Live data from Hacker News

The High Cost of Low-level Crime in San Francisco

city-journal.org

11–20 of 123 posts

Re: The High Cost of Low-level Crime in San Francisco

#11
I used to go running in the early morning near Dolores Park. I remember a period of about six weeks when the entire row of cars there parked overnight would reliably have their windows broken every morning. I also struggle to remember ever seeing an SFPD officer patrolling this neighborhood (two blocks from a major police station) on foot.

Re: The High Cost of Low-level Crime in San Francisco

#12

The primary source at the top of their article, Susan Dyer Reynolds, is not an expert in any way but editor-in-chief of the Marina Times, an independent community newspaper . I wouldn't trust a single word out of this NIMBY's mouth. Why they chose to lead with her and quote her like she's an authority on the subject is beyond reason.

> Why they chose to lead with her

Because it's super important for political reasons that San Francisco be seen as failing. It's the same phenomenon as perception of the national economy: if you don't like who's in power, you think the economy is poor.

Re: The High Cost of Low-level Crime in San Francisco

#13
>“We could be keeping them and be giving services while they’re in jail,” says Fabbri. “It could really be effective.

>we’re not solving our problems when we pretend low-level crimes aren’t important.

Those two facts are the crux of the issue. Prisons do not rehabilitate criminals; they just restrain them. Couple that with the fact it costs, on nationwide average, $84 per day to incarcerate someone and the average petty criminal steals less than $84/day and you end up with an uncomfortable conclusion. That conclusion is that it would be cheaper to offer government-funded total coverage crime insurance than it is to arrest the criminals.

Re: The High Cost of Low-level Crime in San Francisco

#17

I grew up in Sonoma and lived in San Francisco for three years. I’m near the end of a two month stay in Medellín, Colombia. I’m looking to make the move out of SF permanent. People here ask me why I’d move to a city like Medellín from SF. It’s because there’s less crime, less drug use, less homelessness and less street harassment for my girlfriend.

Interested in a move to Medellin as well. Mind if I message privately to ask some questions?

Re: The High Cost of Low-level Crime in San Francisco

#18
post #16

San Francisco absolutely does not need a racist[1] mayor. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_Cit...

I've banned this account because, as we've told you repeatedly before, you're not allowed to use HN as place for ideological battle, and that's basically all you've been doing.

No, that's not because we favor racist mayors. It's because HN needs to be protected against people who only want to use it to advance agendas and fight enemies. If we don't protect it, those things will soon engulf everything else, the same way fire does.

We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20010589 and marked it off-topic.

Re: The High Cost of Low-level Crime in San Francisco

#19

I've wondered if what San Francisco needs is a Rudy Giuliani type mayor. Someone to come in a shake up the status quo with valid right leaning polices when it comes to crime.

Rudy Giuliani certainly deserves a lot of credit for cleaning up New York City--as US Attorney when he dismantled the Mafia. Whether his policies as mayor were effective is highly debated.

Re: The High Cost of Low-level Crime in San Francisco

#20

Which of the high-crime areas have rent control? What would the crime look like if the market had let the rents rise? It's my intuition that people rarely commute 1hr in bumper to bumper traffic to smash windows.

gentrification is whiteness amplification, and therefore bad, or something
Post reply on HN