Hacker News Reader

Comment by premium-komodo | Hacker News Reader

Yes, that seems to be how it is in SF. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arss9V3A1VA

Is it possible that, despite good intentions, the policies being implemented there actually have very harmful effects?

I feel like a lot if it stems from people talking about petty crime like theft as some sort of "cycle". They get tricked into thinking that means you can break it by ignoring it. "Break the cycle, they will stop committing the crime!" With the only voter controlled lever being "don't prosecute crime".

It's like some sort of ridiculous over swing from "tough on crime" that relies on an infantilization of those they wish to "help". Like somehow someone who committed a crime and got punished couldn't know right from wrong, and punishing them for that just somehow reinforces that, and just simply... not punishing them for it helps?

It's such a narrow view that ignores the fact that real people own these stores, actual adults shop there, criminals know that they can just steal free shit without consequence, and all of those sorts of normal people just say "fuck it" and eventually move. Nobody will put up with being a constant victim as some sort of "aid" to the situation, including those that vote for it. The ones that vote for it just don't have enough exposure to the aspects of society they're forcing to take the punishment for this crap. They force others to suffer the punishment for it, in lieu of the criminals they actually _reward_ for doing it.

After decades of "tough on crime" policies, this kind of shit was on the retreat. It objectively helped everyone involved. Sadly I think the real cycle is in people who subscribe their religion against law enforcement eventually legalizing most sorts of victimization, and then leaving when the chickens come to roost. Moving elsewhere to vote in politicians with that same sort of virus like mentality, and leaving behind wastelands that by their logic need this "soft on crime" treatment more than anywhere.

It's like freaking independence day, except instead of "resources" that the alien nomads invade to harvest it's a proper functioning society.

It actually becomes a self reinforcing cycle if staying in prison makes you an even worse criminal than before. A sensible solution isn't not to incarcerate criminals, but to make prisons a place where people can improve - and not just be punished with terrible conditions that make you more violent.

> It actually becomes a self reinforcing cycle if staying in prison makes you an even worse

That's certainly one of the tenants that leads people to believe that removing prison from the equation helps. I think that it relies on the false presumption that going after theft equals prison. They should have the stolen goods taken from them, ideally a financial punishment along the lines of treble damages, and locked up in jail (not prison) as this gets processed.

When it comes to "thug took some goods from store" it shouldn't be a matter of holding them in some sort of "improvement chamber". They need a swift and affirmative punishment and to be left with less than they started with when the process is done.

To clarify, I'm not against the idea of punishment for theft, but humans aren't simple reward maximising bots. IMHO no punishment doesn't work, and also too much punishment doesn't work.

Yeah, I think that hits the nail on the head.

The nimby problem, on the other hand, shows how selfish intentions can also lead to very harmful effects.

Spent 5 years there and am not envious of anyone living in the Bay at all.

I actually think NIMBYism isn't a San Francisco specific problem. It was just brought to the forefront because many people decided to move there all of a sudden. But the reality is most popular places have people choosing to protect their property values.

This rings true, although it’s hard to think of cities where the issue has resulted in as much harm as in SF.

The biggest problem is that the Cops 1) hate the DA because he's charging them with crimes, and 2) have a terrible clearance rate, which predates the current DA. They're hoping to drum up the narrative that this is his fault and replace him in a recall election.

To some extent, it's working. Every time you talk to the cops right now, they will tell you that the crime is the DA's fault.

Is there a possibility that sky is blue and water is wet? SF is the place everybody looks at when they want to know what not to do.

These harmful effects are intended. That is the strategy.

Its important to understand why. Your life depends on it.

Why? I mean, you can't tell people their life depends on knowing something and then not tell them.

I suspect they mean that some people in the area have an aligned agenda (not necessarily conspiring, just aligned) of trying to push the tech industry back out of the city, because they resent the gentrification. Can’t speak to the life depends on it part, but I suppose it’s an allusion to the dangers of crime.

I'll bite. Can you please expand on what you mean by this?

I'm not who you are asking but one thing to consider is you can't have a revolution without revolutionary conditions, or put more simply, revolutions don't generally happen when times are going good.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com