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

Trends in the San Francisco (mostly dog?) poop crisis

renthop.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–257 of 257 posts

Re: Trends in the San Francisco (mostly dog?) poop crisis

#251

Post by ryandrake »

catalogia wrote: post #234
ryandrake wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As an example: I called 311/911 to report a trio of homeless guys, operating a bike chop shop First of all, I hope you called 311 and not 911 for this. It's obviously not a life-threatening emergency. > I asked, incredulous, "isn't this a police matter that you should pursue right now? How will they still be here in 3 days?" She gave some unsatisfactory answer of course. As (hopefully) established above, this is no…

In most of the country, if you call any number other than 911 to report any crime you'll be told to call 911 next time. When I called in my smashed car window, they told me to use 911 next time. I've heard similar from others. Anyway, reporting a crime that is in progress certainly warrants 911. There is no ambiguity there.

Where on earth did they tell you to call 911 over a broken window?? Everywhere I’ve ever lived, 911 is for emergencies only. It is not a general “call the police” line. People treating it as such is why many PSAPs are overloaded and sometimes real emergencies get dropped. Please don’t call 911 unless it is a life threatening emergency!

Re: Trends in the San Francisco (mostly dog?) poop crisis

#252

Post by catalogia »

ryandrake wrote: post #251
catalogia wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In most of the country, if you call any number other than 911 to report any crime you'll be told to call 911 next time. When I called in my smashed car window, they told me to use 911 next time. I've heard similar from others. Anyway, reporting a crime that is in progress certainly warrants 911. There is no ambiguity there.

Where on earth did they tell you to call 911 over a broken window?? Everywhere I’ve ever lived, 911 is for emergencies only. It is not a general “call the police” line. People treating it as such is why many PSAPs are overloaded and sometimes real emergencies get dropped. Please don’t call 911 unless it is a life threatening emergency!

> Where on earth did they tell you to call 911 over a broken window??

The obscure backwater of Seattle.

911 is not exclusively for life-threatening emergencies as you are suggesting. It's for emergencies more generally, and that generally includes crime reports. Particularly reports of crimes that are in progress. The crime I was reporting (the burglarizing of my car) was not in progress which is why I didn't call 911 (and consequently received a brief lecture about using 911 in the future.) But had I witnessed the crime in progress, I wouldn't have hesitated to call 911 and nor should anybody else.

Here is the advice of Mary Ellen Carroll, executive director of the San Francisco Department of Emergency Management: https://abc7news.com/when-to-call-911-vs-311/5300051/

    When to call 911:
    * Is there danger to life, property or the environment?
    * Is a crime in progress?
    * Is there a medical emergency / need for immediate help?
    * Is there a fire?
Note that the advice she gives is contrary to the advice I received from Seattle's 311, in that she says to use 311 to report crimes that aren't in progress. However she says that 911 should be used for crimes that are in progress without the requirement that those crimes be life threatening. (And also for injuries which require medical attention but aren't necessarily life threatening.)

So, to reiterate, when it comes to crimes that are in progress there is really no ambiguity.

Re: Trends in the San Francisco (mostly dog?) poop crisis

#253

Post by asdff »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #196
altShiftDev wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, actually it does. You simply have to act like other countries in which it isn't a problem.

Could it be some countries have unique demographics, climate, or cultural factors not found elsewhere? I'm not saying SF is blameless, but what works in Japan or Norway isn't guaranteed to work in SF.

It could be, but the broader frustration is that these factors you cite aren't even researched on a local level.

You say the trains run on time in Japan, and people don't respond by researching transit infrastructure in Japan to figure out why that is. They respond by throwing their hands in the air and staying it's impossible, unfundable, politically untenable, whatever fluff reason that's indicative of an unwillingness to think analytically about the problem.

The underlying cause is that there is no thought or scholarship in local government, just electoral risk assessment.

Re: Trends in the San Francisco (mostly dog?) poop crisis

#254

Post by jessaustin »

danschumann wrote: post #201
jessaustin wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, I suggested local jails upthread. You as thread parent suggested "outside the city limits". SF is a "city and county", so it's not possible to have a local jail outside city limits. You're going to have to bribe some other county to take care of the homeless you've charged with crimes. That's not going to be cheap! It's not cheap even if you manage to get all your jails built in Sunset or some other backwater.…

Some people "just want to watch the world burn" and will mess up anything you try to give them, and those people need law enforcement to stop them, because they won't stop themselves. It's unrealistic to think you can solve the problem with only the carrot.

Shitting is not a voluntary activity. Public restrooms could only be considered "carrots" if they included additional amenities beyond the most basic requirements of elimination and hygiene. Is anyone suggesting that?

Re: Trends in the San Francisco (mostly dog?) poop crisis

#255

Post by gojomo »

LoSboccacc wrote: post #214
gojomo wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still can't follow what you meant by the "last time we culled cats". Was that referring to some action by Australians? (Are they the "we"?) Is there a canonical reference to how extensive this "cull" was? Which "prey" have to be controlled, or else which "pests" will balloon? Is the capitalization of 'Predator' significant, indicating some sort of sovereignty on a scale matching that of your only other capitalized…

> Australians? (Are they the "we"?) I also linked a uk study, but this works the same everywhere they tried, including wolves in italy etc > Which "prey" have to be controlled, or else which "pests" will balloon? the food chain sits at an equilibrium that's under dampened. the population of opportunistic/scavenger will grow sharply going over capacity. that will cause harm to animals down the food chain (i.e. attack…

You've "also linked" a UK study of unclear relevance, but you've still never answered what "cat cull" you were originally referring-to as something we should "remember".

Nor is it clear what's the "prey" and "pest" in the case of house pets. What are you referring-to by those words? Similarly, when you say "this works the same everywhere they tried", what's "this"?

Yes, I'm being a "hardass", because your tone is one of "everybody knows these clear and simple things", but the actual details you've provided are grossly insufficient to know what you're talking about. Even when asked for exact details, you've moved on to other non-responsive digressions.

You are seriously overestimating the clarity of your communication, and overconfident about what anecdotes that others might "remember", and making unwarranted assumptions about what shared-interest/shared-history groups your readers might consider to be part of "we". You're expecting others to intuit lots of specific things in your mind you haven't described in sufficient detail for others to know.

Re: Trends in the San Francisco (mostly dog?) poop crisis

#256

Post by xnyan »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #226
xnyan wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you say too few in jail? Do you have any evidence that more people in jail=better outcomes? I’m willing to listen in good faith.

I'd say not having bicycle chop shops out in the open in broad daylight is a better outcome, wouldn't you?

Sorry out of town. Do you have any empirical evidence that will work?
Post reply on HN