The opposite is undesirable too. Balance is key. Of course the crime sucks but at least it wasn't violent. I disagree with the no-punishment philosophy for petty crimes like this but this is how democracy works. So long as people don't get hurt, willing to let proponents either let it play out and eventually show that it is better this way or find balance.

Both LA and SF have this problem. You know what else they have? A homeless problem and high cost of living. Perhaps instead of the law being harsher, people need to be ok with better zoning laws and more houses. Can't imagine most of these people have good day jobs and housing situation.

IMO, they should at least make them recover or return what they took. I also blame cops, so what if they can't lock them up. They can still stop them and get in their way. Thats what cops do, chase robbers. If they resist, then they get locked up for good. Companies should also sue the individuals, will tangle them up in court and introduce a cost to the crime. The apathy behind "we can't lock them up, so it is legal" is b.s. union pacific can also afford patrol security officers and drones. Have them literally get in the way if the looters, so even if they get shoved that's an assault charge with bodycam footage.

I don't agree but if you don't like it, vote or move.