LOL - I live in between a bunch of homeless encampments in a downtown area. I have homeless folks climbing my fence all the time.
And that’s because of one thing: the cost of housing. That drives homelessness, which is creating perceptions that crime is far beyond what it actually is. Though I’m seeing conservatives from a number of cities claiming that things were so much better X decades ago - when crime rates were actually many times higher. Because it’s all about perception.
I could be very wrong, but I think the Detroit affair involved just one or two cops. There may be more to what I heard since then, so something to the same extent of the Philly affair may very well be the case.
This, exactly. And the major problem is that DAs like Boudin and anyone else advocating this haven’t been clear about this. They need to clearly say, expect some short-term pain while we’re solving the deeper problems, but it’s going to be worth it in the end. They also need to give some time frame for when the benefits will start to outweigh the costs. If this is a thing that’s going to take 5 years, ok, say it. If it will take five generations, say that. Whatever. Humans have embarked on multi-generational projects before, so that’s not a crazy idea. But those who are advocating this approach need to be upfront about these issues. Because the other side has a solution that’s expensive in the long term but works effectively in the short term.
San Francisco has had declining violent crime for the entire period covered by SFPD’s tracker. Crime Dashboard | San Francisco Police Department That is paired with a falling property crime in all but 2019 into 2020 (there might be reasons for that year to be a major statistical outlier), including this year so far compared to the same date range last year. So if crime was down and costs were down, what reason are you using for the policies to clearly not be working?
But they actually don’t. Heavily carceral approaches don’t decrease crime. Even a relatively short jail stint (30 days for example) generally costs people stable employment and increases the chance of reoffense.
I went to SF a few months back, every one i know who had been went over 10 years ago, and said how lovely it was, to me saying its a horrid shit whole filled with human shit and $20 beers plus the tax and tip.
I have never been so disappointed to travel 1500 miles to place that i would say is worse than London, and London is only 2 hours away on the train…
What reason are you using facts and data to refute a claim based on gut feeling and anecdotal evidence? /s
I’m across the continent from where this is going on, but people locally do the same thing. Especially since we now have (gasp) Black people due to some pretty great immigration policies. The crime rates are way down from what they were a generation ago, but even people who lived through that time think everything is worse now. 
Personally I think a lot of it can be tracked to the repeal of the fairness doctrine.
For all y’all that don’t live in San Francisco, take it from those who live here. Things are not good.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/sfnext-poll-san-francisco-17442479.php
this city is simmering in organic, home-grown discontent — born of a deep and personal understanding of the shortcomings of public life here and the failure of our leadership to meaningfully improve conditions on the ground, particularly as it relates to homelessness, public safety, and housing.
Nearly half of respondents (45%) say they have been a victim of crime in the last five years. Nearly a quarter (24%) say they had been threatened or physically attacked over that same period
This survey was driven by experiences that the people who live here are actually having
One thing is certain: The status quo isn’t working. San Francisco needs to change. That call isn’t coming from outside agitators or a few malign online actors. It’s coming from inside the house.
Wait, who said things are “good” there?
Saying things are better than they were before is not saying that “things are good,” but it’s refuting your claim that current policies aren’t working to alleviate the problems.
Regardless of your “arguments”, ~50% of the people being victims of crime and ~%25 victims of physical threat is does not “alleviate the problems”
Seems like you missed the part where posters upthread mentioned how the city is essentially waging war against the poor and homeless.
Everybody poops. It’s not an optional activity. What is optional is the city closing every public toilet within miles and refusing to pick up garbage from public trashbins.
Hmmm… sounds like you’re really unhappy where you live.
Doesn’t give you ‘a right’ to take it out on folks here, though.
Shit’s tough all over.
Reminder 1: A few reported residents of the 7.75M residents of the SFBA is not the beginning and end of opinion in the region.
Reminder 2: Those who do live in the region probably have a perspective you do not. As with most things, personal experience and exposure to situations or events is likely relevant.
TL;DR People here with skin in the game likely have interesting viewpoints. They are likely not the only viewpoints of the region. Not necessarily even the majority viewpoint.
7.75B?
Does B stand for something I’ve missed?
No shit—everything went to hell when the techbros showed up 25 years ago and the rents went through the roof
What The City really needs is a crime wave that’s so appalling and inescapable that all the rich people move away and the cost of living returns to something reasonable
I’m pretty sure that every generation in San Francisco has an “everything went to hell when…” story.
It totally is, and I respect that. This conversation seemed intended to rule out everyone else, though. Saying anecdotally that things are worse now than they were before, ignoring statistics about crime rates provided by other posters who live there showing things have actually improved, and saying, “only these self-reported statistics actually count, you don’t live here, you don’t know.”
I’d be interested to hear why the official stats showing reduced crime rates don’t mean policies are working Are officials under-reporting?
Or are we all working with different definitions of “worse”?
If someone says their city sucks, I believe them. If they say “it’s worse than it ever was before,” I’m dubious. This is the kind of mindset that brought us MAGA, after all.
