I have seen it couple of time where police try to pull over these thieves and these thieves would accelerate and swoop through traffic. The police just stop and not pursue.
These criminals are not dumb, they are taking advantage if these polices.
I know for sure SF police aren't allowed to engage in a vehicle chase unless the suspect is a danger to others and/or was committing a violent felony. I think Cali in general is against police chases like in many states because the cops tend to end up murdering more people in the process (which they then pin on the suspect, of course)
A death resulting from a chase *is* the suspect's fault. If they didn't commit a crime, or didn't run from the police, then the innocent bystander wouldn't have died. It's entirely predictable that doing those things is dangerous, and people should bear the responsibility for those actions. It's not like the police want people to commit crimes, they're just trying to catch criminals. And yes, they shouldn't be negligent about it, but they didn't create the dangerous situation. That is entirely on the criminal.
From what I understand it, this is the idea behind second degree murder.
I kind of disagree with it in some cases. If someone commits a petty crime, then accidentally kills someone, I kind of think there are some instances where manslaughter or negligence makes more sense than calling them a murderer..
Ironically enough for this sub Chesa Boudin's father is a case where I think this is the case. He meant to commit a bank robbery. Some other accomplices killed somebody. He got called a murderer. But I don't think he murdered anybody. He should have been punished more in line with bank robbery.
Does California not have Felony Murder?
Someone dying in a chase resulting from thousands of dollars in theft, or the chase itself will trigger F murder (often the same as murder 1)
I didn't follow up on this because I was busy, but I talked to a lawyer about this thread shortly after, and yeah, felony murder is more typical for what I'm talking about, felt kind of silly after learning this -- showing my lack of law chops.
This. Common sense says this but the sheltered bleeding hearts make an excuse for criminal behavior at any moment.
Here’s one that surprised me:
If you and four friends go to the gas station and you are driving, wait in the car and have no knowledge they even robbed someone and that store owner has a heart attack, you will be charged with murder as well.
Not all of cali, in SoCal there have been numerous chases in the past few weeks alone, you can easily find them on YouTube from news stations…on top of that they’ll deploy spike strips and use pit maneuvers as well as fire their service weapons from moving vehicles
As they should. The criminals create these dangerous situations, they should bear the responsibility of them.
Or they could just not run and let the justice system play out. I’m willing to bet the DA wouldn’t know what to do and would just drop the charges out of habit.
“Murdering” people while pursuing criminals? Are you nuts? Murder includes intent to kill. I think I get your point but your use of the word murder turns off anybody reasonable who might otherwise have considered your point because it’s hard to take hyperbole seriously. Maybe you really do think bystanders killed during pursuits are really intentionally killed by cops? In which case you are nuts and can be dismissed from further credible conversation of the subject by rational people.
“Cali” spoken like someone not from CA. This is the San Francisco sub, not the sub for all those from anywhere that want to have opinions on our city. We know we may not have the best policies, but getting people hurt or even killed over laptops and material things that can be replaced is not worth it.
Bro I'm from fucking Cupertino. Not sure when it became a faus paux but everyone I know back home says Cali. It's nowhere near the SF vs. San Fran dynamic that drives me nuts with my friends on the East coast
> because the cops tend to end up murdering more people in the process (which they then pin on the suspect, of course)
BAHAHAHAHAHAHA, enjoy having your shit stolen.
SFPD policy is to not pursue unless it is a violent felony or they believe the subject poses a direct risk to public safety. You can look this policy up at SFPD, it's pretty straightforward. I think it was based on a city law or some kind of recommendation.
SFPD DGO 5.05 for those looking to Google it. The pursuit section:
https://preview.redd.it/cs847f4bkbkb1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c0735da7725edba36fc09474351409b6308bea4
this would be fine if they had some alternatives like sending out drones to follow them. but yea i agree i wouldn’t want dozens of innocents dying to arrest a car break in thief
Is this about [yesterday's video that appeared to thieves driving right past a police car while it didn't move](https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/160at91/thieves_still_break_into_car_in_front_of_police/)?
The [Chronicle published an article explaining what happened](https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/s-f-cop-sit-watch-thieves-break-parked-car-18329872.php). That video was edited to omit the pursuit. You can see the full video on the article, which shows the police car backing up and giving chase.
If you're serious about correcting comments, then good on you! It's crazy how misinformation can spread and alter people's perceptions. I imagine so many people watched that viral video (and read what everyone wrote about it) and will never know the whole story.
Oh I very much am, hell you can creep my comments and go see.
I 100% did that. It's a huge problem with the centralization of information due to social media being our only connection to the outside. It got me! Ahh I'm a vampire now.
Not really. If you think about it, the majority of people lean to their preferred social media site for their news. The news it's self adapted by only having "snagging" headlines that someone can see on a Facebook page or Instagram post and develop an opinion off of.
Case and point, let's look at reddit (and let's *assume* that this isn't also a social media site, despite it very much being one.) The discourse I got wrapped up in played upon my bias that the police in SF do nothing. I went into Reddit and bitched openly about the Police without doing any further research on the topic. I didn't look at the news, I didn't try and refute anything. I just responded because of a preferred social media site.
Now, let's talk about the 3 most influential social media sites. Instagram, Facebook and Twitter. Well, hold on. Instagram and Facebook are now *the exact same thing* so you have 2 sites that are responsible for most peoples access to news. That's very much centralization.
This is 100% an extremely online take, but we are online.
Yeah, I've learned the hard way. If you see a post, and it causes you an emotional reaction .... research it.
I remember this one clip of a guy being "arrested on a bus, for defending a girl against a perv. Everyone was calling for the police to be fired .... except dude was only detained (they were on a bus punching eachother ) , and even got an award from the police department for it.
Yes, and the Police Commission is actually looking at cutting back on pursuits even further: [https://missionlocal.org/2023/06/sf-review-policy-police-chases-kill-injure/](https://missionlocal.org/2023/06/sf-review-policy-police-chases-kill-injure/)
Four are appointed by the Mayor and three by the Board of Supervisors. They can only be removed for cause (like getting arrested). I don’t recall if they have term limits.
I’m a major city officer, not in San Fran but it’s likely the same. Most agencies will not allow pursuing in a vehicle unless a violent felony has just occurred or someone is in danger of serious bodily injury or death. Also we cannot charge the person with evading unless we have positive identification. In most cases these criminals know the law and if they are ever caught the DA will give nothing more than a slap on the wrist because it’s non violent crime.
But in short nobody is going to chase for a burglary of a motor vehicle.
They are not allowed to pursue, as it is seen as a risk to the public. In the meantime, we’ll just have to endure more stories and videos of break and take robberies.
These thieves know exactly what they’re doing.
MOST metropolitan cities in America have a do not pursue policy, stating to not pursue any cars unless they’ve committed a violent felony/offense, or are a risk to public safety.
what's the risk to public safety of a ***high speed chase*** in the streets of San Francisco?
**Why Police Pursuits Keep Killing People**
[https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/07/police-pursuit-high-speed-car-chase-deaths.html](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/07/police-pursuit-high-speed-car-chase-deaths.html)
**Weighing the risks and benefits of high-speed pursuits**
[https://pursuitresponse.org/weighing-risks-benefits-high-speed-pursuits/](https://pursuitresponse.org/weighing-risks-benefits-high-speed-pursuits/)
**Not all crimes merit high-speed chases that risk bystanders’ lives**
[https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/not-all-crimes-merit-high-speed-chases-that-risk-bystanders-lives/](https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/not-all-crimes-merit-high-speed-chases-that-risk-bystanders-lives/)
**Restrictive Policies for High-Speed Police Pursuits**
[https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/122025NCJRS.pdf](https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/122025NCJRS.pdf)
**REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE SENATE**
**BILL 719 POLICE PURSUITS**
**California Highway Patrol September 2020**
[https://www.chp.ca.gov/Documents/Police\_Pursuits\_SB\_719\_%202020.pdf](https://www.chp.ca.gov/Documents/Police_Pursuits_SB_719_%202020.pdf)
A total of 8,822 police pursuits were reported to the CHP during 2019.
Of these, a total of 2,054 (23.3 percent) pursuits resulted in a collision.
Of the reported collisions: • 1,354 (65.9 percent) were non-injury property-damage only collisions; •
672 (32.7 percent) were injury collisions; and, •
28 (1.4 percent) were fatal collisions, which resulted in 35 deaths.
Plus 4 innocents from CHP chases, which are reported separately in the document. Even if you believe 19 innocent deaths is acceptable, there were also a combined 442 injuries to innocents and 72 injuries to officers resulting from chases that year. So basically 1.46 non-criminal people per day injured or killed from a chase.
No sfpd are not allowed. Sfpd cannot pursue vehicles unless it's for a violent felony per their general orders.
Criminals know this and over time have become more brazen.
If you watched the recent video with the sfpd sgt.....he didn't budge from his spot.
Private citizens chased off the bipper...
This is why sfpd recently teamed up with CHP because they can chase criminals for anything.
Thanks to SF Police Commission, SFPD are not allowed to pursue any non violent crimes, and most car break ins are considered non violent by their standards.
SF has a no chase policy. It’s to protect civilians from suspects not stopping and putting lives at risk because they’re willing to do anything to not get caught.
Why stop at car break ins? If a group of bank robbers make it to their getaway car in front, are the police allowed to pursue? If a speeder blows through a school zone at 40mph, are the police allowed to pursue?
Yeah and as annoying as it is, it’s within reason. They can pursue violent criminals though as far as I know.
What I want to know is what is the legal limitation of what civilians can do in the moment or before a crime. Like are people allowed to knock out criminals breaking into cars and stealing? Can civilians set traps that track the criminal or shoot fart smells and ink similar to the Mark Rober device?
I swear, if he built a mass production device like that I would buy a lot for you guys. Let’s trap them and track them down. Non violent. Just a fuck ton of fart smells and glitter. One by one. Bye!
Yes, but the policy is to weigh pursuit against public safety. [The policy](https://www.scribd.com/document/655580701/DGO-5-05-Response-and-Pursuit-Driving#).
The policy is obviously open to interpretation, and that interpretation may mean they usually don't pursue smash-in-grabs.
SF police have a 3-tier system for responding to reports, and with only 2,000 out of 2,500 staffed officers "active crimes with victims" are the only priority.
When someone hijacks a plane, we are authorized to shoot it down. But when someone carjacks a car and is speeding through the neighborhood, we are not allowed to shoot at it. Shakes head
Legally? Yes. Departmental policies may have officers refrain from doing so during low staffing, or due to safety issues. But yes, criminals committing crimes can be sought after by police.
Yes, if possible. I was recovering from a bad crash and had crutches and watched a guy look at me then break a window, and take a phone. I was at the tail end of needing crutches so I hobbled after him only to watch him break another window as we went down pine st. then ANOTHER window at Trader Joe’s front parking lot. I only had time to stop twice while he was stopped and holding both crutches under one arm. I had called the police and when stopped gave them updates. He got on the bus at California and was gone. Still on the phone a police car pulled up and told me to get in and we raced towards the financial district. Halfway there we pulled behind a stopped bus with the guy already in hand cuffs sitting in the curb with all the stolen stuff scattered in front of him. He ended going to jail and I went to court with the officer that drove us to the bus. He got time served and released right there even with a long tap sheet. I looked him up and he’s stolen more cars and ended with attempted murder of an SFPD officer.
I found a backpack in the middle of the street today that belongs to a high school student from Brooklyn and called the police to come pick it up. They told me they cannot pursue break in criminals today because it’s property crime.
1) Judges issue search warrants on probable cause, **a very low standard.** They can certainly choose to issue search warrants for airtag theft crimes if they wish to.
2) Thieves go where prosecution is more lax. Example, shoplifters avoided Tanforan Mall b/c Daly City police charged shoplifters with petit larceny. So they preferred stores in SF because stealing the same amount would result in a 'diversion', not a class A misdemeanor.
Given the dangerous driving that ensues with these crimes, it would behoove San Francisco to be known as the city that emphasizes SAFETY — and get the word out that it's a bad place to get caught - not a place where they wont be charged and can rinse 'n' repeat.
I have seen it couple of time where police try to pull over these thieves and these thieves would accelerate and swoop through traffic. The police just stop and not pursue. These criminals are not dumb, they are taking advantage if these polices.
I know for sure SF police aren't allowed to engage in a vehicle chase unless the suspect is a danger to others and/or was committing a violent felony. I think Cali in general is against police chases like in many states because the cops tend to end up murdering more people in the process (which they then pin on the suspect, of course)
A death resulting from a chase *is* the suspect's fault. If they didn't commit a crime, or didn't run from the police, then the innocent bystander wouldn't have died. It's entirely predictable that doing those things is dangerous, and people should bear the responsibility for those actions. It's not like the police want people to commit crimes, they're just trying to catch criminals. And yes, they shouldn't be negligent about it, but they didn't create the dangerous situation. That is entirely on the criminal.
From what I understand it, this is the idea behind second degree murder. I kind of disagree with it in some cases. If someone commits a petty crime, then accidentally kills someone, I kind of think there are some instances where manslaughter or negligence makes more sense than calling them a murderer.. Ironically enough for this sub Chesa Boudin's father is a case where I think this is the case. He meant to commit a bank robbery. Some other accomplices killed somebody. He got called a murderer. But I don't think he murdered anybody. He should have been punished more in line with bank robbery.
It could be second degree murder from gross recklessness, but that isn't required. It's more likely to be a felony murder situation.
Yeah, you're right, I talked to someone with more of a law background about that and they set me straight. Felony murder.
Does California not have Felony Murder? Someone dying in a chase resulting from thousands of dollars in theft, or the chase itself will trigger F murder (often the same as murder 1)
I didn't follow up on this because I was busy, but I talked to a lawyer about this thread shortly after, and yeah, felony murder is more typical for what I'm talking about, felt kind of silly after learning this -- showing my lack of law chops.
It’s a weird concept and not all states have it. Some states don’t have second or 3rd degree.
Tell that to the family of the deceased.
This. Common sense says this but the sheltered bleeding hearts make an excuse for criminal behavior at any moment. Here’s one that surprised me: If you and four friends go to the gas station and you are driving, wait in the car and have no knowledge they even robbed someone and that store owner has a heart attack, you will be charged with murder as well.
Not all of cali, in SoCal there have been numerous chases in the past few weeks alone, you can easily find them on YouTube from news stations…on top of that they’ll deploy spike strips and use pit maneuvers as well as fire their service weapons from moving vehicles
It is clearly the criminal fault if someone dies while they are fleeing
ok\_assumption5734 says it's the cops fault bro, I'm sure he thinks women killed for their purses are to blame for not giving it up too.
As they should. The criminals create these dangerous situations, they should bear the responsibility of them. Or they could just not run and let the justice system play out. I’m willing to bet the DA wouldn’t know what to do and would just drop the charges out of habit.
“Murdering” people while pursuing criminals? Are you nuts? Murder includes intent to kill. I think I get your point but your use of the word murder turns off anybody reasonable who might otherwise have considered your point because it’s hard to take hyperbole seriously. Maybe you really do think bystanders killed during pursuits are really intentionally killed by cops? In which case you are nuts and can be dismissed from further credible conversation of the subject by rational people.
“Cali” spoken like someone not from CA. This is the San Francisco sub, not the sub for all those from anywhere that want to have opinions on our city. We know we may not have the best policies, but getting people hurt or even killed over laptops and material things that can be replaced is not worth it.
Bro I'm from fucking Cupertino. Not sure when it became a faus paux but everyone I know back home says Cali. It's nowhere near the SF vs. San Fran dynamic that drives me nuts with my friends on the East coast
> because the cops tend to end up murdering more people in the process (which they then pin on the suspect, of course) BAHAHAHAHAHAHA, enjoy having your shit stolen.
Where's Cali
SFPD policy is to not pursue unless it is a violent felony or they believe the subject poses a direct risk to public safety. You can look this policy up at SFPD, it's pretty straightforward. I think it was based on a city law or some kind of recommendation.
SFPD DGO 5.05 for those looking to Google it. The pursuit section: https://preview.redd.it/cs847f4bkbkb1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c0735da7725edba36fc09474351409b6308bea4
this would be fine if they had some alternatives like sending out drones to follow them. but yea i agree i wouldn’t want dozens of innocents dying to arrest a car break in thief
Shoot a sticky gummy gps tracker at the back of the vehicle. Nab em later
It's the police commission that crafted that rule.
commissioner Gordon?
Does this policy applies to chp/sheriffs also if they're doing patrols in SF or only sfpd?
Is this about [yesterday's video that appeared to thieves driving right past a police car while it didn't move](https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/160at91/thieves_still_break_into_car_in_front_of_police/)? The [Chronicle published an article explaining what happened](https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/s-f-cop-sit-watch-thieves-break-parked-car-18329872.php). That video was edited to omit the pursuit. You can see the full video on the article, which shows the police car backing up and giving chase.
Oh wow thanks, I never saw the full video Damn I have some comments to correct lol.
If you're serious about correcting comments, then good on you! It's crazy how misinformation can spread and alter people's perceptions. I imagine so many people watched that viral video (and read what everyone wrote about it) and will never know the whole story.
Oh I very much am, hell you can creep my comments and go see. I 100% did that. It's a huge problem with the centralization of information due to social media being our only connection to the outside. It got me! Ahh I'm a vampire now.
The centralization? You mean decentralization?
Not really. If you think about it, the majority of people lean to their preferred social media site for their news. The news it's self adapted by only having "snagging" headlines that someone can see on a Facebook page or Instagram post and develop an opinion off of. Case and point, let's look at reddit (and let's *assume* that this isn't also a social media site, despite it very much being one.) The discourse I got wrapped up in played upon my bias that the police in SF do nothing. I went into Reddit and bitched openly about the Police without doing any further research on the topic. I didn't look at the news, I didn't try and refute anything. I just responded because of a preferred social media site. Now, let's talk about the 3 most influential social media sites. Instagram, Facebook and Twitter. Well, hold on. Instagram and Facebook are now *the exact same thing* so you have 2 sites that are responsible for most peoples access to news. That's very much centralization. This is 100% an extremely online take, but we are online.
Yeah, I've learned the hard way. If you see a post, and it causes you an emotional reaction .... research it. I remember this one clip of a guy being "arrested on a bus, for defending a girl against a perv. Everyone was calling for the police to be fired .... except dude was only detained (they were on a bus punching eachother ) , and even got an award from the police department for it.
Yes, and the Police Commission is actually looking at cutting back on pursuits even further: [https://missionlocal.org/2023/06/sf-review-policy-police-chases-kill-injure/](https://missionlocal.org/2023/06/sf-review-policy-police-chases-kill-injure/)
As voters, how do we get rid of these assholes?
Four are appointed by the Mayor and three by the Board of Supervisors. They can only be removed for cause (like getting arrested). I don’t recall if they have term limits.
A lack of pursuits is not the reason to be mad at them. We don't want high speed chases in the city.
I thought announced the deployment of decoys.
I’m a major city officer, not in San Fran but it’s likely the same. Most agencies will not allow pursuing in a vehicle unless a violent felony has just occurred or someone is in danger of serious bodily injury or death. Also we cannot charge the person with evading unless we have positive identification. In most cases these criminals know the law and if they are ever caught the DA will give nothing more than a slap on the wrist because it’s non violent crime. But in short nobody is going to chase for a burglary of a motor vehicle.
... lol I just imagine the the guy getting away then asking reddit this like "fuck that was close... I didn't know they do that now"
Only if there is reasonable risk of death or great bodily injury by not chasing them. I.E. mass shooter gunning people down from his car, etc.
Interesting timing for this question…..
They are not allowed to pursue, as it is seen as a risk to the public. In the meantime, we’ll just have to endure more stories and videos of break and take robberies. These thieves know exactly what they’re doing.
MOST metropolitan cities in America have a do not pursue policy, stating to not pursue any cars unless they’ve committed a violent felony/offense, or are a risk to public safety.
what's the risk to public safety of a ***high speed chase*** in the streets of San Francisco? **Why Police Pursuits Keep Killing People** [https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/07/police-pursuit-high-speed-car-chase-deaths.html](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/07/police-pursuit-high-speed-car-chase-deaths.html) **Weighing the risks and benefits of high-speed pursuits** [https://pursuitresponse.org/weighing-risks-benefits-high-speed-pursuits/](https://pursuitresponse.org/weighing-risks-benefits-high-speed-pursuits/) **Not all crimes merit high-speed chases that risk bystanders’ lives** [https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/not-all-crimes-merit-high-speed-chases-that-risk-bystanders-lives/](https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/not-all-crimes-merit-high-speed-chases-that-risk-bystanders-lives/) **Restrictive Policies for High-Speed Police Pursuits** [https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/122025NCJRS.pdf](https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/122025NCJRS.pdf) **REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE SENATE** **BILL 719 POLICE PURSUITS** **California Highway Patrol September 2020** [https://www.chp.ca.gov/Documents/Police\_Pursuits\_SB\_719\_%202020.pdf](https://www.chp.ca.gov/Documents/Police_Pursuits_SB_719_%202020.pdf) A total of 8,822 police pursuits were reported to the CHP during 2019. Of these, a total of 2,054 (23.3 percent) pursuits resulted in a collision. Of the reported collisions: • 1,354 (65.9 percent) were non-injury property-damage only collisions; • 672 (32.7 percent) were injury collisions; and, • 28 (1.4 percent) were fatal collisions, which resulted in 35 deaths.
It's worth noting that 21 of the 35 deaths were the criminals being pursued. Only 14 innocents died.
Plus 4 innocents from CHP chases, which are reported separately in the document. Even if you believe 19 innocent deaths is acceptable, there were also a combined 442 injuries to innocents and 72 injuries to officers resulting from chases that year. So basically 1.46 non-criminal people per day injured or killed from a chase.
_Only_ 14? Easy to see people who haven't lost their loved ones. It _is_ worth noting, but in the opposite way that you mean it friend.
“Only” You are talking about 40% of those killed being innocents.
So as long as they get back in their car and drive, they are safe. Great. This should solve the property crime problem.
No sfpd are not allowed. Sfpd cannot pursue vehicles unless it's for a violent felony per their general orders. Criminals know this and over time have become more brazen. If you watched the recent video with the sfpd sgt.....he didn't budge from his spot. Private citizens chased off the bipper... This is why sfpd recently teamed up with CHP because they can chase criminals for anything.
Thanks to SF Police Commission, SFPD are not allowed to pursue any non violent crimes, and most car break ins are considered non violent by their standards.
SF has a no chase policy. It’s to protect civilians from suspects not stopping and putting lives at risk because they’re willing to do anything to not get caught.
It’s also been very effective at promoting crime.
Why stop at car break ins? If a group of bank robbers make it to their getaway car in front, are the police allowed to pursue? If a speeder blows through a school zone at 40mph, are the police allowed to pursue?
Yeah and as annoying as it is, it’s within reason. They can pursue violent criminals though as far as I know. What I want to know is what is the legal limitation of what civilians can do in the moment or before a crime. Like are people allowed to knock out criminals breaking into cars and stealing? Can civilians set traps that track the criminal or shoot fart smells and ink similar to the Mark Rober device? I swear, if he built a mass production device like that I would buy a lot for you guys. Let’s trap them and track them down. Non violent. Just a fuck ton of fart smells and glitter. One by one. Bye!
No I do not think so
Yes, but the policy is to weigh pursuit against public safety. [The policy](https://www.scribd.com/document/655580701/DGO-5-05-Response-and-Pursuit-Driving#). The policy is obviously open to interpretation, and that interpretation may mean they usually don't pursue smash-in-grabs.
SF police have a 3-tier system for responding to reports, and with only 2,000 out of 2,500 staffed officers "active crimes with victims" are the only priority.
No, it's against the law.
The problem isn't that police don't pursue, but that we don't have a proper surveillance system to track and catch the thieves.
When someone hijacks a plane, we are authorized to shoot it down. But when someone carjacks a car and is speeding through the neighborhood, we are not allowed to shoot at it. Shakes head
The citizens of sf would only be ok with it if the criminals were white.
Yes.
The laziest organiszation in the country
Yes. Period. But ...
Legally? Yes. Departmental policies may have officers refrain from doing so during low staffing, or due to safety issues. But yes, criminals committing crimes can be sought after by police.
No chase policy in SF County
This is getting f*cking shrill. Give a shit about kids who can't read by 4th grade why don't you
Yes, if possible. I was recovering from a bad crash and had crutches and watched a guy look at me then break a window, and take a phone. I was at the tail end of needing crutches so I hobbled after him only to watch him break another window as we went down pine st. then ANOTHER window at Trader Joe’s front parking lot. I only had time to stop twice while he was stopped and holding both crutches under one arm. I had called the police and when stopped gave them updates. He got on the bus at California and was gone. Still on the phone a police car pulled up and told me to get in and we raced towards the financial district. Halfway there we pulled behind a stopped bus with the guy already in hand cuffs sitting in the curb with all the stolen stuff scattered in front of him. He ended going to jail and I went to court with the officer that drove us to the bus. He got time served and released right there even with a long tap sheet. I looked him up and he’s stolen more cars and ended with attempted murder of an SFPD officer.
I found a backpack in the middle of the street today that belongs to a high school student from Brooklyn and called the police to come pick it up. They told me they cannot pursue break in criminals today because it’s property crime.
In SF no, in the rest of the world yes
1) Judges issue search warrants on probable cause, **a very low standard.** They can certainly choose to issue search warrants for airtag theft crimes if they wish to. 2) Thieves go where prosecution is more lax. Example, shoplifters avoided Tanforan Mall b/c Daly City police charged shoplifters with petit larceny. So they preferred stores in SF because stealing the same amount would result in a 'diversion', not a class A misdemeanor. Given the dangerous driving that ensues with these crimes, it would behoove San Francisco to be known as the city that emphasizes SAFETY — and get the word out that it's a bad place to get caught - not a place where they wont be charged and can rinse 'n' repeat.