The article also doesn't dispute any of the numbers in regards to the staggering volume of theft, despite higher investments in store security. Combined with dozens of videos of blatant mass theft circulating on Youtube, I wonder if any amount of provable facts would convince the author. It's reminiscent of arguing with climate change deniers or evolution deniers where facts don't seem to matter.
The real question to the author is why? Why write a piece like this? Why defend organized crime? Is the desire to combat any narrative that the other team has so strong that they're willing to deny undeniable evidence?
This author admits he's political, but it's bizarre in this case because it's to the benefit of literal gangs of criminals ruining the city he lives in.
Are some people so entrenched by their politics that they're willing to defend those destroying their own community?