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

Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 318 posts

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#301

Post by williamcotton »

tptacek wrote: post #286
williamcotton wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tom, I seriously can't figure out why you think that I'm trying to show people that "I'm hard" or something. I'm not. I'm a total wimp. I've had very few issues living in the Mission and Bernal because I keep my head down and mind my own business. Whatever picture you're trying to paint of me is completely irrelevant. The point I'm making is that if you're in a neighborhood where there happens to be a history of gang…

I don't think you're trying to be hard. I think you're trying to rep San Francisco as hard, to sell a narrative of the city as a place so beset by crime and class conflict† that responsible residents all follow a code. Knowing that code, any responsible white dude should know that letting his dog off the leash could end in someone losing their life. What I have a problem with are stories with "good guys" and "bad guy…

I'm just telling it how it is. If you wanna sit there in Chicago and tell me there's no crime and no class conflict going on in the Mission District of San Francisco, well, that's on you.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#302

Post by cgriswald »

foldr wrote: post #292
cgriswald wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your assumptions about both cases and your preconceived notions of racism have lead to you faulty conclusions. The Swartz case was about the response fitting the crime. The Nieto case is about police officers ostensibly fearing for their own safety and the safety of other. Had Nieto's weapon been holstered and had he been arrested, I might have been just as critical about the prosecutorial response as I am in the Swa…

>The Swartz case was about the response fitting the crime. The Nieto case is about police officers ostensibly fearing for their own safety and the safety of other. This says it all: you think that the Nieto case is inherently about whether the police officers feared for their lives, and the Swartz case is inherently about how poor Aaron was prosecuted unjustly. That is one perspective. Another perspective would be th…

> > This says it all: you think that the Nieto case is inherently about whether the police officers feared for their lives, and the Swartz case is inherently about how poor Aaron was prosecuted unjustly. > That is one perspective.

It is a perspective in which one can hold a different opinion of these government actions based on contexts other than race. You seem to have both acknowledge this and moved the goalposts.

> it is so obvious to you that this is what we should do in the Nieto case that you can't even grasp the alternative.

This is just pointless bickering at that has no basis in reality and borders on an ad hominem argument. I am quite capable of grasping alternatives and putting thought into those alternatives. My personal opinion on either case isn't neither here nor there.

The point is that you made generalizations and heavily implied that race was the motivating bias or context for people holding these different opinions. I am pointing out that you failed to make that case and, as a counterexample, provided another context in which people could reach those same conclusions without considering race.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#303

Post by foldr »

cgriswald wrote: post #302
foldr wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The Swartz case was about the response fitting the crime. The Nieto case is about police officers ostensibly fearing for their own safety and the safety of other. This says it all: you think that the Nieto case is inherently about whether the police officers feared for their lives, and the Swartz case is inherently about how poor Aaron was prosecuted unjustly. That is one perspective. Another perspective would be th…

> > This says it all: you think that the Nieto case is inherently about whether the police officers feared for their lives, and the Swartz case is inherently about how poor Aaron was prosecuted unjustly. > That is one perspective. It is a perspective in which one can hold a different opinion of these government actions based on contexts other than race. You seem to have both acknowledge this and moved the goalposts.…

I don't claim to know why people think about Nieto and Swartz in such different terms. I am just pointing out that they do. Objectively speaking, Swartz was much more at fault for his death than Nieto was, and yet for whatever reason, many people here are much more willing to blame the victim in the Nieto case. I think racism probably plays a part in that, but I can't look inside people's heads. What other (good) reason could there be for seeing Swartz as a victim but not Nieto?

(Let me add that I'm not saying that Swartz was at fault for his death simply because it was a suicide. I don't think that we should blame people for killing themselves. What I'm getting at is that he freely chose to engage in civil disobedience without having properly thought through the potential consequences, which fairly obviously included at least some jail time.)

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#304

Post by scotty79 »

whatok wrote: post #173
tinco wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He'll be asked to put his weapon down. And will subsequently be charged with possession of a firearm or of something that looks like a firearm, and in addition probably with some kind of charge for endandering people and if he pointed it a police officer there'd be a charge for that as well. If the police felt especially threatened he might be shot in the leg or tasered (depending on what the police in that country i…

Do police in these countries somehow have enhanced marksmanship and reaction times vs US police? I am not going to blame anyone for taking someone pointing a gun at them seriously and protecting their lives. Aiming for someone's leg (or let's try some movie techniques and shoot them in the hand) is only going to slow down reaction time and possibly end up with a worse situation.

I think in Europe police doesn't assume that something that could be mistaken for a gun is a gun because presence of actual gun on any given random event is minsicule.

If some gun was fired or if they are pursuing known serious criminals they use guns. In europe use of a gun is a planned action, not instincive response to feeling somewhat threatened.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#305

Post by SilasX »

tryitnow wrote: post #239
tptacek wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a person Rebecca Solnit chose to single out, carefully juxtaposing reports of his (incredibly obnoxious) behavior against Nieto's shooting, to which, even by Solnit's account (read carefully), he was not a party . I don't want to get drinks with this character in Solnit's story, either. But I'm not sure we should applaud the tactic of summoning up and focusing outrage on people like this.

Nope. Sorry, Evan Snow's recklessness in not getting his dog under control resulted in a innocent person getting shot, and cops whose careers are probably ruined. Snow deserves a big chunk of blame here. It's simple folks: if you're not highly confident that your dog will behave itself For those of you who still harbor sympathy for Snow, do a Google search for people who have been mauled by out of control dogs. Now S…

I agree that he should have controlled his dog better, but he certainly wasn't at fault for the conflict escalating to a shooting. It was out of his hands by the time the police arrived.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#306

Post by eli_gottlieb »

maxsilver wrote: post #223
seibelj wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No idea why you are being downvoted. Supply and demand, this is Economics 101. I have made the same arguments about SF and people downvote me too. The #1 way to decrease rent is to build more supply. If there was double the apartments in SF, the rent would not be as high.

> No idea why you are being downvoted. Perhaps because the parent poster is wrong. Seattle rents did not decrease this year, or last year. The rate at which rent is increasing has slowed (previously double-digit percentage increases have dropped to single-digit percentage increases). But actual rents have not fallen. Seattle rents continue to grow each year, just at a slightly slower pace than before. http://www.bizj…

>Perhaps because the parent poster is wrong. Seattle rents did not decrease this year, or last year.

Ah! Then someone really should have just told me instead of downvoting!

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#307

Post by eli_gottlieb »

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #88
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normally I'm pretty damn critical of the police, but drawing a gunlike weapon that's actually a weapon and not a plastic toy , while also being clearly out of your right mind... Well, he shouldn't have been shot , but wow.

The police, or at least two of them, claim that he drew the taser. That doesn't mean he actually drew it, but merely that the police did what police often have done in the past--embellish or exaggerate the details to exonerate themselves. For this reason, and of course also to protect police from dishonest civilian witnesses, body cams should be standard issue equipment. In fact, I'm surprised SFPD hasn't long since…

Good points.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#308

Post by eli_gottlieb »

zeveb wrote: post #250
marcus_holmes wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? White folks were forced to move away because their kids might go to school with black kids? Only in America...

> White folks were forced to move away because their kids might go to school with black kids? It's really, really unfortunate that race is a proxy for class in America. It's a natural and IMHO good human tendency for folks to want to be around others of their own class; the problem is that in America race and class are so conflated that one gets this horrible self-reinforcing racist spiral, which is unfair to blacks…

> It's a natural and IMHO good human tendency for folks to want to be around others of their own class;

Natural, but not good. Good is when we eliminate class, not enjoy its stratification.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#309

Post by eli_gottlieb »

tptacek wrote: post #227
yoo1I wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, obviously the less police and the general public are put in this position the better, and when there is a gunman running around the neighborhood, there better be police to subdue, and yes, if it's required to save other lives, kill him. The point here, though is not to deny police their right to self defense, the point is to train them in a way that their first action to exercise that right is not with as much…

That's actually not my point. My preferred solution to this problem isn't utopian. We could do it tomorrow: Step 1: Ensure every police patrol vehicle has a shotgun locked in the trunk. Step 2: Take away handguns from all patrol officers.

That's an excellent idea, especially considering that in my very limited time in California, their cops were the most heavily-armed human beings I'd ever seen in-person. And these were policemen and sheriffs in Redwood City. And I've seen on-duty soldiers.

California cops honestly had me wondering why anyone would ever really need to walk around looking like they'd stepped out of a Hollywood shoot-em-up movie, with two handguns, a rifle, and another larger weapon strapped to their back.

Maybe they were there for a cartel bust or some shit I didn't know about, but that simply was not appropriate for ordinary beat policing. Luckily, I was white enough that they didn't give me crap for staring at them.

Re: Death by gentrification: the killing that shamed San Francisco

#310

Post by raldi »

dangerlibrary wrote: post #296
justaman wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the taser was found anywhere but holstered it means that he _likely_ drew it. Any motion to draw a weapon(lethal or otherwise) is seen as a threat. Given that it is gun-shaped, it was a really stupid move if he did draw it.

Given that he studied criminal justice and had no criminal record whatsoever, I'm sure he knew how stupid that would be. Nobody has provided a reasonable explanation for why he would've done something so stupid.

He was suffering from schizophrenia and earlier that month shot his friend three times with the taser, according to the friend's testimony at a restraining-order hearing.
Post reply on HN