Flamewar comments like this will get you banned on HN, regardless of how right you are or feel you are. No more of this, please. If you'd review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

Edit: you've unfortunately been doing this a lot with this account already. I don't want to ban you, but we need you to fix this if you want to keep commenting here.

Would the comment have been ok if i removed the "scum" part?

Certainly a lot better, but even without that the comment is making a pretty big and provocative claim without any substance to back it up.

Umm, no they are under instructions directly from Chesa Boudin, He initiated a reduction of pretrial incarceration and reduction of cash bail. His DA office is only trying ~50% of crimes compared to other major cities where the percent is 80-90%. In addition he is facing a recall this coming June.

Info about Chesa Boudin - https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Chesa-Boudin-San-Fra...

recall - https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/exclusive-sf-district-...

You claim: "they are under instructions directly from Chesa Boudin"

Article you linked says: Absolutely nothing to support this

You claim: "His DA office is only trying ~50% of crimes compared to other major cities"

Article you linked says: The charging rate was completely unchanged when Boudin became DA.

If you are going to make an outrageous claim that "they are under instructions directly from Chesa Boudin" you have to provide evidence that this is true, otherwise it will appear to be a lie.

Did you actually read the article I linked? Property crime has increased dramatically under Boudin in SF. Here you go(murders also increased as well but not as dramatically):

2018 - 10,058 property crimes

2019 - 9,404 property crimes

Boudin Elected

2020 - 13,632 property crimes 44% increase

2021 - 6,180 property crimes (half year of stats only)

Boudin has initiated a catch and release for non-felony crimes which means the police arrest someone for breaking into a apartment and they are on the streets the next day due to no cash bail. Charging rates are extremely low(from 2018-2019) as the previous SF DA George Gascon initiated the same policies as Boudin and went to LA as DA and he(gascon) is also being recalled.

The question is whether "[the police] are under instructions directly from Chesa Boudin [not to arrest people for property crime]" as you claimed. This claim appears to be a lie, the article you linked provides no supporting evidence, and your followup comment as well provides no supporting evidence.

When pressed on this point, you are relying on deflection to other criticisms you have of Boudin. Eliminating cash bail is in no way, shape, or form a direct instruction to not arrest property criminals.

> under instructions directly from Chesa Boudin

That is not the chain of command. They're completely separate bureaucracies.

District Attorneys wield a ton of power. ADAs get marching orders, and cops act based on what the ADAs want to prosecute.

If they want public intoxication collars, all of the sudden they will appear. Anytime someone tells you the DA is some bystander, laugh.

Cops act on what their police chief and union tell them to do.

Neither of those policies affect whether or not the police make an arrest.

A notable part of SFPD history is during the 70s when they went on strike over a pay raise, started arresting citizens who looked at them funny on the picket line, sent threats on the mayor’s life and set off a bomb at his house.

One of my family members is a DA and we were talking about this and they were bragging that, yes, cops and DAs are doing this because of Boudin and George Floyd protests. They were happy because in their opinion it was working.

If you're a cop, why do your job if the people are just going to be released with no consequences? Police can't do anything if the DA refuses to prosecute.

Because they're paid by taxpayers to do their job. And to be clear: their job is to make arrests and allow the rest of the justice system to do its job, which is (1) to determine the feasibility of going to court, and then (2) to determine the innocence or guilt of the arrested party in a public trial of peers.

Police abstention because other parts of the justice system refuse to play by their (cruel) rules is revanchism, nothing more or less.

Police abstention because other parts of the justice system are non-functional is, beyond any moral or ethical concerns, a certainty.

Every time a police officer arrests someone they're risking life and limb. Whether you like cops or not, you've got to see that aspect of it. Why would you take that risk when you know the system is being operated so that there is literally no difference between if you make the arrest or not?

> Why would you take that risk when you know the system is being operated so that there is literally no difference between if you make the arrest or not?

The ability of police to forecast complex systems so accurately is astonishing.

The change being blamed for 2020/2021 elsewhere in this thread is "catch and release without cash bail." It's noted that there's been a 50% charge rate for a while on things as well. So if the police make that arrest, and that 50% charge rate held, half the time there's going to be a charge filed and regardless of if the person was held in jail or has to be brought back, that's still not "literally no difference."

Do people know Chesa is the DA for San Francisco, a 7x7 square mile city, only? You can't blame anything to do with the entire bay area on him.

Because they’re paid to and because, again, it is just not their job to evaluate or police based on how the rest of the justice system functions.

Because it is your job? Plenty of people deal with managers who don't heed their advice, they don't get to opt-out of working.

Even if a DA refuses to prosecute anyone, police could also still work to prevent crime in the first place, no?

The other option is to either take early retirement, or quit and go work somewhere else. As many SFPD officers have done.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2021/06/24/san-francisco-g...

"Because it is your job?"

Imagine I worked at a pizza shop and was getting $10 per hour to make pizzas. Every pizza I make my boss throws into the dumpster. My boss refuses to talk with me. The boss publicly tweets: he doesn't believe in pizza. This goes on for 12 weeks. It gets pretty hard to go to work and make pizzas.

==$10 per hour==

Is that really comparable to a police office in SFPD? "San Francisco offers excellent benefits and the current starting salary is $92,560 per year. After seven years of service, a Police Officer may earn up to $139,152 per year. You will receive comprehensive training, at your full starting salary." [1]

==This goes on for 12 weeks==

This seems like hyperbole. Has nobody been prosecuted in San Francisco for 12 weeks? Does a prosecution after-the-fact stop a crime from happening?

[1] https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/your-sfpd/careers/sworn-j...

HUD defined “Low Income Limits” in San Francisco as $82,200 for an individual and $117,400 for a family of four. So you are a little above poverty. I think $10 an hour works.

"This goes on for 12 weeks" i just make up some time not related ;)

==I think $10 an hour works.==

$10/hr is the equivalent to $20k a year. SFPD officers make 4-6X that number. Then we can add the health benefits and pension contributions that your "Low Income Limits" don't measure. Not to mention the slight of hand where you turned it into a family of 4 to make the math look better.

==i just make up some time not related=

Another made up number. Making up numbers from thin air doesn't create a legitimate comparison for actual data.

Well you should quit that job in that case.

Unless you are really attached to those sweet pensions, overtime and other union perks that your "pizza shop" job provides. At taxpayer cost.

Don't forget qualified immunity and lost lawsuits created by your own doing don't come out of your budget or pension.

I think most of this can be fixed with a little accountability; the same everyone else is subject to.

Personally, I'd do the same thing as the cops if I were in the situation you describe: do nothing and rake in the moolah, and if anyone has a problem with that, pretend it's someone else's fault.

Why do you care about what happens to the pizzas? You’re getting paid the same.

The SFPD were defunded, staff left in droves due to a cargo culting 'social democrat' political climate that was openly hostile to them. Cops are one wrong move away from being in jail themselves in an increasingly lawless bay area environment. This has reached crisis level and the subtleties of community policing vs law enforcement, and restorative justice experiments have been blown to smithereens by ham fisted, tone deaf ideologues such as DA Boudin. It will take decades to recover from this and is a societal disaster IMO, especially those who are most vulnerable.

> The SFPD were defunded, staff left in droves

You got a citation on this? Because even my city is "defunding the police" because of a budget shortage. And defunding other city services for the same reason. Police leaving in droves, according to Fox News turned out to be 90% retirement.

> Cops are one wrong move away from being in jail themselves

Okay, Tucker Carlson, sure ;-)

https://twitter.com/LondonBreed/status/1471918546812690434 Mayor Breed just declared a state of emergency in the Tenderloin regarding the open drug scene there.

This is still not the "de-funding" you promised us.

I didn't 'promise' anything, what do you mean? Who is 'us'?

Regarding defunding, a very quick google search will give you the information you're looking for assuming you are in the USA.

Separately there has been attrition at the SFPD due to people taking early retirement or moving to easier policing jobs elsewhere.

https://abc7news.com/san-francisco-budget-announcement-defun...

Your first comment:

==The SFPD were defunded==

You have not provided any evidence of this claim, attrition is not "de-funding".

I appreciate the link for the article on a proposed budget. I did some google searching (as you suggested) and found some more updated information. The budget has gone up 50% over 10 years, hardly de-funded.

"For the proposed 2021-22 budget, the San Francisco Police Department’s allocation will decrease by $6 million, from about $668 million to $661 million. Those cuts can nearly all be attributed to decreased demand for police at the airport. However, in the following fiscal year, the city projects the police budget will increase once again to $689 million. That’s close to the police budget’s all-time high of $692 million in FY 2019-20. By way of comparison, in FY 2010-11, the police budget weighed in at $445 million."

https://www.sfweekly.com/news/is-san-francisco-re-funding-th...

"The mayor also highlighted other changes in 2020-21 and 2021-22 budgets, designed to deal with a $1.5 billion shortfall amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic."

==The SFPD were defunded==

Citation please. How much money was taken away and where was it put?

==especially those who are most vulnerable.==

Am I to believe that the staff who fled the department because they disagreed with the politics are now deeply concerned about the "most vulnerable"? Seems the best way to help them would be to focus away from after-the-fact prosecution and instead on community outreach.

not hard to find information online about this https://www.audacy.com/kcbsradio/news/local/san-francisco-po...

etc etc

That articles is about staffing shortages because people retired, not about "de-funding".

>Cops are one wrong move away from being in jail themselves

So what, I'm one wrong move away from being in jail. Everyone is. That's how law works.

unless the DA only decides to prosecute cases he feels are important, as is the case with Boudin

https://www.safersfwithoutboudin.com

> The SFPD were defunded, staff left in droves due to a cargo culting 'social democrat' political climate that was openly hostile to them.

Citation needed.

Seriously. NO ONE has been defunded anywhere in the country.

https://www.sfweekly.com/news/is-san-francisco-re-funding-th...

Because punishment is not in their purview ?

They could at least do it so they could hammer the news with soundbites for the next election: Police took N reports about crime, showing that set stats are undercounting by M; Police arrested X for QoL crimes, but released all but Y because the DA doesn't care about you, etc...

Why fight fires when people keep setting them anyway? Firefighters can't do anything if people keep using their stoves.