The title as written is clickbait, and false. Only the central district saw that increase, not “San Francisco,” and it was because there was a sharp drop from 2019 due to lockdown.
Citywide car burglaries are actually down even from the much lower 2020 numbers despite easing of restrictions. From the article:
“Citywide, however, the number of thefts from cars remains lower compared with last year, when shelter-in-place restrictions pushed car break-ins to record lows.”
Still, a 75% increase from 2019 is insane.... and SF was already the car break in capital of the us (when I lived there my neighbor's car got broken in a garage). And it is common to see shattered glass everywhere around SOMA and downtown.
I live in NYC, and just feel much more safer here. Yet, NYC is about to elect a former cop, to fight crime even more.
The mess in SF started with Gascon, and it doubled down with Boudin. You voted for it SF, own it. You vote stupid, you get stupid.
You're completely ignoring the main point if OP, which is that it is NOT up. The presented data is an outlier and likely not statistically significant.
Up 75% from 2019 in the central district is not a notable increase to you?
Pretty sure SF was near the top of the list for property crime in 2019 already too. I lived in SOMA for 4 years and saw break-ins every single night with no police response. Not an exaggeration when I say every night.
OP seems to be handwaving away this massive increase, unless he presents some data to show that May is indeed an outlier vs other months such as June
I said car break ins/vandalized smash and grab style, not overall car thefts (Oakland has higher stats on that one). And given that people are so used to it, the stats are probably misleading (my neighbor didn't even both to file a report)
This started with 'progressive' Gascon (who is in LA right now) and it is accelerating with Boudin to stupid high levels. Feels like you are in war torn country and not a first world city.
I always feel skeptical to leave anything of value for any period of time in my car in NYC. However nothing has ever happened.
I did have a relative that had his car broken into years ago and have his stock car stereo taken. I had to ask him if that was still a thing, he too was a bit surprised since it was an older model car.
His car was parked in an industrial area that made it an easy target though.
When I move here long ago I was told don't leave any visible change in the car because a "crack head" would break the car for it.
I live in Manhattan and it is extremely rare to see broken car windows/shattered glass in the streets. In SF, it is a common sight, even in nicer seemingly quiet areas (eg. inner Richmond).
It used to be that few junkies would do it around SOMA, or only around tourist heavy areas, but now it is organized by smash and grab gangs/groups, that cruise around even quiet neighborhoods to look for easy opportunities.
Some, more sophisticated ones, even use bluetooth seeking/scanning devices to detect when there is a laptop hidden in a car nearby.
Come on now, you're doing more cherry-picking than the article.
The title of the article is "Car break-ins are up as tourism returns to San Francisco", not the title selected for the HN submission. The money quote is actually from the 6th paragraph buried of the article, two full scrolls down:
> Last month, the Police Department’s Central Station saw a 753% increase in auto burglaries compared to the previous May. But that was the height of lockdown restrictions. They are up only 75% compared to 2019.
As you can see, all of the numbers are properly contextualized. The graph above the quote includes the 2019, 2020 and 2021, clearly demonstrating the dip in 2020.
The article is focusing on Central Station because the central premise of the article is that the increase is in tourist areas. There is nothing nefarious going here either. From the article;
> Statistics from San Francisco police show that break-ins have risen sharply in tourist areas, particularly the San Francisco Police Department’s Central District
Overall it is a pretty neutral reporting, upfront about their sampling biases, and no, not implying a general pattern or carrying out a conspiracy against SF.
Well, anecdotally it certainly feels up. I'm moving back to SF. A friend told me to sign up for the Cole Valley FB group. In the 5 weeks I was on it, 5 garages were broken into, several more attempts, 7 cars broken into, one was caught on camera. Even a film of someone stalking the garages (walking down the street, looking into each garage).
The garages, they generally try to drill a hole and then pull the cable on the door opener.
For cars, they slowly drive their own car down the street looking for cars with stuff inside, 2 people, driver and thief. When they see one, thief jumps out, smashes window, grabs stuff, jumps back in car, driver drives them away. It takes 3-6 seconds.
AFAIK Cole Valley has never been known for car break-ins or garage break-ins. Also AFAIK the garage break-in are happening all over and are new. Further, AFAIK this isn't homeless crack-heads looking for a small fix. It's a few small groups committing the same crimes over and over.
I wish I knew the police were doing something. Assuming I'm right at it is just a few groups of people then it shouldn't take more then a few honeypots to effectively stop most of it.
If I could find a way to get permission from the city I'm betting the residents of certain neighborhoods would be willing to pay for their own sting operations to try to take their neighborhoods back.
This happened to my Mom and it was terrible. Her wedding ring was stolen and her cats ashes. It was a traumatic experience. Please consider her Gofund me if you can help. https://www.gofundme.com/f/z2h9c4-help-my-sister
I do think that racist street enforcement by the cops was effective at keeping down certain classes of crime. With BLM, the police are backing off of that.
I absolutely think that modern policing can curb petty crime without racist brutality. I think drones and other surveillance based policing can work with proper constitutional powers/design and delegation to proper public institutions with legal charters.
If it can't be done in California, well, things don't look good.
I heard a story about people putting small explosives charges in bikes and then leaving them out to be stolen, so that they explode when disassembled. It's a shame that setting traps like this is illegal, it did temporarily lower bike thefts in the area.
I saw one YouTuber build a bike that was structurally unsound and would fall apart just after the thief started riding it causing them to hit the ground.
The new Bluetooth tracker tags from apple and Samsung might also help.
SF has sadly experienced a pretty meteoric rise in crime but one of the problems is the DA's office is underreporting so the actual number is much higher.
A big part of the rise is California's Prop47, it passed and basically made any crime that cost less than $950 impossible to prosecute. Then SF's DA has also refused to prosecute a variety of other crimes that were previously prosecuted leading to SF becoming a hotspot. The joke is that "crime is legal in SF", and sadly thats basically true.
I'm an SF native and I've never seen it this bad, its really awful.
> First, it reclassified certain theft and drug possession offenses from felonies to misdemeanors. Second, it authorizes defendants currently serving sentences for felony offenses that would have qualified as misdemeanors under the proposition to petition courts for resentencing under the new misdemeanor provisions. Third, it authorizes defendants who have completed their sentences for felony convictions that would have qualified as misdemeanors under the proposition to apply to reclassify those convictions to misdemeanors.
What does any of that have to do with keeping schools or neighborhoods safe? It seems what it does is keep criminals safe. Keyword searching that bill for "school" or "neighborhood" yields 0 results, except the title of the bill.
> What does any of that have to do with keeping schools or neighborhoods safe?
The FAQ linked to on the page you linked to states:
> The stated purpose of the proposition is to “ensure that prison spending is focused on violent and serious offenses, to maximize alternatives for non-serious, nonviolent crime, and to invest the savings generated from [the proposition] into prevention and support programs in K-12 schools, victim services, and mental health and drug treatment” and to ensure “that sentences for people convicted of dangerous crimes like rape, murder, and child molestation are not changed.” The proposition states that it “shall be liberally construed to effectuate its purposes.”
I have no idea if it has done any of those things. I'd expect it would be pretty hard to determine if it has actually led to any savings, let alone do so with enough specificity to invest them in school programs etc.
I have seen the videos of groups (or individuals) just walking out of stores with bags of unpaid merchandise. That’s just insane to me. I think out of all the videos I have seen, police arrested or caught 1 individual. Whether or not that person was taken to the station is unknown as the video just stops there.
I think SF is an example of what not to do when it comes to decriminalizing certain aspects. Stealing at all levels should be prosecuted. This discourages others from doing the same. People from all sides should agree with this.
A quote from the article: “It was pretty shocking,” she said, “because I don’t think of high crime in San Francisco, especially in a touristy area.”
Every touristy part of SF -- Twin Peeks, Lands End, Hawk Hill, and on and on -- has signs warning that it's a "High Crime Area." These signs have existed forever. You'd have to be pretty ignorant of your surroundings to not know this fact.
There's been a concerted effort to put signs up in the last 12 months.
There've been quite a few more robberies/shootings at Twin Peaks in the last 24 months, I live nearby and visit it regularly. A few months ago I found used needles, that was a first for me up there and I've been regularly biking to the top there for at least 10 years.
One of the few benefits of an authoritarian regime… usually they’re great at reducing crime.
Of course it’s not the only way. While replicated almost no where else, Japan avoids crime while not being authoritarian. Group think becomes cultural identity, which has its own issues, but crime isn’t one of them.
That's weird, when I was in SF a lot 13 years ago because of my sister studying at SFSU, she was constantly warning not to be flashy or have my wallet visible or even manipulate it in my pocket in a way that could be seen by others. No one's ever given me warnings like that elsewhere (though they are good advice) and I've been in cities that are dramatically and visually worse
You shouldn't need those signs. Instead of solving the crime problem the city is basically saying "don't use this area so we don't have to police it"
Imagine a sign that said "don't go to this beach without full body armor" when what people want is to swim in bathing suits.
There are plenty of places in the world where it's not taken for granted that your car will be broken into if anything is showing and that you'll have stuff stolen or pickpocketed if you aren't eternally vigilant.
You shouldn't have to be. Instead the police should enforce the law so that law abiding citizens can use the area without having to worry about people breaking the law.
I lived in SF for 15 years. The worst area was near the tenderloin. The strangest day was street sweeping day. All the cars would be moved by 7am so you had a clear view down bush street. You could look down bush street and see 3-4 piles of glass on the ground from the previous night. Without street sweeping you would see just a few people crying by their hole in the window.
Smash and grabs are truly the perfect crime in SF. The odds of finding a laptop in the trunk are quite high due to the techies. I, like most residents, cannot hear a car alarm anymore - at this point they help me sleep. It is impossible to get caught - even if you were - the odds of the DA prosecuting you are low. In someways I agree: what is the point of processing a person with a misdemeanor and letting them out in 2 hours without followup.
Ironically, without smash and grabs things would be much worse. I would fear criminals would start hitting apartments. My apartment neighbor was violently assaulted and had her apartment ransacked (for a LAPTOP!). Every office I worked in SF was robbed at least once - no one was ever caught despite clear video. Thankfully, the DA does care about home invasions [I had detective interviews]. So my unpopular opinion is: if they are going to let the city decay into a crime ridden dystopia - leave smash and grabs alone. Let them break into cars. Insurance will cover the window - you can buy a new macbook pro. The next step of home invasions is much more terrifying. AND! With each smash and grab the victim will start voting correctly.
Seattle is also seeing a huge rise in catalytic converter thefts, which they can sell for $1000. Organized criminals are quick to slip under a car (SUV/trucks preferred because of more ground clearance) and saw off the converter with a battery powered saw.
Just another reason why I'm reluctant to go downtown anymore.
P.S. when I moved to Seattle 40 years ago, the police were aggressive in going after shoplifters, and things were very different downtown.
The new DA absolutely does not care about home invasions.
There was a fairly spectacular case last year when a home invader was shot by police (because he attacked the police with a deadly weapon) and the DA let him skate.
Burglaries are also on the rise. The problem with your "voting correctly" assertion is that the people who're tired of things and have means just leave SF. This means the remainder of people are fine with it, or the newbies think the problem is something else.
and a few months back, Nordstrom had their store windows smashed out, windows that cost $50,000 each.
What we'll see is a slow evolution of street level shops into fortresses with smaller windows with bars over them. Perhaps also locked doors with a gatekeeper who decides who gets in and who doesn't.
> Perhaps also locked doors with a gatekeeper who decides who gets in and who doesn't.
That is risky from a legal standpoint due to various discrimination laws, but the less risky way is to relocate out to a suburban area where cars are required and transportation costs filter the possible customers to skew towards wealthier people.
Or the stores can become membership only, or just shut them down and go online.
I have a friend who has a store that was robbed repeatedly. He installed a vestibule like an airlock with two doors. On the wall were pictures of previous thieves, and a very obvious camera system. All customers coming in were remotely vetted. Cause trouble in the store, and your picture goes on the Wall Of Shame.
He said it was very effective in reducing bad behavior.
Back in the 70's when I'd frequent auto salvage yards, behind the front desk was a Wall of Shame covered in bad checks. You only got to try to pass a bad check once.
I also wouldn't be surprised to see shopowners starting to share data about who the thieves are, and the thieves will find themselves denylisted.
>I have a friend who has a store that was robbed repeatedly. He installed a vestibule like an airlock with two doors. On the wall were pictures of previous thieves, and a very obvious camera system. All customers coming in were remotely vetted. Cause trouble in the store, and your picture goes on the Wall Of Shame.
This is why stores in the ghetto have such systems for dealing with customers. It's not because their owners and employees like dealing with people through a tiny bank teller-like hole. It's from painful experience.
(Same goes for why certain items are locked up, only retrievable by an employee, in drugstore chains' outlets in certain locations but not elsewhere.)
You can tell the high crime neighborhoods in the Seattle area by the banks. High crime areas place the tellers behind bulletproof glass with an interlock tray. Low crime areas, the tellers are just behind a counter.
This neighborhood-by-neighborhood variation even happens for branches of the same bank.
Here lies buried: The lede.
reply