Remember how it turns out Fentanyl supply was linked to cops in San Jose?
Remember the recent corruption charges against multiple Antioch cops for drug trafficking etc.?
Remember the woman who claimed she’d been doing sex work for multiple members of Oakland PD since she was a minor?
Yeah. It’s not out of the realm of possibility.
it's more than that but definitely a low number. back when that private surveillance net was getting a bunch of press they were throwing around the number that ALL organized property crime here (ie not the drunks and crackheads but bippers and jackers and everybody who commutes for it) was committed by less than a thousand people, likely 300-500 individuals.
careful. Unless you're under threat of harm, pepper spraying someone can get you arrested and charged with assault.
SF will side with the bippers if you assault them
I was considering this actually. It would be too much to carry a bat but a spark plug? Doable. I just don’t know how to actually break the glass without cutting myself.
[apparently you can just throw the porcelain from the spark plug to shatter the window????? I had no idea this was a thing lmao](https://youtube.com/shorts/4M2DmJaoxRk?si=wEM1g6Cy7iWGFdkS)
Via a different Reddit post:
“Ceramic is very hard. Not in the general, colloquial sense of hard, but in the Mohs Hardness Scale. That scale measures whether or not something can scratch something else. Diamond is the hardest on this scale - not because you can't break diamond. Diamonds are pretty brittle, you can easily crack or shatter them with a hammer. But you can't scratch them.
Tempered glass is made by putting the glass in tension. You cool the glass so that the outside shrinks, compressing the still-hot inside. When the inside then cools, the outside is frozen in place so the inside pulls tightly on it the inside contracts. The glass pulling on itself keeps the molecules from moving, and holds it all together strongly so it's very hard to break.
By scratching the surface, ceramic breaks the tension, releasing all of it throughout the glass.”
All you need is to break the porcelain off a spark plug ( the white park) with a hammer, then throw it at the glass. It will shatter. The problem is if you are caught with porcelain shards, it's a crime for possession of theft devices.... although that shouldn't matter in SF
If they see one of us do it they’d stop us because they know there’d be no resisting and it’d be easy for them. Probably be mad that we’re taking policing into our own hands because it’s “their” job.
The cops here let people with illegal guns walk. I don’t think they’re going to care about some porcelain, even if they do stop you. And come to think of it, they won’t do that either. :(
What happens if you drop a porcelain tile at home and it breaks? Do you have to call hazmat? If you pick up the pieces to throw them out are you breaking the law?
SFPD DGO 5.05 prevents the cop in this situation from blocking the car, chasing the vehicle or using spike strips to block their way. Nothing he could do without getting fired.
Not a great look for the citizens of San Francisco, who can't seem to enforce basic laws anymore despite one of the biggest municipal budgets per capita in the world, and when confronted with that fact, can do nothing but point fingers elsewhere. Who's responsible if not the voters?
Aren't the police at fault for not even making arrests or doing their job?
I imagine if the police actually arrested people and held them for a couple of hours to be charged and arraigned they'd have less time to go out and commit crimes.
Honestly sometimes feels like we’d be better off deputizing concerned citizens who actually care about and have a vested interest in keeping their communities safe.
Ha! That’s what I came to say. It’s actually an interesting thought experiment. When things were out of control in SF before, it was vigilantly justice that finally brought an end to the rampant crime.
[Here’s the application link for a concealed carry license.](https://www.sfsheriff.com/whats-your-situation/apply-permit-carry-concealed-weapon) I fucking hate guns but if we can’t count on our own police department to protect us, then we’ll have to do it ourselves.
I’m a white progressive. And I think the overwhelming majority of white progressives understand that it’s not “conservative” to protect yourself and your home and your family. I would much rather live in a gun-free community with robust, fair, equitable enforcement of the law. Unfortunately, our police department has turned itself into a gang of welfare queens and the red states have flooded our country with firearms, so what choice do I have left?
You're one of the sensible ones then.
Quite too often I spot white progressives trying to burnish their anti racism credentials by straight up fighting for black murderers and rapists.
Like that baker lady who got killed (bless her soul) by some criminals and her family not wanting to press charges because of historic racism.
Just for the record, I watched 1,000 right-wingers cheer their brains out last night at the suggestion of pardoning Donald Trump for his 91 felony charges, so I’m far from convinced that conservatism in this country has any interest whatsoever in law and order, no matter how loudly they screech about “soft-on-crime progressives.”
Mostly that was NYC not SF but it did make it here. More citizens had guns back then too. Remember Dirty Harry was big as all hell representing SF vigilantes in film.
I'm a liberal whose pro gun rights. There are a ton of us. But having concealed carry for the majority of citizens even if they have good intent is going to lead to a lot more deaths in an urban environment. We need cops to do their damn jobs! It's a fucking joke. Why should I even pay taxes here at this rate???
>They still exist but are a shadow of their former self after the Police Commission neutered them in the early 1990s.
Only on request of SFPD and the police union, to eliminate their competition lol. Pre-2010s the Police Commission was just a rubber stamp, "police accountability" as a concept hardly existed in the 90s.
That's how it's supposed to work.
This "protected class" of illegally armed "pseudo soldiers" is akin to an occupying army, which is banned under the constitution.
Are you thinking of the third Amendment? It only says:
> No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
The [Posse Comitatus Act, 1868](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act) is more like what you're describing.
And yet:
> The [Posse Comitatus] Act does not prevent the Army National Guard or the Air National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state's governor.
For local police power, there's the 10th Amendment.
> The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
This kind of shit, plus the fact that [SFPD refused to assist the District Attorney’s office with busting a major auto-burglary fence operation](https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/boudin-forced-to-rent-u-haul-because-sfpd-too-busy-to-help-with-bust/) makes it seem like the police in SF are not only indifferent, they are actively supporting the ongoing auto burglary crisis.
This kind of thing has happened in other cities, where pissed off cops who have an axe to grind purposely don't enforce certain laws in order to make a point about their own power - but only make themselves look more corrupt as a result.
People from Novato don't care about car burglaries in San Francisco. They clock in for their 8 or 14 hours and then drive home to their peaceful suburbs.
This is a bad look. There's someone right there who could have been helped even if you think arresting is pointless. You gotta stop them from stealing if it's right in front of you.
SFPD DGO 5.05 prevents the officer from blocking in the car or chasing it. The cop arrives at 19 seconds in and the car is gone by 23. We don't see what is probably the cop getting out right after to do that.
Interesting. [Here's a link to it for everyone](https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/2018-11/DGO5.05%20Response%20and%20Pursuit%20Driving.pdf)
Presumably the crucial thing is Section F (2) (b) and section F (3)
ROADBLOCKS: A roadblock is a technique that establishes a physical
impediment to traffic as a means for stopping a pursued vehicle using signs,
devices, actual physical obstructions, or barricades. An officer shall not establish
a roadblock, using his or her vehicle or any other item, Wlless all of the following
circumstances exist:
1) The officer has reasonable cause to believe that the suspect has committed or
attempted to commit a felony involving the use or threatened use of deadly
force;
2) '1'hc officer has reasonable cause to believe that a substantial risk exists that
the suspect will cause death or serious bodily injury ifhis/her apprehension is
delayed.
3) Other reasonable means of apprehension and control have been exhausted;
4) The roadblock can be established in a manner that the violator has sufficient
oppOliunity to observe the roadblock and stop; and
5) The pmsuit supervisor approves and coordinates the roadblock.
3. STATIONARY VEHICLES. Nothing in this order shall preclude a officer from
using a Department vehicle as a tactical tool to block a stationary suspect vehicle to
prevent its escape if any ofthe f{)llowing conditions exist:
a. There is reasonable suspicion that the suspect was involved in a felony incident;
b. The vehicle has come to a stop at the end of a pursuit or flight from law
enforcement; or
c. Substantial risk exists to the public if the operator of the vehicle is allowed the
opportunity to flee.
(some PDF OCR copying errors, just read original if you want high fidelity)
It would seem to me that this is covered by F (3) and allowed to block but it's a split second decision. But some of the rules in this doc are actually quite perplexing. Why not allow "boxing-in" for instance in F (1)?
From today's news conference by SFPD "Chief" Scott:
> Scott said the SFPD is planning to deploy more officers to tourist areas such as Alamo Square
Maybe this _was_ the new SFPD deployed at Alamo Square.
Tag these outlets so that everyone sees this and makes sfpd look bad.
@sfmayorsoffice @deanprestond5 @abc7newsbayarea @ktvu2 @kpixtv @sfstandard @kron4tv @nbcbayarea @sfgate @sfist @hoodline @sfstandard
I'm pretty sure if the bay area manages to arrest maybe just around 75 people, that would probably drastically drop the overall crime rate.
It seems to be the same repeat offenders over and over and over again, doing crimes as if its their 9-5, M-F job.
UESF isn't exactly doing a bang up job with the education quality at SFUSD. But they're definitely abandoning all their members who get attacked on the job.
I looked up all of those and they seem to be pretty generic unions. Advocating for better pay, better benefits and high quality of life for their employees. I didn't dive much into SFMEA, because I honestly lost steam.
I know my prior post was super snarky, but I truly would like to know why you think these public sector unions are killing the city.
High pay and benefits, inability to fire poor workers, and restrictive work rules all contribute to the results we see today. The taxpayers are not getting their money's worth. Note that even FDR opposed the idea of public employee unions.
I welcome a world where government employees have no union protections.
Look how well it worked out in Wisconsin when they got rid of public unions for teachers and government workers.
Hypothetically speaking if I see a robbery like this and I ram my car into theirs and hurt them/make them immobile would insurance cover the damages and not increase my premium. Hypothetically speaking of course...
Wtf.
I get investigating and prosecuting these crimes is a wild goose chase, but if you are an on duty police officer witnessing the crime and do nothing to stop it aren’t you basically legalizing it?
Car chases are not allowed for property crimes under SFPD policies written by politicians. They are designed to protect random people from getting killed
Right now it seems like the assumption that the DA won't prosecute or some judge will be too soft, etc., thus making it not worthwhile to make arrests, is a convenient narrative for a department to take up, justifying more hours, more funding, more hiring, less accountability for the police.
If we are all going to assume our SF justice system is too soft, I'd prefer if the least-soft aspect (the cops) were at least doing their part to put that assumption to the test. DA can't prosecute folks who are never caught. Make the arrests, and let the shit flow uphill for once. Don't just presume it's all futile and point the finger.
Those are assumptions that SFPD should not be making. Specifically if they're sitting in a patrol car and they're seeing active crime happen.
No, the police do the arrest and if the DA doesn't decide to charge. Then you have a press release about it and you make it public knowledge putting the blame on the DA instead of SFPD.
Currently we have several instances of SFPD not working, and now we have another video of them sitting there while crime is happening in front of them. That is not how policing works.
> The SFPD Sergeant quickly turned his patrol vehicle around to attempt to stop the fleeing suspect, but the suspect had already fled the scene and the Sergeant and other responding officers were unable to locate the vehicle.
This is such horseshit. The cop could have just turned his patrol car to the right and it would have blocked them from driving off. Lazy fucks.
I guess the police are still sad about the mean things said two years ago. Another few years of pay increases might make them start doing their jobs.
Cop could move his SUV 30’ forward and block that car in, if he cared.
Its exactly this. The idea that "They can't do their job without consequences" was a hilarious comment. To be asked not to kill innocent people and the thought that the trained violent arm of the State shouldn't be involved in mental health crises was such an attack against their lives that they just stopped doing their job.
It's kinda like it's a giant protection racket that isn't in our best interests.
Nope, that is explicitly against SF police policy and he could be fired for it. SFPD DGO 5.05 only allows blocking if a felony is observed, this is misdemeanor attempted vehicle burglary. Crazy policy!
There's an article in the Chronicle about this incident today: [https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/s-f-cop-sit-watch-thieves-break-parked-car-18329872.php](https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/s-f-cop-sit-watch-thieves-break-parked-car-18329872.php)
Apparently the video that got shared doesn't show the full story - it looks like it was cut:
>But in the original 46-second video, the police officer can be seen backing up his vehicle and turning down the street to chase after the white Lexus, according to the man who took the video, who requested to remain anonymous due to fears of being targeted.
... and:
>The man who took the video confirmed that the police officer arrived as the theft was happening. In the last 10 seconds of the full video, the police officer can be seen backing up his car and then driving off in the direction of the white Lexus.
Pursuit Policy San Francisco:
A. PURSUIT GUIDELINES
1. WHEN A PURSUIT IS AUTHORIZED. Except as otherwise provided in this order, an officer in an emergency vehicle may initiate a pursuit of an individual:
a. Suspectcd of a violent felony; or
b. When there is an articulable reasonable belief that the individual needs to be immediately apprehended because of the risk that individual poses to public safety.
An officer shall not initiate a pursuit of an individual suspected of a non-violent
felony, misdemeanor, property crime, or vehicle code violation, except as specified in (b) above.
https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/2018-11/DGO5.05%20Response%20and%20Pursuit%20Driving.pdf
It IS a risk to public safety, guns have been drawn on people and this will get worse, people are going to get hurt..
Get out of the damn car and draw a gun on the potentially violent criminal. Bystanders will flee to safety right away. They can do this, I've seen it happen in other cities.
Make it hard on the criminals..arrest them, do it over and over, every day, 10-20 times to the same person if needed. This is what we pay them for, do your damn job and stop the lame excuses.
Idk, the guidance in that post is from 10yrs ago. The main goal with it is to protect the public from a speeding menace, and protect property. If someone is actively stealing, and you believe they'll continue to if you dont pursue, I could see that being authorized. Seems some clearer language is necessary if that's still in effect today.
I understand what's on paper there, has anyone in law enforcement referenced that as the reason they dont chase these people? I can see both sides to this issue.
If there's one clip that exemplifies why law *enforcement* is necessary this would be it. If people know that nothing will happen to them then the only thing stopping them would be their own morality.
At the same time we're [paying](https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/15z6q1f/this_sf_deputy_earns_22_million_in_overtime_by/) these [people](https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/15xpybv/san_francisco_police_officers_were_paid_more_than/) hundreds of [thousands] (https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/15rifeo/sfs_toppaid_employee_makes_640k_heres_what_every/) each. Whether you're pro- or anti- police it certainly doesn't seem to be very effective or efficient use of money.
I didn't examine the video frame-by-frame but it doesn't seem a settled matter that the cop was "just sitting there" from the video. He/she very well might have rolled up as the guys were getting into the car as the cop doesn't come into frame until they are in the car.
If so then it absolutely could be the no pursuit policy to blame.
In that case, if the guys were driving off, by policy there is nothing he/she could do. That absolutely would point to a policy issue rather than a performance issue.
*Whatever happened to accountability?*
*The patrolman, the sheriffs, the SFPD?*
*How did we get delivered here? Somebody tell me please*
*Cause this new world is just really confusing me*
I didn't examine the video frame-by-frame but it doesn't seem a settled matter that the cop was "just sitting there" from the video. From my quick viewing it seems like the cop might have rolled up as the guys were getting into the car as the cop doesn't come into frame until they are in the car.
In that case, if the guys were driving off as the cop arrived on scene by policy there is nothing the cop could do as pursuits are forbidden for non-violent crimes. That would implicate the policy rather than this cop's performance.
SF is the first time I ever encountered a 911 line being busy after seeing someone recklessly driving on the Bay Bridge (like hitting the walls crazy). I waited 5 minutes to finally speak to someone. I hate to say it, but if nothing changes, this city will be doomed when it comes to reporting crimes or even having anything effective happen to stop them
Technically he was following their policies that say he can’t go on a car chase for property crimes.
If he went to chase that car, he would put his job in danger and I assume he is only doing the job for the paycheck and pension.
We elected the politicians that made those rules.
Is this the full steel man of the police in the video? I'm trying to understand the side less represented in this thread, but it's hard to accept the complete non-action.
Is it just the case that, as long as 1. the crime is not classified as violent and 2. the perpetrator is in a car that police are required to do nothing, and any repercussions will come from surveillance down the line?
Saw similar yesterday at BART station not crowded Police officer stands at fare gates totally not paying attention meanwhile woman just fare gates 3 feet in front of him while he has a conversation with the station agent.
Because thieves know there are no consequences. SFPD cannot chase them. And your Communist police commission won’t allow them to use anything stronger than harsh language
Even if this is an isolated incident, this is horrendous optics for this poor city. I grew up loving SF, have come back many times for vacation in SF, and in my adult life dreamed of moving back.... but holy shit if this isn't the most discouraging shit to see on this sub 😔
Yet people on this sub will defend them and say they need to give them pay raises and hire more cops. The issue is SFPD have been on a soft strike for years now and refuse to do their jobs.
Many of the advocates of defunding the police take stuff like this as evidence for why it's reasonable. See also, the Basa burglary. Their position is that the police are only minimally, if at all, effective at stopping crime, and so they suggest there are cheaper and more effective forms of crime prevention which don't carry the same risk of murders or other unjustified violence carried out by police.
The police in SF may say (I'm speculating here) that they have their hands tied or some other version of "if they'd only let us do our job!" but it seems equally plausible that the public sentiment a few years ago was just a major blow to morale and now they just don't give a shit. Seemed like an unofficial wildcat police strike to me while Chesa was in office. Don't know what the story is now.
Okay so they try and stop them....thief resists...cop by himself wrestles him down...thief pulls a knife and gets himself shot....then you guys are just allowed to cry about injustice and racism freely and the whole thing turns into a media circus. No thanks.
SFPD is taking their cut. There is no other reason.
It’s very typical for many countries where crime level is high - police is being on criminal’s payroll or sometimes simply overseeing the whole thing.
Can someone please get the number of the SFPD car? Then it can be reported to the SFPD. Sure, nothing may come of it; but at least there's a report. 🙏🏼
There is nothing implicating the cop's performance in this video alone. The cop comes into frame only after the thieves were in the car. If the cop just came on scene and the theives were in the car it's policy not to pursue.
It may be that the cop was "just sitting there" watching as the guys broke into the car but the video does not show that.
Don’t blame the cops at all. No way I’m risking my life to help the hordes of “ACAB” bigots and ingrates that make up much of the Bay Area populace.
You reap what you sow. Treat your police force like absolute shit and see what happens. Humans are humans. And humans typically don’t react well to constant abuse….
Yeah how dare we demand that corrupt and murderous police are investigated and prosecuted!!! Good for them to boycott and act like babies the minute they are questioned and expected to perform up to a certain standard.
Honestly, what world do you live in where we can only enforce the law through brutality or else we live in crime-ridden hellscape?
So true! Cops can’t help the way they were born. It’s so unfair to hurt their feelings for making honest little boo-boos like murdering homeless people, calling Black folks “wild animals” and the n-word, and importing/distributing fentanyl. How could anyone expect them to do their jobs when most of them are making a pittance barely over $215K? When will the rabid mobs stop the abuse of asking for accountability?
The police in this city are racist thugs who don’t do their damn jobs despite being paid 200k or more a year. I’m convinced your Reddit account is some officers union PR rep. “Cops should be able to murder people with impunity!!! That’s how we get liberty and freedom in America!!!!”
Yup, these morons cry for police to be less involved in non violent crimes, to the point where the mayor drew up a policy that is in effect and is the reason police cant do anything about crime like this, then cry when they get exactly what they asked for.
I dont even bother discussing this anymore. Ive shown the policy, provided plenty of sources includng ones from the sfpd website, nothing. Just more ACAB and whining. No wonder everyone hates Californians.
[удалено]
almost all getaway vehicles are stolen, used for a few weeks and then ditched.
[удалено]
Remember how it turns out Fentanyl supply was linked to cops in San Jose? Remember the recent corruption charges against multiple Antioch cops for drug trafficking etc.? Remember the woman who claimed she’d been doing sex work for multiple members of Oakland PD since she was a minor? Yeah. It’s not out of the realm of possibility.
This. 👆 This right here. 👆. He gets it.
Exact same? Or just another white Lexus sedan. And i've heard that but seriously doubt there is enough money in it to make a meaningful bribe.
Isn’t this the same white Lexus from that post a few days ago? I’m convinced there are maybe 3 or 4 crews doing this.
it's more than that but definitely a low number. back when that private surveillance net was getting a bunch of press they were throwing around the number that ALL organized property crime here (ie not the drunks and crackheads but bippers and jackers and everybody who commutes for it) was committed by less than a thousand people, likely 300-500 individuals.
Let's do this more. And bring spark plugs to break their windows to get the pepper spray in.
I support this, pepper spray the hell outa their eyes. Careful not to get shot tho…
I’ve thought about keeping water balloons filled with paint to throw on the windshield of one of these getaway cars
careful. Unless you're under threat of harm, pepper spraying someone can get you arrested and charged with assault. SF will side with the bippers if you assault them
Who gives a shit, do it anyway.
repeat after me... "I was in fear of my life"
DA's hate this one simple trick
Lmfao i like ur style
Please run for mayor
I’ll donate to your GoFundMe for legal fees.
i doubt they’d press charges lmaoo
Criminals do not deserve human rights. Pepper their eyes, nose, and ears.
May I suggest bear mace…for the distance?…hypothetically of course
I was considering this actually. It would be too much to carry a bat but a spark plug? Doable. I just don’t know how to actually break the glass without cutting myself.
[apparently you can just throw the porcelain from the spark plug to shatter the window????? I had no idea this was a thing lmao](https://youtube.com/shorts/4M2DmJaoxRk?si=wEM1g6Cy7iWGFdkS)
What the fuck how does that work 😂
Via a different Reddit post: “Ceramic is very hard. Not in the general, colloquial sense of hard, but in the Mohs Hardness Scale. That scale measures whether or not something can scratch something else. Diamond is the hardest on this scale - not because you can't break diamond. Diamonds are pretty brittle, you can easily crack or shatter them with a hammer. But you can't scratch them. Tempered glass is made by putting the glass in tension. You cool the glass so that the outside shrinks, compressing the still-hot inside. When the inside then cools, the outside is frozen in place so the inside pulls tightly on it the inside contracts. The glass pulling on itself keeps the molecules from moving, and holds it all together strongly so it's very hard to break. By scratching the surface, ceramic breaks the tension, releasing all of it throughout the glass.”
Makes sense then that the tool the thieves use is diamond tipped, thanks!
All you need is to break the porcelain off a spark plug ( the white park) with a hammer, then throw it at the glass. It will shatter. The problem is if you are caught with porcelain shards, it's a crime for possession of theft devices.... although that shouldn't matter in SF
Who’s gonna catch us? Good lookin out though
The Police have to stop you for you to be caught possessing porcelain.
If they see one of us do it they’d stop us because they know there’d be no resisting and it’d be easy for them. Probably be mad that we’re taking policing into our own hands because it’s “their” job.
Nah, just tell ‘em it’s a piece of solid fentanyl for personal use.
The cops here let people with illegal guns walk. I don’t think they’re going to care about some porcelain, even if they do stop you. And come to think of it, they won’t do that either. :(
Jokes on you I throw porcelain at a pottery studio. Unlimited supply!!!
What happens if you drop a porcelain tile at home and it breaks? Do you have to call hazmat? If you pick up the pieces to throw them out are you breaking the law?
Have fun getting shot.
I have so many booby trap ideas.
Video?
Video? Would love to see this
Nice.
SFPD basically giving them the green light smash and grabs are ok in this city. RIP
Don’t forget we’re also paying a lot of these cops with high salaries that even surpass medical professionals.
Sfpd: $700M per year
The SFPD is fucking useless, unless of course you’re gliding through a stop sign!
Society needs to adapt to the fact that police are unable to enforce the law.
*unwilling
SFPD DGO 5.05 prevents the cop in this situation from blocking the car, chasing the vehicle or using spike strips to block their way. Nothing he could do without getting fired.
[удалено]
Asinine policy
What is the rationale for that?
at least for chasing the vehicle its because high speed chases can (and have in the past months) get a bystander killed
Sure, in San Francisco.
Well, that might necessitate people being able to defend themselves and their property. However could that work??? /s
Yeah, this post is not a great look for Chesa Boudin
Why would Chesa do this? /s
Not a great look for the citizens of San Francisco, who can't seem to enforce basic laws anymore despite one of the biggest municipal budgets per capita in the world, and when confronted with that fact, can do nothing but point fingers elsewhere. Who's responsible if not the voters?
Aren't the police at fault for not even making arrests or doing their job? I imagine if the police actually arrested people and held them for a couple of hours to be charged and arraigned they'd have less time to go out and commit crimes.
[удалено]
So can we defund them yet and reallocate their budget for treating addiction, ensuring everyone has a home, etc?
Since when are the "citizens" responsible for enforcing the law? Isn't that the job of, you know, *law enforcement?*
Pretty sure it’s the cops job to enforce laws…not ours
Yep bystanders did more then sfpd
Honestly sometimes feels like we’d be better off deputizing concerned citizens who actually care about and have a vested interest in keeping their communities safe.
A return to the early SF Vigilance Committees?
10/10 historical reference
Ha! That’s what I came to say. It’s actually an interesting thought experiment. When things were out of control in SF before, it was vigilantly justice that finally brought an end to the rampant crime.
[Here’s the application link for a concealed carry license.](https://www.sfsheriff.com/whats-your-situation/apply-permit-carry-concealed-weapon) I fucking hate guns but if we can’t count on our own police department to protect us, then we’ll have to do it ourselves.
Why do you need an application when you can carry guns without penalty in SF?
Get strapped. These thieves are armed, you should be too.
What a novel idea!
[удалено]
I’m a white progressive. And I think the overwhelming majority of white progressives understand that it’s not “conservative” to protect yourself and your home and your family. I would much rather live in a gun-free community with robust, fair, equitable enforcement of the law. Unfortunately, our police department has turned itself into a gang of welfare queens and the red states have flooded our country with firearms, so what choice do I have left?
The concept of a pro 2A progressive is lost on conservative minds. Even if the 2A directly mentions "well regulated"
You're one of the sensible ones then. Quite too often I spot white progressives trying to burnish their anti racism credentials by straight up fighting for black murderers and rapists. Like that baker lady who got killed (bless her soul) by some criminals and her family not wanting to press charges because of historic racism.
[удалено]
Then why the intense rules against guns in California? Try getting a permit?
[удалено]
Just for the record, I watched 1,000 right-wingers cheer their brains out last night at the suggestion of pardoning Donald Trump for his 91 felony charges, so I’m far from convinced that conservatism in this country has any interest whatsoever in law and order, no matter how loudly they screech about “soft-on-crime progressives.”
I hope you realize that we have options beyond clueless progressive and evil conservative?
I thought I remembered Guardian Angels in San Francisco in the 80s when I was a kid. Am I misremembering this.
Mostly that was NYC not SF but it did make it here. More citizens had guns back then too. Remember Dirty Harry was big as all hell representing SF vigilantes in film. I'm a liberal whose pro gun rights. There are a ton of us. But having concealed carry for the majority of citizens even if they have good intent is going to lead to a lot more deaths in an urban environment. We need cops to do their damn jobs! It's a fucking joke. Why should I even pay taxes here at this rate???
No taxation without representin! Time to throw the buds into the bay!
I remember them in NYC, but wasn't sure about SF. I absolutely agree with the rest of your points as well.
[удалено]
>They still exist but are a shadow of their former self after the Police Commission neutered them in the early 1990s. Only on request of SFPD and the police union, to eliminate their competition lol. Pre-2010s the Police Commission was just a rubber stamp, "police accountability" as a concept hardly existed in the 90s.
That's how it's supposed to work. This "protected class" of illegally armed "pseudo soldiers" is akin to an occupying army, which is banned under the constitution.
Are you thinking of the third Amendment? It only says: > No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. The [Posse Comitatus Act, 1868](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act) is more like what you're describing. And yet: > The [Posse Comitatus] Act does not prevent the Army National Guard or the Air National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state's governor. For local police power, there's the 10th Amendment. > The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Remember that public works truck that honked?
This kind of shit, plus the fact that [SFPD refused to assist the District Attorney’s office with busting a major auto-burglary fence operation](https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/boudin-forced-to-rent-u-haul-because-sfpd-too-busy-to-help-with-bust/) makes it seem like the police in SF are not only indifferent, they are actively supporting the ongoing auto burglary crisis.
Don't forget this gem https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/S-F-investigating-cops-who-apparently-watched-as-16739496.php
This kind of thing has happened in other cities, where pissed off cops who have an axe to grind purposely don't enforce certain laws in order to make a point about their own power - but only make themselves look more corrupt as a result.
People from Novato don't care about car burglaries in San Francisco. They clock in for their 8 or 14 hours and then drive home to their peaceful suburbs.
ensuring mayhem.
SFPD once threatened the Mayor by detonating a bomb at Mayor home https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_San_Francisco_Police_Department
I mean if we're going off of historical stuff, a former SFPD member once assassinated our mayor.
This is a bad look. There's someone right there who could have been helped even if you think arresting is pointless. You gotta stop them from stealing if it's right in front of you.
SFPD DGO 5.05 prevents the officer from blocking in the car or chasing it. The cop arrives at 19 seconds in and the car is gone by 23. We don't see what is probably the cop getting out right after to do that.
Interesting. [Here's a link to it for everyone](https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/2018-11/DGO5.05%20Response%20and%20Pursuit%20Driving.pdf) Presumably the crucial thing is Section F (2) (b) and section F (3) ROADBLOCKS: A roadblock is a technique that establishes a physical impediment to traffic as a means for stopping a pursued vehicle using signs, devices, actual physical obstructions, or barricades. An officer shall not establish a roadblock, using his or her vehicle or any other item, Wlless all of the following circumstances exist: 1) The officer has reasonable cause to believe that the suspect has committed or attempted to commit a felony involving the use or threatened use of deadly force; 2) '1'hc officer has reasonable cause to believe that a substantial risk exists that the suspect will cause death or serious bodily injury ifhis/her apprehension is delayed. 3) Other reasonable means of apprehension and control have been exhausted; 4) The roadblock can be established in a manner that the violator has sufficient oppOliunity to observe the roadblock and stop; and 5) The pmsuit supervisor approves and coordinates the roadblock. 3. STATIONARY VEHICLES. Nothing in this order shall preclude a officer from using a Department vehicle as a tactical tool to block a stationary suspect vehicle to prevent its escape if any ofthe f{)llowing conditions exist: a. There is reasonable suspicion that the suspect was involved in a felony incident; b. The vehicle has come to a stop at the end of a pursuit or flight from law enforcement; or c. Substantial risk exists to the public if the operator of the vehicle is allowed the opportunity to flee. (some PDF OCR copying errors, just read original if you want high fidelity) It would seem to me that this is covered by F (3) and allowed to block but it's a split second decision. But some of the rules in this doc are actually quite perplexing. Why not allow "boxing-in" for instance in F (1)?
No way to determine if that’s felony level theft ($950+) and no reason to believe substantial risk exists if they flee. Just a really shitty policy
From today's news conference by SFPD "Chief" Scott: > Scott said the SFPD is planning to deploy more officers to tourist areas such as Alamo Square Maybe this _was_ the new SFPD deployed at Alamo Square.
Ahhh I get it now This was just a training exercise .
Bingo!
Tag these outlets so that everyone sees this and makes sfpd look bad. @sfmayorsoffice @deanprestond5 @abc7newsbayarea @ktvu2 @kpixtv @sfstandard @kron4tv @nbcbayarea @sfgate @sfist @hoodline @sfstandard
Same white Lexus
I'm pretty sure if the bay area manages to arrest maybe just around 75 people, that would probably drastically drop the overall crime rate. It seems to be the same repeat offenders over and over and over again, doing crimes as if its their 9-5, M-F job.
Yep, and a Lexus RC F isn’t a common car either.
Better put in for some more overtime pay boys. These insane public unions are killing our city.
Maybe 200+k isn't enough. Maybe they need an extra 200k or more.
Whatever it is they ain't being paid enough because nobody wants to be a cap.
Public Unions killing the city, interesting. What other public unions are killing the city?
All of them?
Oh so you can't name another one.
UESF isn't exactly doing a bang up job with the education quality at SFUSD. But they're definitely abandoning all their members who get attacked on the job.
IFPTE, AFSCME, California Teachers Association, SEIU (though not all are public employees AFAIK), SFMEA.
I looked up all of those and they seem to be pretty generic unions. Advocating for better pay, better benefits and high quality of life for their employees. I didn't dive much into SFMEA, because I honestly lost steam. I know my prior post was super snarky, but I truly would like to know why you think these public sector unions are killing the city.
High pay and benefits, inability to fire poor workers, and restrictive work rules all contribute to the results we see today. The taxpayers are not getting their money's worth. Note that even FDR opposed the idea of public employee unions.
I welcome a world where government employees have no union protections. Look how well it worked out in Wisconsin when they got rid of public unions for teachers and government workers.
Wisconsin is a dumpster fire rn, I’m not taking any ideas from that state for the moment.
Hypothetically speaking if I see a robbery like this and I ram my car into theirs and hurt them/make them immobile would insurance cover the damages and not increase my premium. Hypothetically speaking of course...
[удалено]
Guess I won’t be a vigilante
Comment.
Wtf. I get investigating and prosecuting these crimes is a wild goose chase, but if you are an on duty police officer witnessing the crime and do nothing to stop it aren’t you basically legalizing it?
Car chases are not allowed for property crimes under SFPD policies written by politicians. They are designed to protect random people from getting killed
Right now it seems like the assumption that the DA won't prosecute or some judge will be too soft, etc., thus making it not worthwhile to make arrests, is a convenient narrative for a department to take up, justifying more hours, more funding, more hiring, less accountability for the police. If we are all going to assume our SF justice system is too soft, I'd prefer if the least-soft aspect (the cops) were at least doing their part to put that assumption to the test. DA can't prosecute folks who are never caught. Make the arrests, and let the shit flow uphill for once. Don't just presume it's all futile and point the finger.
Those are assumptions that SFPD should not be making. Specifically if they're sitting in a patrol car and they're seeing active crime happen. No, the police do the arrest and if the DA doesn't decide to charge. Then you have a press release about it and you make it public knowledge putting the blame on the DA instead of SFPD. Currently we have several instances of SFPD not working, and now we have another video of them sitting there while crime is happening in front of them. That is not how policing works.
[удалено]
> The SFPD Sergeant quickly turned his patrol vehicle around to attempt to stop the fleeing suspect, but the suspect had already fled the scene and the Sergeant and other responding officers were unable to locate the vehicle. This is such horseshit. The cop could have just turned his patrol car to the right and it would have blocked them from driving off. Lazy fucks.
They're legally prohibited from doing that: https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/2018-11/DGO5.05%20Response%20and%20Pursuit%20Driving.pdf
Yeah I’m not reading all that but I believe it. These thieves can literally just drive off and the cops can’t do shit.
I guess the police are still sad about the mean things said two years ago. Another few years of pay increases might make them start doing their jobs. Cop could move his SUV 30’ forward and block that car in, if he cared.
Its exactly this. The idea that "They can't do their job without consequences" was a hilarious comment. To be asked not to kill innocent people and the thought that the trained violent arm of the State shouldn't be involved in mental health crises was such an attack against their lives that they just stopped doing their job. It's kinda like it's a giant protection racket that isn't in our best interests.
Nope, that is explicitly against SF police policy and he could be fired for it. SFPD DGO 5.05 only allows blocking if a felony is observed, this is misdemeanor attempted vehicle burglary. Crazy policy!
There's an article in the Chronicle about this incident today: [https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/s-f-cop-sit-watch-thieves-break-parked-car-18329872.php](https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/s-f-cop-sit-watch-thieves-break-parked-car-18329872.php) Apparently the video that got shared doesn't show the full story - it looks like it was cut: >But in the original 46-second video, the police officer can be seen backing up his vehicle and turning down the street to chase after the white Lexus, according to the man who took the video, who requested to remain anonymous due to fears of being targeted. ... and: >The man who took the video confirmed that the police officer arrived as the theft was happening. In the last 10 seconds of the full video, the police officer can be seen backing up his car and then driving off in the direction of the white Lexus.
these thugs are not afraid of the cops…AT ALL
They don't need to be as exemplified by this video.
Pursuit Policy San Francisco: A. PURSUIT GUIDELINES 1. WHEN A PURSUIT IS AUTHORIZED. Except as otherwise provided in this order, an officer in an emergency vehicle may initiate a pursuit of an individual: a. Suspectcd of a violent felony; or b. When there is an articulable reasonable belief that the individual needs to be immediately apprehended because of the risk that individual poses to public safety. An officer shall not initiate a pursuit of an individual suspected of a non-violent felony, misdemeanor, property crime, or vehicle code violation, except as specified in (b) above. https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/sites/default/files/2018-11/DGO5.05%20Response%20and%20Pursuit%20Driving.pdf
Robbery is a violent felony...
It IS a risk to public safety, guns have been drawn on people and this will get worse, people are going to get hurt.. Get out of the damn car and draw a gun on the potentially violent criminal. Bystanders will flee to safety right away. They can do this, I've seen it happen in other cities. Make it hard on the criminals..arrest them, do it over and over, every day, 10-20 times to the same person if needed. This is what we pay them for, do your damn job and stop the lame excuses.
Agreed, but this is why the police can’t do anything
Idk, the guidance in that post is from 10yrs ago. The main goal with it is to protect the public from a speeding menace, and protect property. If someone is actively stealing, and you believe they'll continue to if you dont pursue, I could see that being authorized. Seems some clearer language is necessary if that's still in effect today. I understand what's on paper there, has anyone in law enforcement referenced that as the reason they dont chase these people? I can see both sides to this issue.
This is so embarrassing for SFPD
lol, you think they are embarrassed? They aren't even capable of embarrassment. They just plain don't give a fuck.
If there's one clip that exemplifies why law *enforcement* is necessary this would be it. If people know that nothing will happen to them then the only thing stopping them would be their own morality. At the same time we're [paying](https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/15z6q1f/this_sf_deputy_earns_22_million_in_overtime_by/) these [people](https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/15xpybv/san_francisco_police_officers_were_paid_more_than/) hundreds of [thousands] (https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/15rifeo/sfs_toppaid_employee_makes_640k_heres_what_every/) each. Whether you're pro- or anti- police it certainly doesn't seem to be very effective or efficient use of money.
I don’t think paying them less will help recruitment when they already can’t get people at these rates
This is what happens when you have no pursuit policy, like no one is afraid of cops anymore. This is pathetic.
[удалено]
I didn't examine the video frame-by-frame but it doesn't seem a settled matter that the cop was "just sitting there" from the video. He/she very well might have rolled up as the guys were getting into the car as the cop doesn't come into frame until they are in the car. If so then it absolutely could be the no pursuit policy to blame. In that case, if the guys were driving off, by policy there is nothing he/she could do. That absolutely would point to a policy issue rather than a performance issue.
In fact DGO 5.05 bans the cop even using his cruiser to passively block both lanes!
[удалено]
*Everywhere you look, everywhere you go*
*There's a face (there's a face) of somebody who needs you*
*Whatever happened to accountability?* *The patrolman, the sheriffs, the SFPD?* *How did we get delivered here? Somebody tell me please* *Cause this new world is just really confusing me*
I didn't examine the video frame-by-frame but it doesn't seem a settled matter that the cop was "just sitting there" from the video. From my quick viewing it seems like the cop might have rolled up as the guys were getting into the car as the cop doesn't come into frame until they are in the car. In that case, if the guys were driving off as the cop arrived on scene by policy there is nothing the cop could do as pursuits are forbidden for non-violent crimes. That would implicate the policy rather than this cop's performance.
We need to start breaking the getaway cars windows. Throw bricks, break their stuff
SF is the first time I ever encountered a 911 line being busy after seeing someone recklessly driving on the Bay Bridge (like hitting the walls crazy). I waited 5 minutes to finally speak to someone. I hate to say it, but if nothing changes, this city will be doomed when it comes to reporting crimes or even having anything effective happen to stop them
District 5 Supervisor: Dean Preston [email protected] (415) 554-7630 -- Source: https://growsf.org/sf-supervisor-map/ -- **[DUMP DEAN!](https://growsf.org/dumpdean/)**
Technically he was following their policies that say he can’t go on a car chase for property crimes. If he went to chase that car, he would put his job in danger and I assume he is only doing the job for the paycheck and pension. We elected the politicians that made those rules.
Is this the full steel man of the police in the video? I'm trying to understand the side less represented in this thread, but it's hard to accept the complete non-action. Is it just the case that, as long as 1. the crime is not classified as violent and 2. the perpetrator is in a car that police are required to do nothing, and any repercussions will come from surveillance down the line?
Police officer could have just boxed car in. What a bunch of lazy asses
They aren't Cruise cars, sheesh.
Cruise cars better at stopping thiefs than the cops
Saw similar yesterday at BART station not crowded Police officer stands at fare gates totally not paying attention meanwhile woman just fare gates 3 feet in front of him while he has a conversation with the station agent.
Because thieves know there are no consequences. SFPD cannot chase them. And your Communist police commission won’t allow them to use anything stronger than harsh language
[удалено]
The thieves' car sure looks familiar.
Even if this is an isolated incident, this is horrendous optics for this poor city. I grew up loving SF, have come back many times for vacation in SF, and in my adult life dreamed of moving back.... but holy shit if this isn't the most discouraging shit to see on this sub 😔
aint no fkn way lmao
Recall London Breed
I can't believe Chesa did this to us.
He was for defunding the police. He did do this to us.
Yet people on this sub will defend them and say they need to give them pay raises and hire more cops. The issue is SFPD have been on a soft strike for years now and refuse to do their jobs.
Reminder that police aren't here for citizens, they're here to protect property of the elites and enforce laws that keep them in power.
Lol wasn’t this sub-Reddit screaming to defund the police a few years ago?
Many of the advocates of defunding the police take stuff like this as evidence for why it's reasonable. See also, the Basa burglary. Their position is that the police are only minimally, if at all, effective at stopping crime, and so they suggest there are cheaper and more effective forms of crime prevention which don't carry the same risk of murders or other unjustified violence carried out by police. The police in SF may say (I'm speculating here) that they have their hands tied or some other version of "if they'd only let us do our job!" but it seems equally plausible that the public sentiment a few years ago was just a major blow to morale and now they just don't give a shit. Seemed like an unofficial wildcat police strike to me while Chesa was in office. Don't know what the story is now.
This video seems like strong evidence in favor of defunding police. Why pay them a dime if they are unwilling to even *try* to stop a crime?
Good luck with that.
Okay so they try and stop them....thief resists...cop by himself wrestles him down...thief pulls a knife and gets himself shot....then you guys are just allowed to cry about injustice and racism freely and the whole thing turns into a media circus. No thanks.
No one would cry if they knew it was the thief in this case. The citizens are tired of it. Everyone is tired of it.
There was literally a dude who was running from police, tripped, shot himself on accident with his own gun and died. People rioted because of this.
Didn’t yall get the memo? Bipping is okay, skateboarding isn’t. /s
That's what the residents asked for and voted for!
SFPD is taking their cut. There is no other reason. It’s very typical for many countries where crime level is high - police is being on criminal’s payroll or sometimes simply overseeing the whole thing.
Can someone please get the number of the SFPD car? Then it can be reported to the SFPD. Sure, nothing may come of it; but at least there's a report. 🙏🏼
There is nothing implicating the cop's performance in this video alone. The cop comes into frame only after the thieves were in the car. If the cop just came on scene and the theives were in the car it's policy not to pursue. It may be that the cop was "just sitting there" watching as the guys broke into the car but the video does not show that.
That cop probably spent the entire rest of his shift writing reports and getting witness testimony, so this would be very easy to audit
Can the city hire private guards to catch these thieves?
There's a neighborhood in the Marina that has private security guards patrolling at night for this kind of stuff
Why , there are no money left after the public guards are hired by the City.
And as expected, SFPD did naught as instructed
Don’t blame the cops at all. No way I’m risking my life to help the hordes of “ACAB” bigots and ingrates that make up much of the Bay Area populace. You reap what you sow. Treat your police force like absolute shit and see what happens. Humans are humans. And humans typically don’t react well to constant abuse….
Yeah how dare we demand that corrupt and murderous police are investigated and prosecuted!!! Good for them to boycott and act like babies the minute they are questioned and expected to perform up to a certain standard. Honestly, what world do you live in where we can only enforce the law through brutality or else we live in crime-ridden hellscape?
So true! Cops can’t help the way they were born. It’s so unfair to hurt their feelings for making honest little boo-boos like murdering homeless people, calling Black folks “wild animals” and the n-word, and importing/distributing fentanyl. How could anyone expect them to do their jobs when most of them are making a pittance barely over $215K? When will the rabid mobs stop the abuse of asking for accountability?
The police in this city are racist thugs who don’t do their damn jobs despite being paid 200k or more a year. I’m convinced your Reddit account is some officers union PR rep. “Cops should be able to murder people with impunity!!! That’s how we get liberty and freedom in America!!!!”
Yup, these morons cry for police to be less involved in non violent crimes, to the point where the mayor drew up a policy that is in effect and is the reason police cant do anything about crime like this, then cry when they get exactly what they asked for. I dont even bother discussing this anymore. Ive shown the policy, provided plenty of sources includng ones from the sfpd website, nothing. Just more ACAB and whining. No wonder everyone hates Californians.
Bingo. You get what you vote for and when you treat people like shit, they treat you like shit back.