Is Reviving a Private Police Agency in SF the Solution to the City’s Crime Woes?(sfstandard.com)
sfstandard.com
Is Reviving a Private Police Agency in SF the Solution to the City’s Crime Woes?
https://sfstandard.com/2023/07/31/is-reviving-a-private-police-agency-in-san-francisco-the-solution-to-the-citys-crime-woes/
13 comments
I'm surprised that the Vigilance Committee has not been resurrected by now. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Committee_of_V...
Also, I am weary of "the standard" these days. IIRC their reporting of the Bob Lee murder was very sensational, and their reporting of Anchor's closing was superficial (they just repeated Sapporo's stance without seemingly interviewing anyone else, most importantly Anchor employees).
Also, I am weary of "the standard" these days. IIRC their reporting of the Bob Lee murder was very sensational, and their reporting of Anchor's closing was superficial (they just repeated Sapporo's stance without seemingly interviewing anyone else, most importantly Anchor employees).
This is some dystopian cyberpunk bullshit. SF spends a crap-ton on policing. Spending which apparently doesn’t do any good since the police can’t seem to do anything. Try calling the non emergency line. After an hour and a half of it blairing in your ear you’ll hear that someone might show up tomorrow.
This “solution” is even worse than the problem.
“I’d love to help you citizen, but your policing plan is expired so you’re on the public plan which provides no help and support whatsoever.”
I actually feel for the SF police. They can’t recruit because police have a bad name.
Instead of trying and failing to recruit into the old guard the city should initiate community policing initiatives. Training and authorization for local communities to police themselves. I don’t need an armed response to go write my neighbor a noise ticket at 4am. I just need someone with authority to investigate and issue the ticket.
There are plenty of bike commuters who are infuriated that their bikes have been stolen, but they’re not allowed to investigate and follow up on their own. The police can’t be arsed about bike theft. Put the authority, training and funding into the community and let the community police itself.
This is the only way “defund police” works. If you don’t want society to collapse you have to allow communities to replace authoritarian external policing with locally driven initiatives that actually serve public order and safety.
Publicly funded community policing.
The answer is NOT pay for private. The answer is drastically rethink our approach to policing.
This “solution” is even worse than the problem.
“I’d love to help you citizen, but your policing plan is expired so you’re on the public plan which provides no help and support whatsoever.”
I actually feel for the SF police. They can’t recruit because police have a bad name.
Instead of trying and failing to recruit into the old guard the city should initiate community policing initiatives. Training and authorization for local communities to police themselves. I don’t need an armed response to go write my neighbor a noise ticket at 4am. I just need someone with authority to investigate and issue the ticket.
There are plenty of bike commuters who are infuriated that their bikes have been stolen, but they’re not allowed to investigate and follow up on their own. The police can’t be arsed about bike theft. Put the authority, training and funding into the community and let the community police itself.
This is the only way “defund police” works. If you don’t want society to collapse you have to allow communities to replace authoritarian external policing with locally driven initiatives that actually serve public order and safety.
Publicly funded community policing.
The answer is NOT pay for private. The answer is drastically rethink our approach to policing.
Part of the issue is the media and other race baiters. Here's a thought exercise:
Guess what race police shoot to death most often? Now take a look at the link below...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-de...
It wasn't what you expected was it?
This is extremely demoralizing to police officers and absolutely affects hiring and how they perform their jobs.
Guess what race police shoot to death most often? Now take a look at the link below...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-de...
It wasn't what you expected was it?
This is extremely demoralizing to police officers and absolutely affects hiring and how they perform their jobs.
> …the rate of fatal police shootings among Black Americans was much higher than that for any other ethnicity
That’s pretty much exactly what I was expecting. People think of police as racist thugs because, well… they are.
That’s pretty much exactly what I was expecting. People think of police as racist thugs because, well… they are.
Did you look at the actual numbers? Twice as many whites were shot every year.
To answer the headlines question: no [0]
San Francisco’s “Crime Woes” will continue to exist until US National policy creates a stronger safety net for the least fortunate among us or San Francisco’s politics take a hard turn right toward protecting property rights over all else.
I don’t know which is more likely, but both will require systematic change, not a couple guys playing police.
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headli....
San Francisco’s “Crime Woes” will continue to exist until US National policy creates a stronger safety net for the least fortunate among us or San Francisco’s politics take a hard turn right toward protecting property rights over all else.
I don’t know which is more likely, but both will require systematic change, not a couple guys playing police.
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headli....
> US National policy creates a stronger safety net for the least fortunate among us
What further safety nets do you feel are necessary that are not provided by the state of California?
What further safety nets do you feel are necessary that are not provided by the state of California?
Guaranteed housing for all people?
EDIT: Just for context, relatively free-market oriented Singapore and Hong Kong both invested heavily in government funded housing to solve similar homelessness crises in the 20th Century. So much so that that overwhelming majority of people in Singapore live in housing developed by the government.
It’s also used as a very effective form of soft social control (get a better house if you do X thing we want), so it’s not unreasonable to assume that it would meaningfully reduce crime as well.
[0] https://www.economist.com/asia/2017/07/06/why-80-of-singapor...
EDIT: Just for context, relatively free-market oriented Singapore and Hong Kong both invested heavily in government funded housing to solve similar homelessness crises in the 20th Century. So much so that that overwhelming majority of people in Singapore live in housing developed by the government.
It’s also used as a very effective form of soft social control (get a better house if you do X thing we want), so it’s not unreasonable to assume that it would meaningfully reduce crime as well.
[0] https://www.economist.com/asia/2017/07/06/why-80-of-singapor...
> I guess the typical upper-middle-class progressive must always be secretly suspicious of themselves, always unsure whether they’d become a total monster if they were to miss a couple paychecks. “Poverty causes crime,” they must scream into their pillows at night, knowing not whether they too would commit atrocities if they couldn’t afford an iPad.
https://twitter.com/wanyeburkett/status/1645439924886290433
https://twitter.com/wanyeburkett/status/1645439924886290433
It’s amazing that people accept we live under capitalism and accept that MIT physics graduates will work 80+ hours a week at a quant trading firm just to make money, but we somehow believe that people who have no other options won’t resort to crime.
The crime people are mad about in SF is petty theft of consumer packaged goods and food, with some opportunistic car robberies. That is the crime this org would try to fight. If your implication is that these criminals are just morally bankrupt people, I find that thesis much more demeaning and implausible.
EDIT: Don’t forget that the guy called himself “poor” and claims he isn’t now. The problem isn’t lack of money now, it’s lack of opportunity. That guy didn’t steal because he knew it would limit future opportunities.
Being poor doesn’t cause crime, being impoverished with not hope for a better life following the law is.
The crime people are mad about in SF is petty theft of consumer packaged goods and food, with some opportunistic car robberies. That is the crime this org would try to fight. If your implication is that these criminals are just morally bankrupt people, I find that thesis much more demeaning and implausible.
EDIT: Don’t forget that the guy called himself “poor” and claims he isn’t now. The problem isn’t lack of money now, it’s lack of opportunity. That guy didn’t steal because he knew it would limit future opportunities.
Being poor doesn’t cause crime, being impoverished with not hope for a better life following the law is.
There are millions of "impoverished" people in NYC. Yet the NYPD came out and said that 85% of all property crime is committed by less than 600 individuals. Not a smattering of random poor people. Not a random sampling of the millions of poor people in the city. These specific 600 individuals. Yes: they are morally bankrupt individuals. They commit crime because they chose to, not because they are "poor".
> that 85% of all property crime is committed by less than 600 individuals.
I’d like to know how an organization that claims they cannot find/arrest the suspects in nearly any property crime can also claim with such certainty that they know exactly who commits these crimes.
Doesn’t really make sense, does it?
I’d like to know how an organization that claims they cannot find/arrest the suspects in nearly any property crime can also claim with such certainty that they know exactly who commits these crimes.
Doesn’t really make sense, does it?
This could provide a deterrent effect once SF gets saturated with concealed carry permit holders. I'm assuming not though since most of the crime is non-robbery theft, where use of deadly force wouldn't be justified.