Lawlessness in San Fransisco - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15177308
:lol: One incident and all the cuntservatives lose their fucking marbles.

Anyone engaging in theft is to be left to police. All store employees are taught this. Trying to stop a crime can result in someone getting hurt, and ensuing litigation.

In a country where anyone can be armed is it really wise to "tackle" them and wait for the police, anyways? It seems a pretty stupid thing to attempt to stop ANY criminal in a country with shit gun laws like the USA.

Until they leave the store, they haven't actually stolen anything, incidentally. When would you have suggested they "tackle them"? Where was store security, if they had any? How many people do you know who know the laws pertaining to citizen's arrest? It is not the job of store customers to provide security for the store. I wouldn't have stopped him, either.

Get a grip, you guys!!! You could video tape this same sort of thing in every state in the USA. It happens daily. That it happened in SF is irrelevant and only pushing a fucking dipshit narrative about "lawlessness" in a Democrat run state. Poppycock!


Florida is lawless!!!
https://www.ocala-news.com/2021/02/18/o ... -stealing/

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/ ... 11597.html
#15177310
Godstud wrote:Florida is lawless!!!
https://www.ocala-news.com/2021/02/18/o ... -stealing/


Disingenuous since this guy was arrested...

Godstud wrote:https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/ ... 11597.html


...And police are searching for this woman.

If it's true police won't look for you if you commit a misdemeanor without flagrantly doing so, then SF is quite evidently a different jurisdiction, one inviting that sort of behavior. They may as well legalize taking less than $950 worth of goodies without paying for them if that's their position. It would not be "lawless" if it's legal.
#15177311
This sort of thing happens DAILY. most of the time it's not worth the effort to charge or even arrest minor shoplifters and this is not limited to SF. That is the disingenuous part of this whole narrative!!! You "think" that it only happens in one place. :lol:


The only difference is that this was caught on video. Most people know fuck-all about retail shoplifting, and most certainly don't know how big of a problem it is, and how little law is applied to it.

I do. I worked in retail security for a couple years. You'd be honestly surprised by how frequent it is, and how many times people get away Scott-free.

The ignorance of people, and posters, such as yourself,@wat0n is all that's missing.

I am sure hundreds of thousands of shoplifting incidents occur all the time and few are pursued, arrested, and convicted. It's usually not worth the bother. Employees are told NOT to try to apprehend them, and even when apprehended, they will often only get off with a warning, or banned from the store in question.
#15177313
Godstud wrote:This sort of thing happens DAILY. most of the time it's not worth the effort to charge or even arrest minor shoplifters and this is not limited to SF. That is the disingenuous part of this whole narrative!!! You "think" that it only happens in one place. :lol:


The only difference is that this was caught on video. Most people know fuck-all about retail shoplifting, and most certainly don't know how big of a problem it is, and how little law is applied to it.

I do. I worked in retail security for a couple years. You'd be honestly surprised by how frequent it is, and how many times people get away Scott-free.

The ignorance of people, and posters, such as yourself,@wat0n is all that's missing.

I am sure hundreds of thousands of shoplifting incidents occur all the time and few are pursued, arrested, and convicted. It's usually not worth the bother. Employees are told NOT to try to apprehend them, and even when apprehended, they will often only get off with a warning, or banned from the store in question.


I don't doubt that many will go unsolved, but cops will at least offer a reward like in the second FL case and perhaps make an arrest if the circumstances allow for it like in the first one. It seems that in SF even this isn't an option, and not worth it for the cops because of the low penalty anyway... Hence the two jurisdictions are not really comparable on how they are treating theft.
#15177314
It has nothing to do with how the jurisdictions are dealing with theft. It's something you can't clue into is how often this happens, and that many times there is ZERO action by police or even the business, to theft.

This isn't the exception. It's the NORM, when you don't have store security, or on-site police.

That's why this whole bullshit narrative of lawlessness in SF is such a load of anti-Democrat propaganda. :knife: :knife: :knife:
#15177315
Godstud wrote:It has nothing to do with how the jurisdictions are dealing with theft. It's something you can't clue into is how often this happens, and that many times there is ZERO action by police or even the business, to theft.

This isn't the exception. It's the NORM, when you don't have store security, or on-site police.

That's why this whole bullshit narrative of lawlessness in SF is such a load of anti-Democrat propaganda. :knife: :knife: :knife:


Again, just because it happens constantly it doesn't mean those caught on tape shouldn't be exposed and that information about their whereabouts shouldn't be requested like the cops in FL did.

Even if the guy in the OP won't be arrested, being caught on video will still hurt him in the long run. Being caught by your acquaintances and possibly shamed for theft is still pretty bad, and should help deter that behavior to some extent.

Catching all thieves may be impossible but that does not mean there aren't any other means to deter theft. And here cops can help by making the videos public - not doing so is negligence on their end, and if the jurisdiction doesn't correct that behavior then it's more like a policy not to do so.
#15177316
Most thieves caught on video by retail stores end up being banned from said stores with no further legal action. That's the reality.

I am not condoning this behavior. I am merely informing you that this is not limited to SF or any location, due to government action or inaction.

I've seen, many a time, people arrested, detained and then released with no charges being laid, for shoplifting. This is nothing new, as the OP would like to imply. It has nothing to do with any recent occurrences. FFS, this has been happening for a very long time.

Petty theft has NOT been decriminalized. :roll:
#15177317
Godstud wrote:Most thieves caught on video by retail stores end up being banned from said stores with no further legal action. That's the reality.

I am not condoning this behavior. I am merely informing you that this is not limited to SF or any location, due to government action or inaction.

I've seen, many a time, people arrested, detained and then released with no charges being laid, for shoplifting. This is nothing new, as the OP would like to imply. It has nothing to do with any recent occurrences. FFS, this has been happening for a very long time.

Petty theft has NOT been decriminalized. :roll:


I'm not saying you are condoning this type of behavior, the issue is that since this type of shoplifting is a misdemeanor, cops can only make arrests if it happens in their presence. This means that they must sense the shoplifting occur in real time, which does not include simply watching videotapes

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia ... rrest.html

As such, by turning shoplifting for less than $950 into a misdemeanor, CA has actually removed concrete means to deter that type of behavior, and I don't mean just arrests. The cops have little reason to publish videotapes of shoplifters and request information about there whereabouts if they can't make arrests after the fact anyway (regardless of the difficulty or cost of doing so). As such, they also removed the possibility of exposing them as well, with the social consequences that come with being caught on tape stealing stuff.
#15177318
In most countries, theft under $5000 is a summary offense(a misdemeanor in the USA).

eg. A summary offense is a minor crime. ... Some examples of a summary offense include loitering, disorderly conduct, retail theft of a minor value or dollar amount or not licensing a dog. Most summary offenses result in a fine for a conviction. A person convicted of a summary offense may not have to go to court.

The laws have never deterred anyone from shoplifting. People who want to do so, will do so, and there is little actually done about it. That this video shows this happening, is not surprising, in the least.

Would you take a chance trying to stop a person shoplifting like this, and possibly putting your life in danger for what amounts to $200 of goods? Do you think the store would even reward your involvement?

What you claim is happening, is not. You are making the same argument that people who said, "Gay marriage will lead to people marrying horses!", made.

Here is the reality:
Retail stores tell their employees not to get involved when people steal, or even rob the store. Give them what they demand. Do not attempt to stop them or "arrest them". That's what insurance is for.

The stores don't need to pay out money for employees who get hurt on the job, and indeed an employee getting injured can cause the store an immense amount of financial harm... moreso than some petty theft.

That police aren't going to pursue these petty criminals is also unsurprising. The time, effort, and cost to catch such a petty criminal makes it completely unrealistic to do so.

This often happens in even car theft, vandalism, etc.
#15177332
Politics_Observer wrote:@Tainari88



Where I am from, this criminal would have been tackled and arrested when the police showed up. Many criminals who try to rob store owners with weapons also really do and honestly get shot in many cases by the store owners in my local area. If the criminal that attempted to commit armed robbery on a store owner is lucky enough to survive his wounds, the police will have them handcuff to their hospital bed ready to transport them to jail when they are discharged from the hospital.


Well, armed robbery is different than just shoplifting and stealing on a bike like a guy in the video did Politics. I think stealing is not a crime worth killing over. I have had my stuff shamelessly stolen and was angry too, but it never occurred to me the thieves need to be shot. Caught yes. Not shot or physically beaten up either. A property crime or stealing for me is never equivalent to a terrible thing like murder, or manslaughter or terroristic threats and assaulting and harming or raping. For me there are three crimes you must punish severely and those people need serious mental counseling for the rest of their lives. Rapists, murderers and kidnappers who kidnap people to subjugate them to slavery or to exploit them sexually. Child rapists and exploiters I hate with a passion. I won't mind them getting beaten or shot either. But a thief from a Walgreens? No. Or even some diamond thieves with Kim Kardashian crying over her diamonds on TV? Someone like that getting shot or life imprisonment? Tax avoidance and financial crimes against banks or institutions with big money and people like Monofort? No, don't shoot them just put them in jail for a few years. Not forever. For me the worst criminals are the evil ones who only think of killing and raping and controlling and lying and cause serious damage to all others.

Let me think back to all the crime I have been subjected to in my lifetime? I have had my apartment broken into and all my stuff stolen down to dirty dishes in the sink and food in the cupboard/pantry. It looked like I had moved they stole so much.

I have had my car broken into many many times and things taken. i have had my car stolen and had to get it out of the impound. I have had men try to assault me (presumably for rape), and I have been in an area of mass shooting taking place, and I have been robbed on my way to work and the thieves stole from everyone on the bus. My original wedding ring I don't have. They stole it. I have had my business broken into and they stole both Televisions.

Most of the crimes I find offensive in the extreme are men who want to assault women in the dark of night. And the presumption is they were trying to find a woman to rape. I find those people extremely dangerous and they need serious time. Not some probation like they usually get.

Property crimes are annoying Politics in the extreme.

The worst one I have read in Mexico? An American woman who bought some land and hired an engineer/architect to build the broken down home she purchased and she paid the woman up front about 1.6 million pesos. Almost one hundred thousand dollars? and the women booked on out and never lifted a finger to do the job. Just shamelessly stole that woman's life savings. Why? In my opinion you can't go to Mexico without knowing Spanish, having a personal connection and knowing that you NEVER pay people for construction work FIRST. Never. It is a serious mistake. Especially in a pandemic with people losing money here and the government not giving you money to live on.

But? People don't listen. I tell them, 'get some information. One American man asked me why he paid triple for a house I paid one-third for in the downtown area here? I summed it up. "You don't speak Spanish, you don't know the culture and you made the mistake of hiring people whose references you never checked on. You can't do that. You need to read the contract in Spanish or get a translator. The laws here are completely different about buying homes. Figure it out."
Last edited by Tainari88 on 18 Jun 2021 14:44, edited 1 time in total.
#15177339
Godstud wrote:In most countries, theft under $5000 is a summary offense(a misdemeanor in the USA).

eg. A summary offense is a minor crime. ... Some examples of a summary offense include loitering, disorderly conduct, retail theft of a minor value or dollar amount or not licensing a dog. Most summary offenses result in a fine for a conviction. A person convicted of a summary offense may not have to go to court.

The laws have never deterred anyone from shoplifting. People who want to do so, will do so, and there is little actually done about it. That this video shows this happening, is not surprising, in the least.

Would you take a chance trying to stop a person shoplifting like this, and possibly putting your life in danger for what amounts to $200 of goods? Do you think the store would even reward your involvement?

What you claim is happening, is not. You are making the same argument that people who said, "Gay marriage will lead to people marrying horses!", made.

Here is the reality:
Retail stores tell their employees not to get involved when people steal, or even rob the store. Give them what they demand. Do not attempt to stop them or "arrest them". That's what insurance is for.

The stores don't need to pay out money for employees who get hurt on the job, and indeed an employee getting injured can cause the store an immense amount of financial harm... moreso than some petty theft.

That police aren't going to pursue these petty criminals is also unsurprising. The time, effort, and cost to catch such a petty criminal makes it completely unrealistic to do so.

This often happens in even car theft, vandalism, etc.


No employee of a big retailer will stop shoplifters in the act (except for security guards, sometimes) but I have seen retailers (especially small neighborhood grocers) put photos of shoplifters in the act, as means to shame them. So why not have PDs publish the footage online when a retailer calls them, as they do when they request information about the whereabouts of shoplifters in states like FL, to do the same?
#15177341
wat0n wrote:No employee of a big retailer will stop shoplifters in the act (except for security guards, sometimes) but I have seen retailers (especially small neighborhood grocers) put photos of shoplifters in the act, as means to shame them. So why not have PDs publish the footage online when a retailer calls them, as they do when they request information about the whereabouts of shoplifters in states like FL, to do the same?


No one should risk their lives for a stack of Levi brand jeans or some expensive drugs from Walgreens. Most of the pharmacy stolen stuff are drug addicts who jump over counters to get some Oxycotin.
#15177344
Tainari88 wrote:No one should risk their lives for a stack of Levi brand jeans or some expensive drugs from Walgreens. Most of the pharmacy stolen stuff are drug addicts who jump over counters to get some Oxycotin.


Indeed, or risk facing jail if you harm the shoplifter for whatever reason.

@Godstud is correct that shoplifting is just too widespread and not serious enough to warrant a serious effort to round up all the shoplifters. The stigma of being filmed in the act could help as a deterrent here - yet making them a misdemeanor goes against this idea, at least as far as the current law is concerned. Perhaps there should be laws allowing or even mandating PDs publish videos of blatant misdemeanors?
#15177353
I absolutely agree with you @wat0n that efforts to shame shoplifters should be done. They shouldn't get away with these crimes, simply because of apathy.
#15177354
Godstud wrote:I absolutely agree with you @wat0n that efforts to shame shoplifters should be done. They shouldn't get away with these crimes, simply because of apathy.


Or because it's objectively expensive to do so, I don't think it's just an issue of apathy. So I don't disagree with you there.

Shaming would probably be good, and honestly fair.
#15177554
The reason why shoplifters tend not to be apprehended by store staff , per policy , involves liability . https://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/can-shoplifter-severely-injured-security-sue-store-10482.html Also , the store can both sue the thief https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/restitution-law-victims-crime.html , and collect on an insurance policy https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/business-crime-insurance.asp .
Rugoz wrote:To each according to his needs. California has realized socialism! :up:

You left out the part about from each according to their ability , also the part about to each according to contribution . https://politicaltheology.com/the-bible-and-the-soviet-constitution-of-1936/ Also , as the anarcho-communist Kropotkin pointed out , there is no right , under natural law , to steal . https://libcom.org/library/anarchist-morality-peter-kropotkin Notwithstanding how such self proclaimed anarchists as this seemingly seek to excuse it .
Godstud wrote:I absolutely agree with you @wat0n that efforts to shame shoplifters should be done. They shouldn't get away with these crimes, simply because of apathy.
If any of you are interested , this YouTube channel , among others , does publicly expose and shame shoplifters . https://m.youtube.com/c/GasStationEncounters/videos It's sort of like the " America's Most Wanted" of convenience store surveillance footage .
Last edited by Deutschmania on 21 Jun 2021 00:31, edited 1 time in total.
#15177557
@Deutschmania

It's true the store can collect on the insurance policies but then the insurance companies will just raise their rates on all their policy holders to pay for the new claims due to the out of control theft (or they might start refusing to insure for the San Fransisco area because the risks to them as an insurance company is too high). So, it's not like the store is getting off scot free when their insurance rates go up afterwards. Plus, a store still can't make money even if they are insured given the lack of the rule of law where criminals can simply shoplift with impunity. Hence, why Walgreens stopped doing business in San Fransisco. This can't be good for the people who live in that city or for the local businesses.
#15177629
Here's a thing that most people living in California do not know.

The courts support themselves with guilty verdicts. Civil asset forfeiture depends on guilty verdicts, and the cops get to keep half. The other half goes... you guessed it... to the courts.

This is not just drug dealers that the courts in California are gouging with this racket. Happens every time someone gets a traffic ticket.

https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/crimjust/20 ... 020519.pdf

Even the Public Defender's office receives money from guilty verdicts.

So... my point is that when the courts are corrupt and involved in generating revenue, what meaning does lawlessness have?
#15177635
@PataOneil

Well, being lawful starts with society itself and not the courts. It starts with all of us. I know some small towns where cops are revenue generators because nobody wants to pay taxes. Well, government isn't free and if nobody wants to pay taxes and elects politicians who don't raise taxes or institute necessary taxes but still want government services, then government has to use police officers to generate revenue to pay for the cost of government given nobody is paying the appropriate amount of taxes to pay for government. Nothing is free but everybody wants something for nothing. But that still doesn't change the fact that nothing is free so the money will come from somewhere.
Masdar City

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCKz8ykyI2E&ab[…]

Did You Get Vaccinated?

Also the protests were most definitely about loc[…]

https://factsanddetails.com/china/cat8/sub50/item[…]

@Juin But since we are talking about voter ID[…]