April 30, 2008
A Plugged-In Reader's Report: Crime Starts Hitting Closer To Home
I was in Baretta restaurant on 23rd and Valencia last night while it was robbed at gunpoint. The gunman had us all lie on the floor and look down. He proceeded to rob the till. Very scary stuff. I know of a recent home invasion on North Potrero. A friend of mine had his wife's laptop stolen while he was in the shower in his own home in Noe Valley. Then there's the rash of muggings in Bernal and Glen Park. I saw a guy roll up on another guy and then get shot at by the driver of the car he meant to himself assail two weeks ago on the corner of Cesar Chavez and South Van Ness. They sped off down Cesar Chavez street at 100 mph. One of the kids who was killed by that asshole over pizza in the Sunset lived in a friend of mine's building. He was shot in the face. The killer remains at large because his girlfriend wouldn't i.d. him. That was the best they could come up with. San Francisco needs to step up the policing. It's getting ridiculous.
And ads: "[T]hat octopus risotto [at Baretta] is awesome."
UPDATE (5/2): "My neighbor in Ashbury Heights was mugged at gun point last night at 10:00, half a block from her house. We're all very shaken."
First Published: April 30, 2008 1:58 PM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Only way to reduce crime is to get more involved as citizens ie. reporting suspicious activities, and banding with neighbors to keep a closer eye.
Our SF police and D.A. are just liberal wimps who refuse to clamp down on crime, petty or otherwise. Stop voting for stupid liberal handouts to homelessness and start voting conservative tough on crime.
Posted by: Live Smart at April 30, 2008 2:17 PM
Another reason why I don't care what the data says about "recession". When crime picks up, that to me, is a great leading indicator.
Glad you're safe.
Posted by: J at April 30, 2008 2:18 PM
people told me in 2003 if I voted for Terry Hallinan and Matt Gonzalez for DA and Mayor respectively, that crime would be out of control and we'd have a mayor totally clueless to deal with the budget.
well I did, and that's what we got (with Harris and Newsom). And we can thank the local business community and the GOP for both of 'em.
so the right wingers can eat my poo.
Posted by: conservativessuck at April 30, 2008 2:22 PM
I just bought a new house and am a little worried about home security given the increase in crime recently. Can anyone recommend a website for simple home security measures beyond a security system (I'm already doing that).
Posted by: M at April 30, 2008 2:22 PM
Smith & Wesson
Posted by: ID at April 30, 2008 2:29 PM
A lot of people were saying that this probably has to do with gasoline prices. I think that makes sense. Poor people get hit the hardest and then the criminal element within the poor act aout.
Posted by: fluj at April 30, 2008 2:29 PM
I was walking home last night close to 1:45 a.m. after going to see a show at Mezzanine, and I noticed a tow truck starting to hook up a car parked on the street in front of The Infinity. I guess it was a repossession ... but would probably could just as easily have been a car thief, and folks just don't question a tow truck as much as a guy smashing a window in order to steal the car. (Shrug)
Posted by: jamie at April 30, 2008 2:34 PM
Sounds like we need Inspector Callaghan. "Do ya feel lucky punk, well do ya?"
I sometimes feel like the only self-reliant, rugged individual in a town full of namby pamby, girly men, pu**ys.
Posted by: need_F40 at April 30, 2008 2:37 PM
I just learned from a neighbor that Martha & Bros. on Cortland was robbed at gunpoint yesterday as well. Don't have any details, can't find anything on SFGate, but wondering if these are related...same day, same MO from what it sounds like.
Posted by: BernalDweller at April 30, 2008 2:38 PM
That's it ... I'm getting my shotgun out of storage at my parents house and bringing it with me into the city.
Posted by: Jimmy (Waiting for Ragnarok) at April 30, 2008 2:40 PM
Martha Brothers coffee shop robbed at gunpoint this morning
The Martha Brothers coffee shop at 745 Cortland Avenue was robbed this morning, April 29th, around 5:30 AM. Here's the police report:
A black male about 19 to 23 years old, standing 5'9" tall, weighing about 140 pounds, wearing a dark brown hooded sweatshirt, a black ski mask, and blue jeans entered the Martha Brothers coffee shop and brandished a black revolver. He demanded that all present, three employees and two customers, get on the floor. The robber took cash from the shop's cash register and fled the store. No car was seen and the area was searched to no avail. Inspector Danker of the Robbery Detail took over the case. CSI processed the scene. SFPD # 080446957
While not specifically Precita Valley, this is an area where many Precita area residents shop.
Posted by: sfmom at April 30, 2008 2:46 PM
if you don't like the crime in your neighborhood move to a different area.
Prices are down, its a buyers market, and everyone can now live in PacHeights/RussianHill/SeaCliff.
Or maybe start a "citizens on patrol" group like they did in Police Academy 22.
Posted by: Jamison at April 30, 2008 2:47 PM
"and then the criminal element within the poor act aout." WTF? Are you for real? Did we miss Enron, Worldcom, and all the other corporate scandals?
To imply that the poor have some special "criminal element" that the rich do not share is absurd. I'd trust my "poor" housecleaner a h*ll of a lot more than I'd trust the average car salesman or...wait for it...the average realtor ("It's always a great time to buy! All real estate is local! Blah blah blah."). Before I thought you were just a cheerleader, fluj - now I see you're a bigot.
Posted by: anon at April 30, 2008 2:50 PM
M- check out sfsafe.org. They may have some useful info on neighborhood watch groups and basic security tips.
Posted by: anono at April 30, 2008 2:51 PM
"A lot of people were saying that this probably has to do with gasoline prices."
Or to back that assertion out one step further, you could say that the culprits are the folks who have forced an infrastructure on us that encourages car dependency. Cities have opted to tilt subsidies towards car owners so naturally people want to drive to take advantage of the free stuff. And it is obvious that the cost of gas is going to continue to rise. Why are we still spending billions on freeways ?
anon at 2:50 : how do you figure that fluj's comment was bigoted ? He referenced the poor, not any particular race.
Still your comment has merit. In times of economic turmoil we should be careful with anyone trying to get to our assets whether they be the petty pickpocket or the stock broker with a "sure deal".
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at April 30, 2008 3:05 PM
Well, the east bay just had a ring of restaurant thieves get caught (I think this story was on sfgate) -- atleast one or two arrests I'm pretty sure.
They strike at night, or just before closing.
Posted by: dub dub at April 30, 2008 3:16 PM
Is there any news reference to the robbery at Baretta? I couldn't find anything in the Crappicle or the other rag.
Posted by: Espumo at April 30, 2008 3:16 PM
whoa anon...I think that's quite a leap you're making in calling someone a bigot for pointing out that some poor people commit crimes when the economy gets tough. That statement is factually true and did not contain any value judgments whatsoever. I think this ultra PC reactionary nonsense like your "bigot" comment is exactly the sentiment that leads to this city being a criminal's paradise.
I was walking past seventh & market recently and (among the numerous crimes you can see on that corner on a daily basis) a guy was selling drugs quite openly. The fellow next to him said "Hey, you might want to be careful, the police might see you" and the dealer said as loud as can be and to no one in particular "I ain't worried about no m-ther f--king police in san fran cisco" with a long drawn out emphasis on "san franscico." It was hilarious and infuriating at the same time.
But hey, since Enron happened let's just not bother to police criminal activity. After all, no one went to jail for Enron...oh, wait.
Posted by: anono at April 30, 2008 3:16 PM
To imply that the poor have some special "criminal element" that the rich do not share is absurd.
Puhleeze! This kind of fuzzy-headed liberal thinking is what makes people vote republican!
Rich people, (and middle class people for that matter) DON'T typically rob shops at gunpoint, sorry. All classes of people commit crimes, but there's a certain type of person that uses violence more than others. It's the poor and desperate. Don't try to excuse this type of behavior by saying "everyone does it."
Posted by: another-anon at April 30, 2008 3:17 PM
Two armed robberies with guns on Sunday in Dogpatch. One was at 4:00pm at the BUS SHELTER at 20th and Tennessee -- victim and robber had hooked up via Craigslist for a laptop sale. Then another at 10pm, two women had their purses taken, also at gunpoint.
What the f*ck is going on these days!
Posted by: DP res at April 30, 2008 3:25 PM
anono - the drug dealer's comment tells you all you need to know about the state of law enforcement in San Francisco. The police dept, the DA, and the mayor should take that as a challenge and a call to action - but they won't.
Posted by: FSBO at April 30, 2008 3:28 PM
It's interesting how political correctness trumps thinking in this country. Meanwhile, the hoodlums are running riot.
This town needs to grow a bigger pair of balls. But with all the girly men, balls isn't something they have
Posted by: need_F40 at April 30, 2008 3:35 PM
""and then the criminal element within the poor act aout." WTF? Are you for real? Did we miss Enron, Worldcom, and all the other corporate scandals?
To imply that the poor have some special "criminal element" that the rich do not share is absurd. I'd trust my "poor" housecleaner a h*ll of a lot more than I'd trust the average car salesman or...wait for it...the average realtor ("It's always a great time to buy! All real estate is local! Blah blah blah."). Before I thought you were just a cheerleader, fluj - now I see you're a bigot."
You're an idiot. Plainly. You are an ass and a troll and an idiot.
The criminal element within the ranks of the poor, guy. Not a criminal element like some sort of crime chromozone. Everyone else knew what the hell I meant ... and it wasn't even my theory. It was something someone else said last night after this happened.
Like "another anon" said, rich people do not rob at gunpoint. Yes, like your cookie cutter liberal ass knows, rich people usually rob on far bigger stages with white collar tactics.
Thank you for not only pointing out your own lack of reading comprehension skills but also your clear knee jerk need to attack me no matter what I say on here. Also thank you for displaying your need to somehow incorporate a realtor slam no matter how far out of context.
You really suck, mean anon. You're the lowest of internet trolls. Get a life. Poor people don't have crimina chromozone. But you absolutely do have a jackass chromozone.
Posted by: fluj at April 30, 2008 3:37 PM
@fluj: LOL You tell him!
But... we used to play a game in high school - first one to swear loses. He (assumed) made you swear, he wins. And will as long as you play his game.
Posted by: PN at April 30, 2008 3:41 PM
That Martha Brothers robbery MO, clothing and the physical description matches what I saw to a tee.
But @ sfmom, most of us north slopers and Precita park people don't get our coffee at Marthas. We go to Charlie's or Park Bench.
Posted by: fluj at April 30, 2008 3:41 PM
It is chromosome.
Posted by: Craig at April 30, 2008 3:42 PM
Can anyone recommend a website for simple home security measures beyond a security system
A Dog. Seriously. Criminals hate dogs. Dogs bark and are loud and they might bite and they draw lots of attention. And it's very hard to neutralize them.
A dog is 100% better than a gun
I learned this when I used to do trauma at SFGH, back when Potrero Hill was the hood. all the gunshot perps and cracked out druggies... I asked the hardcore criminals what worried them most when they did a robbery... 99%+ said "those damn dogs".
Posted by: ex SF-er at April 30, 2008 3:45 PM
Sorry for swearing repeatedly. It's not particularly fun to have someone jump down your throat ... after being at a robbery no less. Talk about classless. You should have seen the nonsense he wrote earlier in the Noe Valley thread before it got erased. The guy is a menace. Mean anon: troll X infinity.
Posted by: fluj at April 30, 2008 3:46 PM
Even if the SF police successfuly arrest someone, the city has no ability to charge them and keep them off of the streets.
Criminals conduct their crimes with a certain imunity in SF.
Posted by: anon at April 30, 2008 3:47 PM
LOL. Thanks craig. I wish there was an edit function on this BBS.
Posted by: fluj at April 30, 2008 3:47 PM
We used use some of that $20 billion state surplus to build more prisons so we can lock up these criminals. What? It's a deficit not a surplus? Crud, you mean we have to let the government rob us to prevent thugs from doing it. Pick our poison.
Posted by: Rillion at April 30, 2008 4:04 PM
It is amazing to me what short-sighted liberal politics has done to SF, when the city supervisors are more concerned with fining $100 the unsightly problem of garbage and recycling cans in front of people's houses, than focusing energies on homeless problems and escalating crime in SF.
Posted by: Live Smart at April 30, 2008 4:07 PM
I agree with Flug's remark. I have talked with many officers about the crime and it all boils down to money and the DA's office. The city has no money to build more jails and the DA is a liberal wimp. I happen to think the police in our city are trying their best to help. But if there are no convictions, it is pointless to do anything about it.
Posted by: Fedup at April 30, 2008 4:20 PM
Live Smart - great point. The DPT is everywhere with their tricycles. I just got a ticket for parking 2hrs and 5 minutes in a 2-hour zone. Why don't we deputize them - they seem to see everything on the streets. Or maybe they have a no-snitch policy?
Posted by: FSBO at April 30, 2008 4:24 PM
Live Smart - yes it's an "unsightly problem" but it also encourages scavenging, and that's not happening by the suit-n-tie-wearing type of criminals. One memorable incident on my block (in Noe) happened a few weeks ago when one meth'd out scavenger got in a fight over a few bottles with another meth'd out scavenger. Put the bins away, this problem goes away (except for the 24 hours surrounding trash pickup).
Posted by: PN at April 30, 2008 4:28 PM
PN: I'd rather have the meth heads fighting each other over who is going to rob a recycling bin then fighting each other over who is going to rob me.
Posted by: Rillion at April 30, 2008 4:32 PM
Sure glad you didn't get hurt. Very sad situations....
Posted by: Michael L at April 30, 2008 4:34 PM
Is Google playing an inside joke today with the suckers?
Posted by: Michael L. at April 30, 2008 4:50 PM
Milkshake - I would personally consider belief in the inherent superiority of a particular class to be as bigoted as belief in the inherent superiority of a particular race. But opinions can differ.
Anono - I have no problem with pointing out that poor people commit the types of crimes (burglaries, robberies) that fluj mentioned. Guess what, they're also disproportionately black. What I find absurd (both from scientific evidence and my own personal experience) is fluj's seeming assertion that poor people have some inherent "criminal element" (presumably genetic) that the everyone else lacks.
Another anon - Who is excusing any behavior? Only the strawman you invented. I support punishment for all criminals. Do you?
fluj - I believe your explanation that you meant "the poor who are criminals" rather than "the criminal element (e.g., genetic predisposition) within poor people" and I apologize for concluding that you are a bigot. I've never attacked you before, so I can assure you there is personal "knee jerk" reaction here.
The realtor "slam", however, is exactly relevant. As you know, there are some on this board who think realtors are inherently shifty or untrustworthy people. I am not one of those. Just as I don't think the poor have some genetic predisposition to crime, I also don't think that realtors have some genetic predisposition to misleading their clients (and trust me, I've been one of those clients who has had a realtor lie to me about the state of the market). What I do believe is that realtors have an economic incentive to exaggerate or misrepresent the market - this is indisputable (if they don't make a sale, they don't paid!). But that doesn't mean that they're somehow inherently evil or conspiratorial.
Posted by: anon at April 30, 2008 4:53 PM
fluj - I also have no idea who you are talking about on the Noe Valley thread. Certainly wasn't me. Looks like we should both stop jumping to conclusions.
Posted by: anon at April 30, 2008 4:57 PM
We have tried your conservative approach to getting "tough on crime". Our country is the most punitive on Earth. Our nation imprisons more people than any other country in the World and we are one of the few that still employs capital punishment (on children and the retarded only until a few years ago). We have systematically rigged the system over the years to make convictions easier and we have created a system that is horribly racially biased. Your war on drugs and war on crime has been just as much of an abysmal failure as pretty much every other conservative pipe dream.
I guess I see how some insecure girly men (guys that talk tough on the internet--like you :) ) take comfort in a swaggering tough guy attitude to crime. You are really really scared of the poor, the black, and the homeless that are screwing up the city. You just want some big hard totalitarian guy to stand up and protect you! (and with lots of leather to boot)
And I love how you conservatives blame the cops on the street and the prosecutors in the courtrooms (while sitting at your computer) for not being able to pull magic rabbits out of their hats and win the war on crime and drugs. As if you could march into town with your conservatarded ideas and get some results. What do you know about crime and punishment other than your silly cowboy slogans? Nothing. You blame the hard-working people on the ground for not doing the impossible. Just like you probably blame the troops in Iraq for not trying hard enough to "win" the war.
You cannot win a war on drugs and crime by locking people up. We have tried locking up 40% of black men. We have tried locking up more people than any other country in the world. This has not worked. We need to deal with the current uptick in crime--especially these violent crimes--but your hysterical posturing and scapegoating will only make matters worse.
Posted by: SFHawkguy at April 30, 2008 5:02 PM
It's patently obvious that SFPD is in dereliction of duties. Can we pass a concealed carry law already? Stuff like this doesn't happen in states with CCW laws.
Posted by: scurvy at April 30, 2008 5:12 PM
"What I find absurd (both from scientific evidence and my own personal experience) is fluj's seeming assertion that poor people have some inherent "criminal element" (presumably genetic) that the everyone else lacks."
that would have been absurd if he had said that, but he did not. his saying that there exists a criminal element among the poor does not mean that he thinks there is no criminal element among the rich.
you sir, have put words in his mouth.
Posted by: location at April 30, 2008 5:14 PM
There was a huge baby boom in 1990 - 92 = more troublemakers in the typical street thug age. In five years crime will go down again and the politicos will take credit.
Posted by: dogboy at April 30, 2008 5:14 PM
location - You're way behind the conversation; check out my post at 4:53. I take his explanation at face value.
Posted by: anon at April 30, 2008 5:26 PM
maybe the correlation between "poor" and "violent crime" is through intelligence which IS chromosomal. stupid people are poorer - that's a fact. violent crime is stupid (it's easier to get caught). so when the going gets tough the stupid people resort to violent crime......
....unlike us smarter folks who just steal more paper clips from the office when the economy goes south. or cheat a little more on our expense accounts. c'mon you know you're doing it.
it's unfortunate. whatever you believe, the stats show that higher crime is associated with a weaker economy. maybe we should do a scatterplot of the # of weekly shootings in SF vs the inventory of unsold homes
Posted by: resp at April 30, 2008 5:37 PM
To those that claim SFPD is being soft on crime, what exactly should they be doing in this situation? I mean it's not like they're letting armed robbers go. It's not like they don't want to catch these guys. It's not like the DA doesn't prosecute armed robbers when they are caught. It's simply tough to catch these guys. They are running into stores with masks and guns and running out and getting into cars.
Posted by: SFHawkguy at April 30, 2008 5:37 PM
SFHawkguy - you are wasting your time with these tools. These computer commandos are all bark and base all their knowledge on old Dirty Harry movies. Not one of these tough typers would make these idiotic statements to any of the cops I know in this city.
Posted by: sfbubble at April 30, 2008 5:44 PM
"The criminal element" is an extremely common turn of phrase. I clearly used "the criminal element" as a noun, as a separate entity from "the poor." There was no confusion about meaning for anyone other than yourself. Your assertion that I needed to explain myself is unacceptable.
Furtbermore, you called me a bigot. A freaking bigot. That's one of the worst things anyone can say to anyone else if it is offbase. I do not accept your lame apology about both of us jumping to conclusions either. No one calls me a bigot in this life.
Get control of your own language, and obtain an understanding of other's language. Read things twice, or something. Or else refrain from trying to communicate. You made a fool out of yourself today, and you called someone a "bigot" for no reason.
Posted by: fluj at April 30, 2008 5:54 PM
the mayor is in israel bringing peace and advanced hairgel to the middle east. he has more importnat things to do. The DA couldn't charge a Blue American express and the police officers are all too busy counting their 300K salary paychecks.
as a victim of violent crime in this city twice, i can tell you firsthand that the police do very little follow-up.
Posted by: Spencer at April 30, 2008 6:00 PM
Trying to be a good citizen of San Francisco, there have been two times in the past year when I witnessed crimes and decided to call 911. The response says a lot.
First situation: three people broke a car window, and were trying to remove the radio with a crow bar. I saw the entire event unfolding. I called 911, while the crime was still in progress. The police dispatcher said, "We don't send units for that sort of thing, please leave a note on the windshield for the car owner." Of course, I would have needed to wait for the crooks to finish their work to leave that note! Truly amazing, there were three people actively committing a crime, and the police refused to respond.
Second situation: I heard a squabble and breaking glass near the Lyon Street steps (near the home of DiFi). Again, I called 911. Within minutes FIVE SFPD squad cars arrived on the scene. Five squad cars with a total of ten police officers! This is in addition to the full-time SFPD patrol at DiFi's house. Needless to say, the glass breaking ended quickly that time.
I think SF needs to respond to crime, arrest criminals and better prioritize how the city applies its resources. And SF's citizens need to *demand* better from their government.
Posted by: SFBob at April 30, 2008 6:13 PM
The person responsible for a string of robberies in Presidio Heights was a tranny from the loin...
Posted by: MedusaSF at April 30, 2008 6:15 PM
Crime rates seem to go up and down. Sometimes there is a clear demographic reason like a baby boom hitting the late teen years or an economic reason like a depression. But alot of the time it seems to just fluctuate, with the government only stepping up to claim the responsibility when it goes down.
What we certainly have is a consistent escalation in the weapons used and style of crimes that leads to these scary stories, in the sense that a bad guy with a knife mugs one person where a bad guy with a gun can mug an entire restaurant.
Finally, there is the issue of being a copycat. The inspiration for these SF restaurant holdups no doubt being when the homies saw there business competition in the east bay upping the ante on them.
Posted by: redseca2 at April 30, 2008 6:34 PM
Well, our house is already on the market as a result of a transfer to...ORANGE COUNTY...I'll miss alot about SF, but after my first house-hunting trip to Newport Beach last week, gotta say, I'm looking forward to not worrying as much about this kind of problem.........
Posted by: deshard at April 30, 2008 6:53 PM
There's always gonna be criminals. With gas at $1, people still got robbed.
Best way to stay out of the criminal's line of work: A) don't run a business that has lots of cash on hand (hint: drop safe or accept credit cards) and B) don't advertise that you have money.
A person under the age of 60 in jeans, a T shirt and tennis shoes not wearing a watch or expensive jewelry, frequenting establishments that accept credit cards or have a drop safe is unlikely to ever need a gun or a dog to protect him. It can happen anywhere, but if you are under that age and do those simple things, it is very unlikely you will ever get in to trouble.
Fluj, I'm sure you don't want to hear this having gone through a very scary event, but the owner of that establishment put everyone in danger for the lack of spending $200 on a friggin drop safe. That's no less criminal than the guy who robbed him and it would have been cheaper than what he probably lost in the robbery. He had a duty to protect his employees and his customers.
As an individual, make sure you carry no less than $40 so that if you get robbed, the robber doesn't get mad, and no more than $100,so if you get robbed, YOU don't get too mad (though it will scare the daylights out of you).
And don't frequent establishments near bad neighborhoods that refuse to take the most basic precautions to protect you. Given the neighborhood and the cash nature of the businesses, that was going to happen sooner or later. It is so easy to deter.
News flash: the police aren't going to protect you. Take some basic steps and you'll probably never need the police.
Posted by: tipster at April 30, 2008 6:54 PM
Deshard, can you take me with you to Newport Beach? My brother moved down there, and I cannot even get him to come back up to visit here after the first year there. I gave him all of the standard San Francisco putdowns about O.C., but there are amazing restaurants in Newport and Laguna, perfect weather, beautiful hiking in the hills, and as he constantly reminds me, "it's safer here". He lives in the Bayshores neighborhood and leaves his front door unlocked throughout most of the day so neighborhood children can walk in to visit his children.
Posted by: justin at April 30, 2008 7:06 PM
German Shepherd. No bullets required.
Posted by: Kathleen at April 30, 2008 7:36 PM
someone on the thread said "you're afraid of blacks and the poor who are ruining this city"
er, um, I am not afraid of anyone, including blacks and the poor. But you are 50% right, there is a group of people who are ruining the city. These are the losers, the lazys, the nitwits, the under-educated, the good ol trash and of course let's not forget the substantial number of free-loaders and parasites.
The above disparate group has something in common - they're all namby pamby girlie men liberals.
Posted by: need_F40 at April 30, 2008 8:01 PM
"maybe the correlation between "poor" and "violent crime" is through intelligence which IS chromosomal. stupid people are poorer - that's a fact. violent crime is stupid (it's easier to get caught). so when the going gets tough the stupid people resort to violent crime......"
no offense but i believe your statement, if taken as written, is not logically valid. to wit;
not intelligent (a) equals poor (b)
violent crime (c) equals not intelligent (b)
if its tough going(d) then the not intelligent(a) equal violent crime(c)
if d then a=c
but poor (b) does not necessarily equal not intelligent (a)
and not intelligent(a) does not necessarily equal violent criminal(c). therefore poor(b) does not necessarily equal violent criminal(c)
or, as wiki would have it:
Validity of statements
A statement can be called valid if it is true in all interpretations. For example:
If no god is mortal, then no mortal is a god.
In logical form, this is:
If (No P is a Q), then (No Q is a P).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic - 138k
anyway, i think i get your point...
Posted by: paco at April 30, 2008 8:28 PM
Well, Beretta finally made sfgate:
Posted by: Outer Sunset at April 30, 2008 8:59 PM
Every establishment such as diner or a coffee shop should hire a security guard to stand a front of the door. Moscow has tight security at popular public places and people are safe to dine, dance and watch movies. San Francisco is a joke - true wild wild west.
Posted by: Misha at April 30, 2008 9:30 PM
So you're paying all this money to live in SF, when you're getting Oaklandish crime rates now. And worse weather! Where do I sign that contract? Sounds like a deal.
Posted by: David at April 30, 2008 9:34 PM
There was a rash of crime in Cow Hollow and the Marina a few months ago, including more than one holdup on the street (using a gun) and numerous break ins and so on. The community around 4 or 5 blocks united, and our local convenience store became command central, the owner keeping the sign up sheet with a petition to our Supervisor to do something about it. After two meetings attended by cops from North Station, there was agreement to put more cops walking the street. We were given a number to call, not 911, in case of emergency, and also given the name and number of all contacts at the North Station. I'd call that responsive. So for you guys wanting to just go out and buy a gun, think instead about getting your neighbors involved ... but really involved. Oh and yes I am getting a dog too, just as a little extra security.
Posted by: Oceangoer at April 30, 2008 10:03 PM
sorry paco, you're right. i wasn't shooting for the a,b,c, logic exactly but the conclusion i meant to say was that "when the going gets tough the poor people resort to violent crime."
Posted by: resp at April 30, 2008 10:34 PM
I just saw the story on the $100 "parking tickets" for garbage cans yesterday on sfgate. The thing is, even though it sounds ridiculous, it's part of the "broken window theory" (or something like that) where if you have a neighborhood that's not kept up, it spirals into real blight.
Having said that, I thought that the comment to deputize the DPT people wasn't such a bad idea :) However they do it, SF does need to focus on the big crime and transient/homeless/mental illness issues we've got going on.
I'm trying to make a point to be out on my street for 15 minutes at least every other day. I live on the side of my block where leaves collect, so I spend a few minutes sweeping up the leaves. It's a little exercise and lets me check out what's going on on my block, and I've met 5 new neighbors so far in just 2 weeks of doing it. I'm sure it sounds cliche, but it's partly about building community and knowing your neighbors. Not that it will help at 1:30 in the morning with a gun-toting robber, but it's a start.
I've also called 311 to get the parking signs cleaned of graffiti, and also am considering doing the grafitti watch program where they give you the tools to do it yourself (call 311 to inquire). At least the removal might get done sooner that way...
Posted by: EMM at April 30, 2008 11:34 PM
Wa da da dang...
Wa da da da dang...
Listen to my 9 millimeter go bang!
Posted by: mrbogue at April 30, 2008 11:37 PM
Right on EMM, you have the spirit of a true San Franciscan.
I remember after the '89 quake, when people were directing traffic in intersections where the power had gone out and the TV news cameramen came up to ask them "Why are you doing this?" and they would reply "Because I am a San Franciscan!" and wave them off so they could get back to work.
I was over in East Bay helping dig out the Cypress Freeway that night, but that is another story.
Those of you ready to run off at the first sign of danger, begone already, we don't need you. Enjoy your life in Orange County or wherever it is you decide to end up.
Posted by: NoeValleyJim at May 1, 2008 12:29 AM
Looks like socketsite is running out of real estate related issues to talk about. Next week, Fluj and company will be discussing Brittney's new dress.
[Editor’s Note: Anybody who doesn't think crime rates, or even simply the perception of crime rates, isn’t a real estate related issue, should really think again.]
Posted by: anon at May 1, 2008 3:24 AM
"Every establishment such as diner or a coffee shop should hire a security guard to stand a front of the door. Moscow has tight security at popular public places and people are safe to dine, dance and watch movies. San Francisco is a joke - true wild wild west."
This is not Russia. I just wrote a check for $6K to pay my property taxes. In exchange for that I am supposed to be supplied with municipal services like police protection.
I do feel that most of the cops try to do their job as best they can. However when you have a DA who is basically stupid and really only there because she dated Willie, what do you expect?
You can slam Realtors all you want and I probably won't disagree with you, but Realtors wouldn't be in business unless there were greedy sellers. You'd be surprised how some of the "nicest" people turn into mean, stingy a-holes when they list their homes.
Posted by: Mystery Realtor at May 1, 2008 6:31 AM
fluj - Wow dude, chill out. I think that bigotry is repellent and I believe that you were not being bigoted in your original remarks. You can choose to agree with me on these two things or you can choose not to. Totally up to you.
Posted by: anon at May 1, 2008 8:53 AM
It's amazing the ridiculous lengths people go to sprout crap on this site. Crime goes up and down, you'll be safe just don't carry money, it's not their fault we need to fix the schools.... You know what makes a difference in crime ? More police, longer jail terms and abortion clinics. Simple as that, but of course we won't get that in SF, too many people make a buck off of "helping the poor".
Posted by: Snafu at May 1, 2008 9:09 AM
just to add my story
someone climbed in my window while some one was home and stole a lap top
And they caught the guy and he got 4 years in the State Penn.
Posted by: Zig at May 1, 2008 9:14 AM
just move all the projects out of the city, close down all the SRO hotels and round up all homeless and send them to sac.
screw the poor. I have no compassion. Yes I am a right winger in case if you can't tell.
I only care about the result not how we get there.
Posted by: dotcomer at May 1, 2008 10:20 AM
You sound like more of a fascist than a right-winger... perhaps you'd have been happier living in Mussolini's Italy?
Maybe you can march around town wearing a snappy brown uniform and black leather boots. Who knows, you might make some friends!
Posted by: Jimmy (Bitter Renter) at May 1, 2008 10:26 AM
My two-year-old's daycare is less than ten blocks from there.
Zig - its great to hear a SFPD success story. On the other hand, two weeks ago a friend of mine watched a criminal break into her car from her apartment. She was on the phone with 911 during the break in which lasted for 10 minutes (they were in no hurry). SFPD finally made it an hour and a half later, whereupon the police officer informed her that he would never live in SF due to the crime and that he commutes in from out-of-town to work.
There is a reason why SF has a an extremely low per capita popluation of children (two reasons actually: the homeless population and crime). I'm not sure how much longer I can stay. For that reason I continue to put off buying in SF.
Posted by: Publius at May 1, 2008 10:31 AM
"fluj - Wow dude, chill out. I think that bigotry is repellent and I believe that you were not being bigoted in your original remarks. You can choose to agree with me on these two things or you can choose not to. Totally up to you"
Whatever. You "believe" me? You're out to lunch dude. Once again you're saying that I needed to convince you of something, when I didn't. My initial meaning was very clear, you stupidly misunderstood, and you called me a bigot. You've had several chances and that still was nowhere near an apology. Do everyone a favor and get control of your own language.
Posted by: fluj at May 1, 2008 10:37 AM
Crime is high in a few neighborhoods in San Francisco but very low in most.
The low crime neighborhoods are mostly more expensive, of course, but the Sunset has a relatively low crime rate, one that compares favorably with any similarly priced neighborhood on the Peninsula.
Most people can't evaluate risk very well at all, so perception is more important than reality. What is your percentage change of getting hurt in a violent crime living here compared to the suburbs? What is your chance of getting hurt in an auto accident due to the increased driving? It turns out that the risks are similar. Maybe you would prefer to get into an auto accident than be mugged, but I sure wouldn't. I also feel like I have more control over being a victim of a mugging, but perhaps I am kidding myself there.
Posted by: NoeValleyJim at May 1, 2008 12:42 PM
There is a reason why SF has a an extremely low per capita popluation of children (two reasons actually: the homeless population and crime).
Primary reason: SFUSD and it's lottery system. Secondary reasons: cost-of-housing, crime. Don't personally know many families that have moved out because of homeless. I point them out and say "this is how you will live if you don't do your homework".
Posted by: pennybags at May 1, 2008 12:52 PM
Fair enough pennybags. As my son is only two, I haven't yet had to deal with SFUSD. That said, I have sufficient financial resources to send him to a school of my choosing. Cost-of-housing is also not an issue for me (well at least I'm not priced out of the market).
My primary reason for moving will be the homeless population. My ancedote: I live in South Beach because it substantially reduces my commute time to work. I also take Caltrain a fair amount of time. When I first moved to this area from Pacific Heights, I became excited about the new development around South Park. We used the park quite a bit. There were always a few homeless people there, but most kept to themselves. However, there were a few problem homeless people. One in particular who was very angry at the inequity of the capitalist system and used more four-letter language than substantive language to express his view. There were also a few instances where I found used drug paraphernalia in the sand. Finally, there was once an extremely dirty and probably still drunk (judging by the empty alcohol container next him) homelss man passed out by the swings -- sorry son, no swings today.
I then thought I could remedy this problem by moving back to the Pac Heights or the Marina until I experienced similar (though less severe) instances at both Alta Plaza and at Moscone.
I love San Francisco, but wonder if it is fair to my son to expose him to potential harmful situations like this when I can move to an area that does not suffer from these same problems (and visit SF).
If we move it will be due to the homeless population. Maybe we'll stay, but if we don't you can add me to the list of families who moved because of the homeless population.
Posted by: Publius at May 1, 2008 1:32 PM
I am curious, what is your concern about homeless people? All they do, in my considerable experience living in the Bay Area, is act strange and smell bad. I have never been threatened by any of them.
And if you really want to stay in The City and not be bothered by their presence, you can live in District 4. I have never seen any homeless in St. Francis Wood or Forest Hill.
Posted by: NoeValleyJim at May 1, 2008 2:24 PM
@NoeValleyJim -- you sound like a very caring person (tm). A perfect human being! Way better than me.
One of my employees was assaulted by a homeless person about 3 months ago (east bay, she is okay).
This person looked very harmless and "only" stinky/strange, but suddenly lunged at her. This person turned out to be mentally ill (person was caught pretty easily by police). Which homeless people are mentally ill? How can I tell?
Should she have avoided the homeless person to begin with, and if so, would she have been a bigot?
Maybe that's what it's like in the bay area (I've lived here a long time too), and you can get assaulted by *anyone*, but I think it's kind of ridiculous to pretend there's not something wrong with living in the street "acting strange and smelling bad" as a general rule.
Posted by: dub dub at May 1, 2008 3:02 PM
I mostly have a "live and let live" attitude in general. I probably could not live in a big city otherwise. People who block the exits on BART kind of annoy me, but other than that, I am mostly fine here.
I am sorry to hear about your friend. Most homeless are probably mentally ill, but that doesn't really make them particularly dangerous. Tatto covered ex-cons make me a lot more nervous.
I am not trying to claim that there is nothing wrong with sleeping in the street and having bad hygiene, I just think it is mostly tangential to the problem of violent crime. Property crime, yes, violent crime, probably not. If you came up with solid statistics (not anecdotes) you could convince me otherwise.
Posted by: NoeValleyJim at May 1, 2008 3:32 PM
Editor - I believe Cooper or Spencer [can't remember which] was recently censored for calling Fluj "Deflujional". While I won't defend the opinions of either Cooper or Spencer, [and may agree with Fluj more often than I agree with them] perhaps there is a double standard when rhetoric from Fluj such as the following, is permitted -
"You're an idiot. Plainly. You are an ass and a troll and an idiot."
Sounds like a personal attack to me, doesn't it? As someone that has been censored before on this site, it only seems fair to be consistent.
[Editor’s Note: Cooper’s comment wasn’t edited for calling Fluj “Deflujional” (do a search, you’ll find plenty of references), it was edited in an attempt to keep the discussion on topic about the data/facts (Case-Shiller) rather than an individual (Fluj).]
Posted by: Recent ORH buyer at May 1, 2008 3:34 PM
Publius ("friend of the people") is right. I have heard other says they left the city because they don't want their kids finding needles in parks. The homeless issue is a public health issue, not just a social issue. They are dirty and spread disease.
Posted by: fred at May 1, 2008 3:45 PM
S.F. man shot to death while sitting in car in the Mission
Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer
Thursday, May 1, 2008
(05-01) 10:08 PDT SAN FRANCISCO --
A San Francisco man was shot and killed Wednesday night as he sat in a car in the Mission District, authorities said today.
Martel Peters, 21, was shot numerous times near the corner of 26th and Harrison streets shortly after 9:30 p.m., authorities said. He was pronounced dead at San Francisco General Hospital.
Posted by: Spencer at May 1, 2008 3:55 PM
@ORH buyer: I respectfully suggest fluj gets a pass for that -- he was responding with exasperated forensic brute force to a knee-jerk strawman accusation (well, in my opinion)! Like giving your 3 year old a lollipop at 9am, it's hard to understand out of context :)
...and "jackass [chromosome]" was hilarious ;)
I actually think his original comment was non-controversial, unless I missed some codewords...
Posted by: dub dub at May 1, 2008 4:00 PM
While I'm not against drugs, I don't use myself, but I feel that the open drug culture in the Bay Area has perpetuated an enormous criminal element. People come here from all over to partake in this relatively consequence-free drug-candy store that we call the Bay Area and don't realize where the stuff comes from, how it is handled, who is making the money etc. Just a thought.
Posted by: ps123 at May 1, 2008 4:23 PM
@ Recent ORH Buyer,
There was a context. I don't want to dredge it all back up. Read what was said. The editor seems to sometimes let us defend ourselves if we are maliciously slandered.
Posted by: fluj at May 1, 2008 4:24 PM
Jim - Good suggestions. I like St Francis Wood, although I'm not sure if I'm priced out of that area or not.
My concern with the homeless population is not for myself. Its more for my son and his mother. In addition, my concern isn't for the bulk of homeless people, but the few who have problems that might be dangerous (anger issues or drug problems). It is, however, difficult for me to identify whether a particular homeless person has these problems or not.
The unfortunate reality in SF is that homeless people frequent parks that would also be used by children if not for their presence. As anyone with a child of two knows, they pick up anything they haven't seen before. This is a problem when used drug paraphenalia is the never-before-seen object.
Also, your experience with never being threatened is not everyone's experience. Although I have never been threatened, the mother of my son has. Neither my son, nor his mother are able to defend themselves against an average homeless man. They are both very small.
I hope that clarifies my concern.
Posted by: Publius at May 1, 2008 4:26 PM
Growing up in the suburbs I came across used needles all the time. It's not just a city problem.
On the other hand, living in the Mission, I hope all this violent crime levels off soon. Too many young thugs around thse days...
Posted by: Drew at May 1, 2008 4:55 PM
flug - you mean libeled.
Jim - your point about tatoo covered ex-cons is well taken. However, I haven't seen them hanging around the parks in significant numbers like I see homeless people.
Posted by: Publius at May 1, 2008 4:58 PM
Sorry I mean't fluj not "flug." Serves me right.
Posted by: Publius at May 1, 2008 5:00 PM
If you're worried about homeless people... don't move to SF. At least, not the urban parts of the city. The homeless and criminals are like cockroaches in the urban centers-- they are everywhere and impossible to eliminate. And for every one you see outside, there are 50 more hiding in an SRO hotel nearby waiting to come out when its dark.
Posted by: Jimmy (Bitter Renter) at May 1, 2008 5:18 PM
Publius, enjoy your posts. Really illustrates how priorities change with parenthood, and why SF loses so many families. In my experience, friends left in two waves. The first wave decides they cannot afford an acceptable home. Those that remained bought or were willing to "rent forever" so that they could raise their kids in the city. Then they experienced SFUSD (and/or private schools) and ran screaming for the exits. Some remain and are content with their SFUSD or private school.
Homeless per se isn't what would send me packing. Witnessing the way the city accomodates the homeless, while leaving middle-class kids to fend for themselves, that might do it.
Posted by: pennybags at May 1, 2008 5:18 PM
Can anyone confirm an anecdote heard from a parent in the SFUSD for me? He said that the number of applications to the lottery have shot up dramatically in the last year or so - by many 100s percent. His theory is that the housing/credit crunch has slowed the rush to private school and/or the suburbs.
Any opinion/data/whatever on whether this is true? If so, crime isn't the only factor (obviously).
Posted by: PN at May 1, 2008 5:30 PM
fluj - LOL, you really crack me up. Sure thing, I'll "try to get control of (my) own language." Just to review, I called you a "bigot" (single instance) and then retracted my statement after seeing your explanation. Your score so far on this thread is as follows:
"idiot...ass...troll...an idiot...what the hell I meant...cookie cutter liberal ass...lack of reading comprehension skills...attack me...slam...You really suck...mean...lowest of internet trolls...Get a life...jackass chromozone (sic)...classless....nonsense...menace...Mean...troll X infinity...obtain an understanding...fool...out to lunch...stupid..."
Now here is a man who truly believes in irony. I'll admit it dude, you have me completely beat in terms of total trash talk and pure anger. I don't know if you just have Tourette Syndrome or you have some serious, clinical-level anger management issues, but as amusing as I find you online, I would not want to meet you in person! So long man.
Posted by: anon at May 1, 2008 7:10 PM
though you have made a distinction between your language and fluj's you have not addressed the reason for it.
you might be be goaded into the same response by someone else's inane comments as well...
Posted by: paco at May 1, 2008 7:42 PM
You called me a bigot apropos of nothing. That caused the, yes real, anger. Apparently you must call people bigots all the time, or at least on the internet. So it is no big deal to you. Well it is a big deal to me and I responded in kind at first.
Then you continued on talking about "my explanation" and stuff. That wasn't acceptable. The shoe is on the other foot, man. I had the right to lash back at you after you did that.
My last post was direct too. But devoid of name calling. You clearly are not in control of your language. Your language this evening indicates the same thing. You're acting like you're on a high horse after libelling me!
I shouldn't have gotten angry in the first place though. You didn't even use "bigot" correctly come to think of it. Yeah man. Stay away from me, and I'll do the same for you. (Unless despite what you say, you really are the same "mean anon" who chomps at the bit to harangue me for everything I say.)
Posted by: fluj at May 1, 2008 8:13 PM
C'mon fluj - let it go. Google "wrestling with pigs" if you need a reason. As it is, you're coming off as desperate for a 'win' and that's not what this is about. Or you sound persecuted.
Just go back to your roots, and forget the haters. Pretend that people are judging you based on your insight and your flame wars. You've got good info and a great perspective - keep to those.
Posted by: PN at May 1, 2008 8:20 PM
sigh, another blog jumps the shark......
Posted by: Adios at May 1, 2008 9:19 PM
My neighbor in Ashbury Heights was mugged at gun point last night at 10:00, half a block from her house. We're all very shaken.
Posted by: aghast at May 2, 2008 8:51 AM
PN: Parents for Public Schools is a volunteer group trying to pull SFUSD up from the depths. The increase of parents betting their childrens' future in the SFUSD Lotto can be at least partially attributed to their work. I don't know the YOY increase in parent-bettors; there are stats on the second link for last year.
On-topic, glad the poster from the holdup lived to tell the tale.
Posted by: pennybags at May 2, 2008 9:44 AM
Thanks pennybags. It is entirely possible that I'll fall into one of the two waves you describe. I hope not, but I imagine my priroites will continue to change with the age of my son.
Posted by: Publius at May 2, 2008 11:46 AM
Safeway in Diamond Heights just robbed. Add another one to the total.
Posted by: Scott Pierce at May 3, 2008 6:36 AM
This just arrived in my inbox from the "Safety Network."
"Update from DA's office: Have you been a victim of a robbery or crime? Suspects in the recent rash of street robberies are in custody. The SFPD is asking that victims of robberies, or those who have witnessed a robbery & can identify the suspects; please contact Inspector Danker at 415-553-9256.
The police & the DA need the cooperation of the community to keep dangerous criminals off the street. If you or someone you know is the victim of a crime please report it & give us the tools we need to make this a safer place to live, work, & grow.
Hopefully it's just a sign of spring? Hopefully the creeps will disappear when the June Gloom arrives....
Posted by: onthehill at May 9, 2008 2:22 PM