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

Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

mercurynews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 262 posts

Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

#171

Post by siruncledrew »

twblalock wrote: post #38

This is why it's hard to get support for public transit funding. People don't want to take public transit if they will fear for their lives, or be surrounded by drug addicts and mentally disturbed people yelling at and spitting on other passengers. BART trains and stations are like this on a regular basis; Muni has the same problems but not as bad. I've seen this kind of thing happen on Caltrain late at night also, b…

If you ever want to give a Japanese visitor a significant culture shock, ride with them on the train (whether it's SF, NY, DC).

Untimely train schedules. Disorderly conduct. Blatant disregard for the rules.

I took the 7 Train from Grand Central to Flushing with a visiting Japanese colleague in NY. The face of concern he gave while on the train was like he was witnessing purgatory. I remember he looked at me and said, "Is this safe?", to which I replied, "I don't know, I guess so". Retrospectively, the honesty did not ease the anxiety. The crowdedness part he had no trouble in managing, given how packed the Tokyo metro could be. What struck the most was: 1. The lack of fucks people gave on train, 2. How much of a free-for-all the US metro systems are, and 3. How on-edge people are. There's people who take naps with their phones out on Japanese trains. On the NY metro, he was wide awake and clutching his belongings for dear life the entire ride. Of the various things to appreciate about the U.S., that was certainly not a highlight.

Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

#172

Post by pteredactyl »

admax88q wrote: post #149
pteredactyl wrote: post #115

Same is true for San Francisco. Criminals have more rights than children. Or taxpayers... If we are to have a functional civilization we must remain open but also learn how to say no to unacceptable behavior. Especially the egregious. Like you see everyday. People littering, shooting up and shitting on the sidewalk. Meanwhile our legislators are passing laws to limit the amount of restaurants in certain neighborhoods…

You're the second person I've seen to say "Criminals have more rights than children" Where do you get your talking points from?

From myself. I mentioned it once before in this HN post (if that's what you're referring to)

Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

#173

Post by diogenescynic »

esotericn wrote: post #75
twblalock wrote: post #38

This is why it's hard to get support for public transit funding. People don't want to take public transit if they will fear for their lives, or be surrounded by drug addicts and mentally disturbed people yelling at and spitting on other passengers. BART trains and stations are like this on a regular basis; Muni has the same problems but not as bad. I've seen this kind of thing happen on Caltrain late at night also, b…

Is this just an American thing? Healthcare funding, or something? I've never been to SF, but I've visited NYC, and the subway there feels like stepping in to a horror movie. During a two week visit I saw people passing out and being ignored (I was the only one attempting to help), individuals swinging around bricks in socks, and various other obvious examples of severely mentally ill individuals. In London I've never…

In this case it seems more like a Bay Area thing where the politicians and bleeding hearts want to be soft on crime but then it quickly becomes a downward spiral... For example, cops don’t do anything about most property crimes and theft and treat it as an insurance problem, they’ll tell you to report it to 311. Then they stop caring about trespassing and loitering and litering. Then they let junkies on BART and other criminals who don’t pay because “they don’t have anywhere else to go, have a heart.” So they’re constantly enabling this criminal behavior by preventing any real consequences. Because the voters don’t demand change, the District Attorneys and Judges largely do nothing about it either. I’m a social democrat but San Francisco is a cesspit. Being liberal/progressive shouldn’t mean letting junkies take over you city, defrcate in the street, and destroy the public life for everyone else. We’ve got to start creating some boundaries for this behavior and that starts with actual consequences for crimes. I think BART might have to be fined for them to take it seriously.

Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

#174

Post by darpa_escapee »

wolco wrote: post #166
darpa_escapee wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems to me that escalating a situation with firearms increases the chances of a gun being shot.

The counterpoint is the coldwar and the threat being more powerful to the actual gun.

People aren't nation-states who take game theory to its logical conclusion.

Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

#175

Post by solveit »

refurb wrote: post #97
toomanybeersies wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the fact that drug dogs at train stations unfairly target poor people and minorities for possession of personal quantities of drugs (traffickers don't take the train), despite rates of drug use being fairly consistent across socio-economic borders. Drug dogs are also generally also inaccurate and respond heavily to their handlers signals, and are therefore susceptible to their handlers biases. They're basically…

I see your point about drug dogs on trains adversely impacting poor people, but what does that have to do with fascism?

The fact that Fascism doesn't mean Fascism any more and is now synonymous with whatever flavour of authoritarianism the speaker wants it to mean.

Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

#176

Post by diogenescynic »

masonic wrote: post #130
jblow wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original Bay Bridge was built in 3 years, with 1930s technology. We used to not be a bunch of incompetent idiots when it came to building infrastructure, but now we clearly are. I understand why people don’t want to pay large amounts of tax money to pay incompetent idiots to take a long time building tiny amounts of infrastructure.

The original design for the Bay Bridge retrofit was $400 million. Instead, we got a less-safe, grandiose art piece for over $8 billion. $400 million more if you want a bike lane.

Is this corruption or incompetence? I honestly think it’s corruption. Why can’t we just outsource this to a European engineering company that is capable of accomplishing this? It just makes no sense to me.

Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

#177

Post by diogenescynic »

pteredactyl wrote: post #121
nodesocket wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This ideology of inaction, or "nothing" we can do about it, is a phenomenon unique to the bay area. I used to live there, and it is one of the reasons I left. Criminal activity is not pursued, bad behavior is not penalized. I'm sure there are many reasons, but I suspect a big factor is that police and politicians are afraid of cracking down due to the political fallout and backlash. There is a palpable disdain for po…

Yea I'm in SF not sure how long I'll last. It's a cess pool. Criminals have more rights than children. There was a crazy homeless guy who would shit everyday in front of a school in Bernal. The police couldn't do anything about it. You are completely right about the fear of political fallout for wanting to uphold the law. It's sad.

>Criminals have more rights than children.

This is the most succinct way I’ve seen it explained and it’s 100% accurate. You’re also right about the fear of upholding the law. It’s sad AND ridiculous.

A relevant article about another local offender cops just ignore: https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/heatherknight/article/Co...

Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

#178

Post by grogenaut »

geerlingguy wrote: post #77

It doesn't seem quite that bad in St. Louis, but the Metrolink has a lot of similar characteristics. Just the fact that all the platforms are open (there are no turnstiles, so you don't even need to pay a cent to board a train or lurk on a platform, any time of day) seems like a major contributing factor. And in my recent rides, maybe 1/5 times would there ever be a person checking tickets. It's definitely a chicken-…

Having gotten a failure to pay ticket on metro the first time I ride for not understanding the system I can tell you it's quite steep $90 in 2000. And it only takes the officers about four stops to walk the whole train. That's a lot of rides without a fare ticket to pay for the one penalty ticket.

Also you can often get tickets from other riders. I get asked for my stubs every time I'm in town

Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

#179

Post by diogenescynic »

anigbrowl wrote: post #157
pteredactyl wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true though. Do you ride BART or live in SF or Oakland?

I don't think it is, and yes I do. I'm well aware that crimes happen on BART, someone was murdered at my local station not long ago. But I don't think that 'lawless' is a good description, although many of my journeys take me to stereotypically sketchy stations or occur late at night. It's because of this subjectivity that I said I hoped the case would turn on a more rigorous definition.

Compared to any transit system in another developed country, BART is absolutely lawless.

Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)

#180

Post by toomanybeersies »

King-Aaron wrote: post #163
toomanybeersies wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having police with drug dogs, posted at train stations to catch random people with personal quantities of drugs is straight up fascist in my opinion. Drug use crosses socioeconomic lines, yet drug dogs at train stations (targeted in the poorer suburbs too) ends up unfairly targeting poor people (who are often minorities), especially as wealthier people tend to drive rather than take public transport. Send some drug d…

I smoke pot, and don't like the idea of being targeted at train stations because I smoked a spliff the night before while wearing the same sweater. FYI I am not 'poor' and I do have a small fleet of my own cars, but people with a small quantity of money behind them a) also like to smoke drugs on occasion and b) also do use public transport. Edit: I realize that sounded a bit snide, apologies. I think my point is that…

I guess calling it all-out fascist is perhaps a hyperbole. But it's creeping authoritarianism.

To me though, having police posted with dogs at train stations just looks especially authoritarian. Police dogs (whether drug dogs or attack dogs) are primarily a tool for intimidation.

Post reply on HN