Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

San Francisco Organized Shoplifting Surge Prompts Target to Cut Operating Hours

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 143 posts

Re: San Francisco Organized Shoplifting Surge Prompts Target to Cut Operating Hours

#101

Post by tryingtogetback »

This is a very interesting historical phenomenon. Basing my views strictly on objectivism, isn't that a side effect of what residents are being actively manipulated to vote (and blindly/aggressively stand) for?

There is definitely a negative financial impact of being discriminatory and "prosecutory" towards individuals with a high potential (high mental capacity) aka resources we need to use which haven't been "discovered" or "utilized" yet and it makes total sense to pull those out of the system ASAP (in this case prevent them from going through the system in the first place) which seems like a very profitable direction for the industries involved (see the rise of coding bootcamps) but has an extreme and unintended second order effect no-one planned for: uncontrolled crime.

Maybe 1 out of 100.000 could make it to be a Craig Federighi of sorts, but is it really worth it if other 99.999 are looting, shoplifting, and defecating on your porch?

Re: San Francisco Organized Shoplifting Surge Prompts Target to Cut Operating Hours

#102

Post by tolbish »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #67
tolbish wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not letting New York become San Francisco is not mutually exclusive with police reform. Is the current lead candidate against police accountability/police reform?

> Is the current lead candidate against police accountability/police reform? Yes, he is a former cop and law and order candidate [1]. (It’s not cut and dry. He opposed stop and frisk in our Senate but wants to reinstate solitary confinement, for example.) [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Adams_(politician)

Solitary confinement is not as central of a police reform issue. I still don't see how San Francisco is causing a lapse in police reform here.

Re: San Francisco Organized Shoplifting Surge Prompts Target to Cut Operating Hours

#103

Post by infamouscow »

staticautomatic wrote: post #78
infamouscow wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how fast the approach shifts after the people in charge find themselves in a sticky situation with not a single LEO willing to respond.

I’ve lived here for almost 15 years now and I can’t remember the cops ever responding to the shit people are now blaming the DA for.

Completely agree. It's definitely not new, but I think we are starting to see the practical limits of the policy.

Re: San Francisco Organized Shoplifting Surge Prompts Target to Cut Operating Hours

#104

Post by Gimpei »

adjkant wrote: post #98
b9a2cab5 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tech industry didn't do shit, San Francisco NIMBYs were the ones who refused to build housing causing the price of everything to only be affordable for tech workers. I don't know how you can blame a high paying employer for causing "destabilization". People getting pushed out by gentrification are getting pushed out because there is no new supply of housing but massive new demand for housing.

You need both NIMBY's and a large population influx to cause the core issue here. The tech industry indisputably caused the latter. You also imply some/many tech workers were also not NIMBY's as well, as if these two groups are entirely separate. Growth is not inherently good, and the tech industry absolutely did not help alleviate the issues NIMBY's helped to cause. There was no reason SF couldn't have gone on being…

The problem with this argument is that, if not for NIMBYs, growth really could have helped all the people of San Francisco. Dense cities are the places with the greatest opportunity and the greatest mobility (see for example Chetty). But for this to be the case, housing has to be affordable enough for working people to afford. So basically, NIMBYs took something that could have been great and made it awful instead. How is tech to blame for this? Tech provided a wonderful opportunity and the people of SF blew it.

I'd also add that I am a San Francisco native and it was not some midsize paradise in the 80s. It was broker, the schools were worse, the public transportation was worse, there were already plenty of homeless, and, like every other major US city, it was far more violent. The only thing that was better was housing affordability and the niners.

Re: San Francisco Organized Shoplifting Surge Prompts Target to Cut Operating Hours

#105

Post by HKH2 »

adjkant wrote: post #53
josephcsible wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, "tagging" is vandalism. Also, your source says 5 months, not the 1 year that you claimed.

> To be clear, "tagging" is vandalism. In NYC we call that art. I just went to a museum exhibit in Boston about graffiti art on public transit in the 80's. Point being, something so benign being that strongly and violently punished does indeed sound crazy to me.

When I was last in Singapore, I was impressed by how clean it was. It's not crazy at all.

Re: San Francisco Organized Shoplifting Surge Prompts Target to Cut Operating Hours

#106

Post by naveen99 »

chmod600 wrote: post #96
naveen99 wrote: post #50

This is counter intuitive. I expected the coming (here?) surveillance state would lower crime in cheaper real estate neighborhoods. Here the opposite is happening, the priciest real estate in the world is becoming more crimeful. I suspect it’s all just theater.

Surveillance doesn't matter without prosecution.

surveillance changes behavior plenty, because there is an increased risk of future prosecution or atleast reputation damage.

Re: San Francisco Organized Shoplifting Surge Prompts Target to Cut Operating Hours

#107

Post by orwin »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #32
tolbish wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you so sure it will set back police reform? The idea that "the police should be held accountable" and the idea that "the police are necessary and should be funded" are not mutually exclusive.

> Why are you so sure it will set back police reform? The effect is palpable in New York. The current lead candidate is campaigning on a promise of increasing police powers. There was direct campaigning on not letting New York become San Francisco, and keeping the Chesas out of the DA seats.

The best way is to remove police rights on some case and to have multiple social services and not just police.

But the way to sell it? Call those social services police.

"Neighborhood police", "Homeless/mean drug addict police", "road police", "proximity police". They should be able to coordinate (share a police precinct) or even have multiple roles in smaller cities.

35 years ago, my grandmother pushed for highly coordinated social services in our 15k hab town, and coordinate those with the two distinct police force we had in the area (think state level police and local police). The local police accepted, and from what i'm told, there was a decrease in small crimes, more people going to the formation center and more people involved in association, and even more people going to church (disclaimer: i'm not a believer, but i think church as a social mean of emancipation is good), all around the city, and the state-level police commander decided to help after ~5 years to increase the range (ex-farmers, alcoholics were a true danger on the roads). Even drove them to the formation center (my father is really anti-olice and even he told me they were the best cops he ever encountered, i think it is just social determination). Lasted into the 2000s, but the population decline and job going elsewhere were too much.

Re: San Francisco Organized Shoplifting Surge Prompts Target to Cut Operating Hours

#108

Post by AnimalMuppet »

sdenton4 wrote: post #81
b9a2cab5 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because police don't even bother to report these crimes anymore. See: the article posted recently with the video of shoplifters straight up clearing out an entire Walgreens and no police in sight.

The police are never around when crimes are going on, though: showing up later is what always happens... Good forbid one should bring stats to an pity party though.

Nice snark, I guess, but it totally misses the point, which is that if the narrative is right, you can't trust those statistics. So trying to use the statistics to disprove the narrative is completely not going to work. You need to have objectively verifiable statistics in order to disprove the narrative (or at least something better than "reported to police").

Re: San Francisco Organized Shoplifting Surge Prompts Target to Cut Operating Hours

#109

Post by readflaggedcomm »

standardUser wrote: post #45
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> refuses-to-prosecute Almost like selective enforcement of the law is a step towards tyranny and we’ve know that for hundreds of years.

In the US, the police more than anyone decide who is a criminal and when, and it has always been that way.

The SF DA refuses to prosecute crimes. Police were still enforcing laws until they gave up.
Post reply on HN