3y ago

I don't know SF all that well personally, so I really can't say. I do know that where the person I know stayed was in the Mission District, which was (and still is) widely known to be among the more dangerous parts of San Francisco. I also know he was routinely coming and going at odd hours, 23:00 or later. I also know that he had a permit to carry a gun, which (at the time) was near impossible to get in California, and that he in fact did so. Nevertheless, he chose to drive the block and a half rather than walk, because the last thing he ever wanted to do was be forced to use his gun. I personally don't consider that to be an “obvious display of wealth”, but take it for what you will.

light_hue_1 3y ago
People love the Mission, move there for the night life specifically. It's lively and fun at 11pm. This person sounds like they have some mental issues.
HWR_14 3y ago
People who go out of their way to carry guns in cities usually strike me as "more paranoid" and not "more cautious". I am far less likely to trust their assessment of danger.
- tourmalinetaco 3y ago
  So because someone values their life and belongings, and has the proper training to wield a firearm, you are less likely to trust their assessment of danger? So then who do you trust? And for the record, Mission has almost 4x the crime rate as California, which is already above the national average.[1] So it seems as though their “paranoia” was paying dividends. [1] - https://www.areavibes.com/san+francisco-ca/mission/crime/ https://www.areavibes.com/san+francisco-ca/mission/crime/
  - HWR_14 3y ago
    People who bring guns into urban areas have a bad assessment of danger, yes. There is almost no urban situation, especially on the street, where a concealed gun will help. It's not like anyone will give you a chance to draw your weapon if you are ambushed. And every mugger I've experienced or heard of starts with their weapon out or at least their hand on it. If you think you can quick-draw and beat them, you have watched too many movies. And, for the record, the source you cited shows that crimes where you would be morally or legally justified to use deadly force to defend yourself (e.g. rape, murder, assault), are less frequent in California than the national average and less frequent in San Fransisco than in California's average. Absolutely, if you think using a gun is a valid response to someone breaking your car window you are absolutely not a good judge of threats. Nor are you a responsible gun owner and should be forced to surrender your gun.