[flagged]
A person can be both ‘rich’ and want better for the community they choose to be part of.
we've already done the carceral state thing. It doesn't solve anything. history has taught us this lesson already. it's brain-dead to keep pimping for it like he's doing.
Sure, protect the shift worker who has little power and therefore little blame. But, who's to blame for society's ills then? Calling for more arrests and incarceration has never, ever solved the underlying issues. What Garry Tan doesn't realize or won't admit is that he is part of the wealthy caste that caused this. Now that he got his money? Lock all of these bad people up!
I agree heavy sentences and private jails and, what is clearly a planned system to take offenders and make sure they can't re integrate into society are terrible and we need reform in the jail system.
Policing, as a deterrent, and arresting for petty crime however are effective. The threat of punishment is an effective deterrent. The fact we have a draconian system after that point is unfortunate, but if I understand SF doesn't even present the threat.
> [Police] arresting for petty crime however [is] effective
Incorrect. These are myths that people fall back on when they want to advocate for the same policy positions that have produced worse social outcomes for at least the past 40 years. The same thing, over and over again, driven by the belief that punishment must be involved to deter crime.
The threat of punishment has zero effect on deterrence. "Certainty of being caught" apparently does, but as you build a police force that makes getting caught of committing a crime a certainty, you have already fallen into the same trap America (and her cities) fall into over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over and over and over and over and over and over again.
That's my point, and it was the first bullet point in what you linked. Can't be worried about being caught if there is no policing.
> "Certainty of being caught" apparently does [provide a deterrent effect], but as you build a police force that makes getting caught of committing a crime a certainty, you have already fallen into the same trap America (and her cities) fall into over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over and over and over and over and over and over again.
Police aren't a solution. They're a problem. That's not to say there's no UPSIDE. It's to say there are trade-offs and I think they have been proven by history to be unfavorable trade-offs in the long view.
No one in power has any interest in upending the entire US penal system, I understand this upsets you. The reality is those people won't be helped in the way you want maybe ever.
I don't agree that letting otherwise law abiding average people suffer the consequences because of that is okay.
I also don't see people taking the needed action to make these changes you want. For all the extreme positions of complete reform that I see they only come to me online in talk.
I'm a moderate I really don't share the passion, but if I did I'd be taking more physical action to enact it than I see.
shocking
> law abiding average people suffer the consequences
law-abiding average people suffer the consequences of increased policing and incarceration, it's just law-abiding average people you don't see or share community with.
What is your proposed solution to crime in SF? Is it feasibly executed? This entire conversation is you saying what doesn't work without providing a realistic alternative.
Crime is mostly the result of social ills. While individuals should own their behavior, so should the puppeteers. You can't make affordable, consumable tech without exploitation, whether of humans or of Mother Nature, full stop. I'd agree with Garry a lot more if he was trying to fix the dreadful economic situation as well.