Theft in California: Annals of completely predictable logical consequences
How astounding – if you eliminate penalties for certain crimes, you will get more of those crimes. And there will be consequences to that, as well:
By a margin of 60 to 40 percent, the idiots of California basically legalized shoplifting. Proposition 47, which passed in 2014, no longer made it a felony to steal if the value of what you steal doesn’t exceed $950. It’s also no longer a felony to receive stolen property valued at less than $950. And so…
Instead of being punished as a felon, you are hit with a misdemeanor, and in many cases not even that.
As you can imagine, this has turned into a free-for-all for shoplifters and a stone cold nightmare for retailers.
The result?
According to this headline in the far-left San Francisco Chronicle… “Out of control’: Organized crime drives S.F. shoplifting, closing 17 Walgreens in five years.”…
“This has been out of control,” said Supervisor Ahsha Safaí, who held a hearing Thursday with retailers, police, the district attorney and probation departments. “People are scared to go into these stores — seniors, people with disabilities, children. It’s just happening brazenly. We can’t just as a city throw up our hands and say this is OK. We have to come up with solutions.”
How was Proposition 47 passed? In the usual leftist manner, by giving it a pretty name and dressing it up as helping matters and guaranteeing the opposite of what it would almost inevitably lead to:
The measure was also referred to by its supporters as the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act.
Let that sink in for a moment. Orwell knew exactly what he was talking about.
How did they sell the idea that this would lead to safer neighborhoods and schools? Here’s how [emphasis mine]:
The measure’s main effects were to convert many nonviolent offenses, such as drug and property offenses, from felonies to misdemeanors. These offenses include shoplifting, writing bad checks, and drug possession. The measure also required that money saved as a result of the measure would be spent on “school truancy and dropout prevention, victim services, mental health, and drug abuse treatment, and other programs designed to keep offenders out of prison and jail.”
It’s a bit parallel to the idea that police officers can be replaced by social workers to deal with volatile and potentially violent situations. The appeal is to the idea that prevention will work and we know how to do it, and that either/or is a better way to approach it than combining both penalties and attempts at prevention.
Well, it did reduce the prison population, apparently. No surprise there. And that saved the state money. Quality of life? Not so much – at least, not for the regular non-offending population who might want to go to a convenient Walgreens, or feel safe going into stores in general.
Predictions from the bill’s opponents:
Opponents of the measure include Mark A. Peterson, the District Attorney of Contra Costa County, who wrote before its passage that the measure “would make our neighborhoods and schools less safe”. It was also criticized by Nancy O’Malley, the District Attorney of Alameda County, who said it would “expose Californians to significant harm” and called it a “Trojan horse”.[
What happened:
Numerous media outlets have continued to report an increase in retail theft related to the passage of Prop 47. Large retailers Safeway, Target, Rite Aid and CVS pharmacies reported in 2016 that shoplifting increased from 15 percent to (in some cases) over 50 percent since voters approved Proposition 47. The Los Angeles Times reported in 2017 that the California Supreme Court ruled that a person convicted of a felony for stealing a car may have that conviction reduced to a misdemeanor if the vehicle was worth no more than $950, and in 2018 that researchers found Prop 47 contributed to a jump in car burglaries, shoplifting and other thefts. The San Francisco Chronicle reported in 2018 that Prop. 47 led to a rise in the larceny theft rate of about 9 percent compared to the 2014 rate.
By 2019, organized retail theft was on the rise; police and store owners attributed it to Prop 47. Fox News reported that post Prop 47 both shoplifters and fencers operated openly and with impunity, with both criminals and storekeepers aware that selective enforcement policies mean police largely ignore reports of shoplifting, or respond too slowly. President of the California Retailers Association Rachel Michelin stated that thieves will bring in calculators to ensure that they do not go over the $950 limit and that “one person will go into a store, fill up their backpack, come out, dump it out and go right back in and do it all over again.” She also reported that out-of-state crime rings use children as they are even less likely to be prosecuted, and that even when police make arrests, charges are dropped or downgraded by the district attorney.
Safe Neighborhoods and Schools, indeed.
The word “unexpectedly” was left out.
Why do I feel more and more as if I were living in The Gods of the Copybook Headings?
Nearly every major election cycle we Californians are presented with a dozen or so of these propositions. I begin the wearisome process of sorting through them by tentatively voting no on every one. Having gotten that out of the way, I proceed to try to convince myself that there might be something exceptionally good about one or more of them. Failing that, they remain a no vote.
______
The measure was also referred to by its supporters as the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act.
Absolutely true. Now things are much safer for criminals. Whether it is Hillary Clinton trying to get criminals the ability to vote from jail, or Terry McAuliffe trying to legalize voting for every ex-con and felon in the state of VA, these people are now part of the Democrat voter base. (Or potential voter base.)
I wonder if the ordinary citizen who voted for this prop gets what happened and why?
What are the ongoing propaganda tactics designed to keep people from putting two and two together. Aw, crap. You’re not supposed to do that in California;
Okay. Clears throat. What’s being done to keep the voters who voted for this from finding out the connection? Or does California rest easy knowing they have a sufficiency of morons?
Some time back I posed the question of whether an individual of even barely adequate cognitive capacity has a moral duty to think, to use his logical faculties, on matters of public interest?
Richard Aubrey:
I think there are probably plenty of social scientists who will study it and say that they can’t prove that the new law led to the lawlessness, and that will be enough for a lot of voters to continue along the same path. Even in California, though, there’s always the possibility that people will connect the dots about something like this, that affects them directly.
As TommyJay said, I simply vote No on the assumption that the State government would not put anything on the ballot that I found acceptable. California is awash in propositions and I believe that it is a mechanism for Legislators to dodge responsibility for ticking bombs
Eeyore:
I think the premise of the poem is that we’re ALWAYS living in The Gods of the Copybook Headings, whether we know it or not.
“For the People” always and forever….
(But which people?)
But where is Montage with the progressive perspective?
Do not intercede when your enemy (CA Democrats) is committing suicide. Let’s just watch as stores close and prices rise in the remainder to offset sanctioned theft. On top of Biden’s inflation! Even Democrats will be scrambling for safer economic quarters.
Neo says, “I think there are probably plenty of social scientists who will study it and say that they can’t prove that the new law led to the lawlessness”. Well, we know that these are not scientists, their disciplines are not objective or scientific, and they are all in it for the moola, being unable to achieve a useful and productive economic status.
“What’s being done to keep the voters who voted for this from finding out the connection?”
Rich people either order everything online or shop at stores too expensive to be affected by this.
Poor people…well, no one listens to or cares about poor people.
Middle class people are too busy to notice until it directly affects them, and then they likely don’t have the time or energy to do anything but shrug their shoulders and adjust to the “new normal.”
Mike
Now there is a bill in the state legislature to reduce robbery (defined as theft on a person) from a felony to a misdemeanor as long as the robber does not have a deadly weapon or cause “great bodily harm” EVEN if he causes fear or threat as long as he does not take more than $950. The Asian community is fighting this hard as they have been hit with numerous assaults and robberies. Under prop 47 drug possession (meth, heroin, fentanyl, etc.) was also reduced to misdemeanor, which made it harder to leverage those with addictions into treatment, possibly contributing to more homeless, theft, etc. But as you say, hard to prove direct causation.
lynnblc:
Certifiably insane in Sacramento. It’s a feature and systemic.
I just assume that when “social” is put in front of something it negates it. Social Science = Not Science.
When I was first in college in 1966 the only two, out and proud, Marxist professors I had were in my Social Science required classes. I figure it has gone downhill from there a lot.
Sacramento is creating the perfect Socialist society. The unacknowledged model is feudal. Lords and serfs. That horror show of the middle class is to be driven into serfdom or driven away.
Mike. Wrt anybody in your list: They’ll be told to blame…..racism or something, and they’ll do it.
“Sacramento is creating the perfect Socialist society. The unacknowledged model is feudal. Lords and serfs.”
Bingo.
And then the Lords will justify it.
Sacramento delivers. Equity demands it. How much gasoline can you steal to fuel your repatriated ride? Or kW in the future?
@ geoffb I just assume that when “social” is put in front of something it negates it. Social Science = Not Science.
Sheer Einsteinian brilliance, and highly quotable. Bravo!
@RA:
“Some time back I posed the question of whether an individual of even barely adequate cognitive capacity has a moral duty to think, to use his logical faculties, on matters of public interest?”
If the public must have a say (and given what horror show passes for technocratic elites at present, it must), then let it be a moral and dutiful public and ‘logic’ will muddle through.
Debasing the idea of private property is a step along the path to communism. Why go into business in a state where thugs and looters can steal you blind and the law does nothing? The very underpinning of a successful economy is the principle of private property protected by the courts. When that is no longer the bedrock of society, why exert yourself to acquire anything that someone can steal with no consequences? That is why communism always fails. People quit trying to better their lives because the thugs, layabouts, and elites take away all incentive. Eventually it al spirals down to minimal wealth creation and an equal sharing of misery. California isn’t there yet, but they are definitely steering that direction.
Try to imagine 17 Walgreens. Line them up in your mind’s eye. Good luck.
The best bit is the usual agitators will be along in 3, 2, 1 complaining about ‘Food Deserts’ in high crime areas.
“But where is Montage with the progressive perspective?” – om
I noticed a while ago that Montage had disappeared after the election, presumably having completed his/her/its rotation on the Neo beat. Just like Manju absconded coincidentally with Montage’s appearance.
As a reader of comments on other blogs from time to time, I will note that Neo draws a superior brand of Trolling.
It’s hard to put up any convincing progressive perspective on the on-going Democrat train wreck around the nation.
Neo does / did a good job schooling our erstwhile debaters, as they often had subtly could-be-convincing assertions, but now it’s difficult even to parody the Left.
https://notthebee.com/article/whos-this-guy-featured-in-this-prageru-video-why-its-our-very-own-seth-dillon
“Killing Comedy”
geoff b; Banned Lizard:
Social justice. (Not justice.)
Our town has two Walgreens. They’re about four miles apart, one on the main drag, the other half a mile east of it.
A long way to go to another. So if these get shut down, so CVS would, and others. Be a desert, for sure.
And on various holidays, one or another takes a turn for 24-hr service, while perhaps a dozen others are closed.
If you need an emergency script on New Years Eve or something…you may not get it at all. The one is too far away and the weather may forbid.
The lockdowns killed many small businesses and damaged the financial situation of many more. Shoplifting hits retail hard. Making robbery a minor crime will hit other sectors that don’t have anything much to shoplift, like restaurants and other small service places. This is aimed at what used to be known as the bourgeois, still a lefty boogieman, but will hurt the lower middle class too.
California is now the Fool’s Gold State.
It is hard to believe anyone will go into business in SFO any longer. Why bother if you’re going to be robbed/shoplifted into bankruptcy.
But I wonder why some of the existing businesses didn’t adopt the policy of adding $1000 to the price tag of everything and telling shoppers there will be a $1000 discount at the cash register for everyone paying for the item.
Yeah, I know, it would be outlawed pretty quickly, but in the meantime it might cause people to shoplift elsewhere.
“But I wonder why some of the existing businesses didn’t adopt the policy of adding $1000 to the price tag of everything and telling shoppers there will be a $1000 discount at the cash register for everyone paying for the item.”
Disparate Impact.
Consider yourself fortunate that I’m doing this pro bono. My hourly rate is something else.
Reparations from Sacramento.
Enough tut tutting.
Look on the bright side.This result can be seen as a good thing not a bad thing. It certainly is amusing news.
Only a few more adjustments are still needful in order to nake it perfect.
1. California should now pass a law making assault and battery a misdemeanor, with a maximum fine of 5 dollars for aggravated forms.
2. A wall should be erected around the state keeping all Californians in.
3. Video cameras and drones be deployed to broadcast the result in entertaining reality TV fashion as they tear themselves apart like rats in a barrel.
We might even be treated to the sight of an outright social war breaking out, with counties and cities fighting each other, and images of Gavin Newsome driving around in a personnel carrier while wearing a helmet and fending off molovov cocktails.
Funny stuff.
Come on. Does anyone really give a flying flick when people who voted for this cannot as a result get their meds?
Half the population of this country – the progressive class and their state dependent clients – is obstinately bringing hell down on thier heads either literally or figuratively. If you are unfortunate enough to live among them, all you can do is prepare and steel yourself for when they go straight into the Zombie Apocalypse or else make a slight detour into the Vyshinsky mode first.
There is no reasoning them out of it, because they are now beyond and beneath reason, dignity, and shame: reduced, morally speaking, to bags of appetite and unstable whims.
You are not going to be able to preach them out of it either: because their churches are just social justice parodies of the Gospel, presently inhabited by niche seeking sexual deviants “celebrating themselves celebrating themselves.” And the ” gurls” of both sexes and all genders in the pews, seem to like it that way just fine. They exist, even the cleverest, at the “Me so horny” level now where reason, even in its most elaborately manifested forms, is purely instrumental, the slave of disordered minds.
What’s to save then? The land will still be there after they are all dead.
So the law was passed by the voters because the Orwellian doublespeak in the law’s title fooled the voters.
Just another example of how easy it is to fool people.
I forget who said “you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time;” maybe it was Abe Lincoln.
Regardless, when and whomever said it, never envisioned people being fooled BIGTIME just ONCE, to vote for a national suicide, a la Venezuela.
All it takes is for the people to be fooled ONE TIME, really good and hard, and the result will be 100 years of oppression, gulags and firing squads.
Recall the comments of that FBI agent that penetrated the SDS back in the 60s; he recounted that the SDS leadership would – based upon what they actually said – if necessary, EXTERMINATE millions of American citizens if that’s what it took to maintain power.
These SDS radicals (and would be killers) were American born and raised and for the most part, students at top tier universities here in the USA.
No need to look at European or Russian history to find “leaders” who had no qualms about murdering their way to absolute power.
There are plenty of those folks right here in the USA.
DNW:
Forty percent of California voters didn’t vote for it. And of course not everyone in California can vote – many are children. And many people all around the country and the world have relatives there.
Those are just a few of the reasons we should care.
It’s cute that, after the events of 2020, some of you think that all elections here in CA haven’t been completely stolen since Arnold’s first term.
neo on May 21, 2021 at 2:01 pm said:
Well, it might be a reason why those who do, could gin up enough motivation to care.
And one can always go through the “If for ten righteous men, then for their sake” routine.
But you know, at some point you have to decide if you are going to be held indefinite hostage to the hostages; and, if not, then exactly what you can do or propose to do about it; or, whether to let nature, and limits you have drawn, take their courses.
Yes there are some millions of good intentioned people in California; and, some millions more that are largely unoffending if not much else.
But among the millions of juveniles and relatives you mention are the twerking boys, the angry pink haired transexual wannabes, and the defacto stalinist relatives [ described by some here] who would sigh and shrug as you are sent off to reeducation camp, or your house burned down, because you were a reactionary example of wrong think, dear mother, father, sister, brother, or whatnot.
So you know, the have mercy on them all “for the kids” argument only goes so far when deployed on behalf of a population already declaring itself god, and dedicated to feeding the belly of the Moloch within, with their own offspring.
Those propositions are not just doublespeak in the titles but are impossible to understand if you read them and are invariably phrased in such à way to fry your brain: “If you want this proposition to pass, vote ‘no.'”
Most people really have no idea what they are voting for.
But you miss the brilliance of the plan. If small businesses are gone, then the gubbmint will have to provide supplies and locations. “For the People”. An of course, the mayor and local aldermen will get their cut. What is there for a Progressive not to like? It is a Monopoly of grift with a police force. And don’t never say “socialism”. There are always big corporations and “The Wealthy” who will have to pay for it. Marx just missed the retail and grift oppoirtunities.
All the productive residents will admire the outcome, from Hayward.
baldilocks on May 21, 2021 at 3:09 pm said:
“It’s cute that, after the events of 2020, some of you think that all elections here in CA haven’t been completely stolen since Arnold’s first term.”
She’s got a good point there.