California lawmakers want to know why billions in spending isn’t reducing homelessness

Eric said:
First of all, in San Francisco at least I can assure you the police are doing nothing. Even the most Liberal of police haters here are crying for them to at least try but they refuse because every step they make will be litigated and as a result robberies, stealing and crime is at an all time high and even those who are caught will be back on the streets in a matter of hours in most cases.

There needs to be some middle ground here, a blanket "cops will just abuse everyone" is hardly an argument to make the case to simply ignore every crime.
Click to expand...
Stats just don't back that up:

abc7news.com

Is SF's violent crime as 'horrific' as tech execs claim? Here's what data shows

Following the stabbing death of Bob Lee, many tech executives have taken to social media to say that violent crime in San Francisco is horrific and the streets are unsafe. But is there any truth to that? We take a look at the data.
abc7news.com abc7news.com

I know other people love to claim it, it's a favorite of conservative Hoover and US News and World report to say SF has enormous rates of crimes and has become inculcated so widely that of course it's entered the "but even liberals agree". The problem is it just isn't true. What is true is that crime is up and is up everywhere, but still low historically speaking and not any higher in "lax" polities as compared to places where police "do something". Any time a reformer comes into power, police always ascribe any uptick in crime to exactly what you've described and typically local news loves to cover it - the name for this is copoganda (I'm actually shocked abc7 ran this). But it just isn't backed up by data. It's an anti-police reform talking point that gets promulgated but has little basis in reality. As the article states, if you or a loved one is a victim of a (violent) crime ... it's no consolation that it's rare. But that's not what should drive public policy.
 
dada_dave said:
Stats just don't back that up:

abc7news.com

Is SF's violent crime as 'horrific' as tech execs claim? Here's what data shows

Following the stabbing death of Bob Lee, many tech executives have taken to social media to say that violent crime in San Francisco is horrific and the streets are unsafe. But is there any truth to that? We take a look at the data.
abc7news.com abc7news.com
Click to expand...
A link from the view of "Tech execs" after a tweet from Elon? Get real man, you can't be serious here.

Where do you live BTW? If you're going to get involved with local politics you know nothing about you're going to need to do better than a 30 second google search to make your arbitrary point.

Going to have to agree to disagree here and ask you to leave it at that, don't rip on my city and I won't presume to know yours.
 
Eric said:
A link from the view of "Tech execs" after a tweet from Elon? Get real man, you can't be serious here.

Where do you live BTW? If you're going to get involved with local politics you know nothing about you're going to need to do better than a 30 second google search to make your arbitrary point.

Going to have to agree to disagree here and ask you to leave it at that, don't rip on my city and I won't presume to know yours.
Click to expand...
Okay but I'm extremely confused as you seem to have completely inverted my point and the article? I lived in SF/bay area for years and far from ripping on it I was saying SF is *not that city*. The abc7 article goes on to say SF is actually quite safe compared to most cities - that the tech executives *are wrong*, SF's violent crime stats are not horrific. Yes, they use the attention grabbing headline to get you to read the article because it's still a news organization, but Betteridge's law of headlines is that if the headline is a question, the answer is no.

Here's the CNN article, better headline:

www.cnn.com

Despite high profile killing, San Francisco has far fewer homicides than other similarly-sized cities | CNN

The stabbing death of CashApp founder Bob Lee has prompted comments perpetuating the notion that San Francisco is dangerous and crime-riddled, but data shows violent crime -- especially homicides -- are well below that of many other cities of a similar size.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
 
@Eric not to harp but I’m still very confused and trying to figure out your last post. You were posting on how SF has become crime infested with a lackluster police and something must be done. I responded that this wasn’t true, that SF wasn’t crime ridden and here are stats from an article to back up the argument SF isn’t unsafe like many erroneously claim - it cited Musk to highlight that he was wrong. Then you say I’m attacking your city when I’m actually defending it?

I can understand if you want to end the main conversation anyway, we all have lives on gotta move on, but could you at least explain your last post?
 
Herdfan said:
The homeless shouldn't be rounded up simply because they are homeless. But certain behaviors probably need to be constrained.
Click to expand...
They also need someplace to go besides just jail, the original point of this thread is how funds are misappropriated and there's a lack of accountability with that. If it's one thing CA is good at it's taxing the shit out of its citizens with no real accountability, knowing how and where it's being spent is a fair ask.

I see this is two-fold, we know that better than 85% are hooked on drugs and alcohol, I think treatment requirements are a must here and we know we have the funding for it. Second is safe and monitored encampments, just letting them roam the streets is bad for everyone and statistically dangerous. Many are located in public parks, recreation areas and around public schools. All of these areas should be safe spaces and that's simply not the case when you have a bunch of drunk and jacked up addicts in their paths.
 
Back
Top