Dead Comment
The previous DA was doing a fantastic job, he had finally started focusing on violent crime instead of, “quality of life” crime like shoplifting and vandalism. Doing this is difficult because people will (as they did!) post videos online of petty theft or “unruly” people in the streets and people who do not understand how safety is actually created are never going to listen to people who are actually informed.
> he had picked a fight with the police chief.
This is not true. He prosecuted a police officer for murder and put pressure on the police, which have a long history of corruption and rampant racism, human trafficking, etc.. But police unions have a lot of power and influence, the average person thinks that police create safety (they do not! if they respond at all to anything, they respond after the fact with a pencil and paper, and their behavior is often very dangerous - e.g. speeding around the city running red lights when they clearly are not headed anywhere).
The police in SF do not have a tough job, and police everywhere, always slack off. The SFPD famously went on strike some decades ago and were basically shooting out streetlights and holding the entire city hostage, eventually culminating in a bombing on the mayor’s front lawn.
SFPD do not live in SF, almost any of them, they aren’t members of the community, they do not have the community’s best interest at heart. They are bullies who come from the suburbs and basically view all residents of SF as dirty miscreants. If you ask them for help in a violent situation, they will likely threaten you with violence or arrest yourself.
> he had finally started focusing on violent crime instead of, “quality of life” crime like shoplifting and vandalism.
Why not both?Please provide the data that shows this approach will work.
This has been tried for decades in every city across the world and it has been shown over and over again that simply being "tougher on crime" does not work.
What seems to work is a multi-faceted approach targeting root causes like inequality, drug use, homelessness as well as better policing.
> this disregard for the English language is truly despicable. You ought to be ashamed.
I mean, you brought race into it and implied I would care more if it happened to a white woman. That is the textbook definition of race-baiting. Both of your examples knew they were pregnant and abused drugs that killed the fetus. And both happened before Roe was overturned. So is there a point you're trying to make somewhere? > Says who? Some prosecutor?
The law, which is written by legislators democratically elected by the populace of the area they serve. That's how democracy works. If you think giving meth or valium to a baby or a developing fetus is a woman's prerogative, then I'm not sure there is any point in this discussion. > If a man takes a Valium, he won't be charged with anything.
Neither will a woman. Now if she is breastfeeding or pregnant that is a different story because it is no longer just her consuming the drug. She is no longer just endangering herself at that point. If a man endangers a child he will be charged as well. And in fact men face far heavier sentences in the legal system than women do. [0][0] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/women-arent-always-sent...
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
> Tell the world you will stop development until alignment is figured out.
Oh alignment was figured out already, look at who is on the board of OpenAI and the connections they have to US intelligence.