The High Cost of Low-level Crime in San Francisco • Hacker News Board

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

#121

Post by xltk » Wed, May 29, 2019, 6:47 AM UTC

andreshb wrote: post #117

travisjungroth wrote: post #2

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.

I feel safer in Medellin than in San Francisco. In Medellin harassment and crime is not random. I’ve lived in both cities and currently live in Medellin while frequently traveling to SF for business You have to deliberately go into the wrong neighborhood and mess with the wrong people. Every time I’m in SF I’m on edge when I walk in the street. In Medellin I feel safe walking around with AirPods and iphone out, plus…

I’m glad to hear you feel safe exposing valuables in Medellin. From looking at your LinkedIn profile though, I noticed two things:

- You’re a board member of a programming school based in Colombia. There’s inherent bias and conflict of interest in sharing your experiences.

- You are fluent in Spanish and appear to be of Latin American descent. I imagine that adds to your relative comfort level when in Colombia.

When I am in the areas near downtown SF, I also feel on edge and weary of my surroundings.

I encourage you to leave SoMa/Tenderloin/FiDi and check out the Richmond, Sunset, Japantown, Potrero Hill, North Beach, Marina, Pacific Heights, Mount Sutro, Presidio, or Golden Gate Park.

I think you’ll find SF has a lot to offer.

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

#122

Post by CompanionCuuube » Thu, May 30, 2019, 3:25 PM UTC

jopsen wrote: post #91

klipt wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about pepper spray? If assaulting random civilians got you pepper sprayed half the time, that might be a deterrent.

A) Deterrents don't work very well, rarely work at all with desperate people, and far less with people who have mental issues. B) if you end up in a conflict it's always better to run. It's safer for you than to escalate. In sane countries failing to run can invalidate any claim of self-defense. Thus, you'd find yourself on the hook for "armed assult". Even if you state or country is crazy enough to have a "stand you…

Reduced mobility means running away doesn't work very well. :)

In sane countries, a victim isn't revictimized by the courts for having the audacity to defend themselves either. :)

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

#123

Post by tzakrajs » Sun, Jun 02, 2019, 1:59 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #104

microtherion wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no opinion about the grandparent account one way or the other. But are you implying that the original article was NOT "ideological", "advancing agendas" and "fighting enemies"? If this kind political article is legitimate for this site (and I would argue that it is, given that it touches on the daily experience of many HN contributors), shouldn't it also be legitimate to take the other side of the political de…

Many articles posted to HN have a political dimension. We don't exclude them because if we did, the site would become less intellectually interesting. The idea of HN is to optimize for what's intellectually interesting. Moreover, it's impossible to define "political" precisely. Basically everything is political somehow. On the other hand, unmoderated political discussion soon becomes flamewar. We can't allow that eit…

I can tell you have the best intentions but the path to hell is paved with good intentions. There are ways to moderate political discussion but the reality is probably that hacker news has no interest or ability in moderating political topics. The most interesting conversation in my view would be one that changes minds on a political subject. That can’t happen here.