3 ms·
The law mentioned four sentences prior to that sentence (Prop. 47).
by jpcfl 3y ago
The law mentioned four sentences prior to that sentence (Prop. 47).
- mikestew 3y agoThanks. I even skimmed the article a 2nd time to give WSJ the benefit of the doubt, but somehow missed that. (I would also argue the lede is a bit buried down in the penultimate paragraph, but it's still my misreading.)
- jpcfl 3y agoSure thing. So, I don't think that was the most important part of the article--he's not claiming SF is a Homeless Mecca because of Prop. 47. He was just asking a rhetorical question to point out that the dysfunctional Democrat-lead government will throw billions of dollars at a problem before repealing a soft-on-crime law that obviously contributes to the problem. By the way, before anybody calls me out as some right-wing troll for saying the Democrat-led government is dysfunctional: I moved to SF as a D-registered liberal, and still am a liberal in the traditional sense (not a D anymore). But the left wing extremism has caused me to reassess my stance on many issues, especially as I start a family. I am absolutely appalled by the conditions in the city, especially in the Tenderloin, which many don't realize has the highest number of children per capita.