San Francisco Passes the CAREN Act

[Milchshake]

More cities should pass a similar act to protect their vulnerable citizens from entitled and demanding Karens.

San Francisco's Board of Supervisors unanimously passed the Caution Against Racial and Exploitative Non-Emergencies (CAREN) Act, a new law that makes it illegal for someone to call 911 with a false, racist complaint. "911 calls, are not customer service for people’s racism," Shamann Walton, a member of the board, Tweeted.

SAN FRANCISCO -- San Francisco supervisors unanimously voted on Tuesday to pass the Caution Against Racially and Exploitative Non-Emergencies (CAREN) Act that makes racially-motivated phone calls to 911 illegal.

It was first introduced in July after several high-profile incidents including a couple calling the police on a man writing "Black Lives Matter" in chalk in front of his own home in the Pacific Heights neighborhood.

[XDurionX]

I see what they did there.

[Kaleredar]

How is it that the right-wing shitbirds that live on 4chan all day are getting out-meme’d by democratic legislators?

[Edge-]

How is it that the right-wing shitbirds that live on 4chan all day are getting out-meme’d by democratic legislators?

Bay Area politicians are dank, yo. You ever seen the mayor of Oakland's ride?



Seriously - https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...olkswagen-bug/

[Kheirn]

How is it that the right-wing shitbirds that live on 4chan all day are getting out-meme’d by democratic legislators?

Democratic legislators have a fierce meme game, man.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVFEFE_Act

[TEHPALLYTANK]

False, racist complaint? There are legitimate racist complaints?

Where are you reading those words? Because that isn't what was in the statement. Please cite your sources.

[Milchshake]

Bay Area politicians are dank, yo. You ever seen the mayor of Oakland's ride?



Seriously - https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...olkswagen-bug/

That's like every August, as both cities get ready to empty out for Burning Man.

[PC2]

This is pointless because 99.9999% of the calls are about people reporting shady activity and not reporting them on the basis of race. The caller would have to be very explicitly race motivated before you could actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the call was based on race and not on shady behavior.

This is largely a symbolic and "feel good" act that won't fly in an actual court case.

[Edge-]

The caller would have to be very explicitly race motivated before you could actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the call was based on race and not on shady behavior.

This is largely a symbolic and "feel good" act that won't fly in an actual court case.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/06/n...rt-charge.html

[Monster Hunter]

Didn't know this wasn't already a thing.

Bullshit calls to 999 in the UK have been illegal for decades.

[Xeones]

False, racist complaint? There are legitimate racist complaints?

I suppose english isn't your first language? Because I see you got the comma in your comment but you seem to be overlooking it, basically here it separates the statement instead of "false racist complaints" the comma basically makes it "false complaint that is also racist." Another way you could see it is the comma can mean "and" basically "false and racist complaints" you make a statement like "this, that, and also this" you don't say "this and that and also this"

- - - Updated - - -

Didn't know this wasn't already a thing.

Bullshit calls to 999 in the UK have been illegal for decades.

They are here too, but I think you generally have to become known for making multiple frivolous calls before it amounts to anything this seems to make that unnecessary. The goal is likely to keep people from being afraid to call in an emergency, but there has been enough of these malicious calls trying to weaponize emergency response to make them feel this is a necessary step.

[PC2]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/06/n...rt-charge.html

Exactly that's proving my point. That's based on a 'false report' claim and it's not specifically a race-based legal charge like with a CAREN violation. The CAREN act goes above and beyond a general false report claim because the caller could also have to pay the victim $1,000. It's that extra part which i'm saying won't fly in court cases unless the person is very explicit in saying that the call is based on race and not the shady behavior in question.

[Edge-]

Exactly that's proving my point. That's based on a 'false report' claim and it's not specifically a race-based legal charge like with a CAREN violation. The CAREN act goes above and beyond a general false report claim because the caller could also have to pay the victim $1,000. It's that extra part which i'm saying won't fly in court cases unless the person is very explicit in saying that the call is based on race and not the shady behavior in question.

Not at all. As the link showed, the video recorded by the victim proved that the call being made was with racist intent. This is an added penalty for being a racist shit, something which courts have upheld (see: hate crime charges).

[jazen]

I thought it was spelled Karen.

[Xeones]

It's my third language. We don't really do commas in my first language.

I figured, I've heard there are aspects of english that can be annoying.

[PC2]

Not at all. As the link showed, the video recorded by the victim proved that the call being made was with racist intent.

That's your interpretation of the person's intent. You think they were just trying to be racist as opposed to being legitimately scared by the individual's shady behavior.

In the court of law real proof must be 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. That person was charged but hasn't been convicted.

This is an added penalty for being a racist shit,

I support that but what i'm saying is that CAREN act is mostly just a symbolic gesture because it's incredibly hard to prove that a 911 call about a person of a certain race was made on the basis of race and not based on the shady behavior. Ultimately every call is about a person and every person has a race and it's standard protocol to include that description in a report.

something which courts have upheld (see: hate crime charges).

Exactly, hate crime is already a crime which is why this doesn't add anything significantly new that changes anything.

[Edge-]

That's your interpretation of the person's intent. You think they were just trying to be racist as opposed to being legitimately scared by the individuals shady behavior.

Oh, please do tell me how sitting at a park bench watching birds is shady behavior. Unless you're going to lean into racism, at which point please don't.

In the court of law real proof must be 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. That person was charged but hasn't been convicted.

She's not convicted, but is expected to plead guilty to avoid jail time and make a deal for community service.

I support that but what i'm saying is that CAREN act is mostly just a symbolic gesture because it's incredibly hard to prove that a 911 call about a person of a certain race was made on the basis of race and not based on the the shady behavior. Ultimately every call is about a person and every person has a race and it's standard protocol to include that description in a report.

That it's difficult to prove isn't reason to make it law. Hate crimes, which you support, are incredibly difficult to prove and it's one reason why they're so rarely used. But they still have a valuable purpose in our legal system.

Exactly, hate crime is already a crime which is why this doesn't actually add anything new that changes anything.

Except these calls are not hate crimes, and could not be prosecuted as hate crimes. This is a lesser, tangentially related law.

[cubby]

I see what they did there.

Fucking awesome is what it is.

- - - Updated - - -

False, racist complaint? There are legitimate racist complaints?

Baby steps, Sweden, baby steps. Remember, half our country still thinks flying the Confederate Flag is a way to honor history.

- - - Updated - - -

This is pointless because 99.9999% of the calls are about people reporting shady activity and not reporting them on the basis of race. The caller would have to be very explicitly race motivated before you could actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the call was based on race and not on shady behavior.

This is largely a symbolic and "feel good" act that won't fly in an actual court case.

You're probably right, depending on the details, but it will make the racist fucks have to defend themselves now, putting the onus on them to explain their actions or face fines and jail time.

[PC2]

She's not convicted, but is expected to plead guilty to avoid jail time and make a deal for community service.

Okay, my point was that you should not use a legal charge to imply evidence of guilt. Defendants are innocent until proven guilty by the relevant people who have fully studied the situation.

That it's difficult to prove isn't reason to make it law. Hate crimes, which you support, are incredibly difficult to prove and it's one reason why they're so rarely used. But they still have a valuable purpose in our legal system.

Except these calls are not hate crimes, and could not be prosecuted as hate crimes. This is a lesser, tangentially related law.

That was my only point in the first place so it seems we do not have a disagreement.

[AeneasBK]

It's that extra part which i'm saying won't fly in court cases unless the person is very explicit in saying that the call is based on race and not the shady behavior in question.

Unless you're reporting them for something that isn't actually shady like ... renting an Air BnB, walking your dog, jogging, bird watching... the list goes on.