Page 1 of 3
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #1

    New San Francisco Initiative to Pay Individuals Not to Shoot Others

    https://www.newsweek.com/new-san-fra...others-1624676

    Apparently it is not enough that we have laws telling people not to shoot each other, now San Francisco wants to pay gang members not to shoot each other.

    A new program in San Fransisco will pay people at high risk of shooting someone not to pull the trigger to help alleviate rising gun violence in the city.

    The Dream Keeper Fellowship is set to launch in October and pay 10 individuals $300 each month to not be involved in shootings, Sheryl Davis, executive director of the Human Rights Commission, told Newsweek in an interview Tuesday.
    Participants will be paired with life coaches from the city's Street Violence Intervention Program and will be considered "community ambassadors" who work to prevent violence. They will work on their professional, personal, and community development and will be thought of as "partners" in engaging community members and decreasing violence.

    "As you become better, your community benefits from that," she said.

    The program aims to get to the "root causes" of violence, "which in so many ways are economic," according to Davis.

    "We need to be getting to the root causes of why some neighborhoods are safer than others," Davis said.
    So the title of the article is misleading....they are paying people to become "community ambassadors" which seems like a San Francisco way of saying hall monitors. You can even earn an extra 200 for improving your community. The program is based on a similar program in neighboring Richmond, California, which helped reduce gun homicide in the city by 55 percent, according to a 2019 study by the American Journal of Public Health. I do find it hard to believe that a city that has an app to avoid homeless people shitting on the street can curb gun violence by giving gang members $300.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    The program is based on a similar program in neighboring Richmond, California, which helped reduce gun homicide in the city by 55 percent, according to a 2019 study by the American Journal of Public Health.
    So they're taking a program that's proven to have public benefits elsewhere and testing it out? That sounds great, if they can get violent crime down and spend less to do so by stopping it proactively, that sounds like a win/win for me.

    Good job, San Francisco!

  3. #3
    The Insane draynay's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    18,798
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    So the title of the article is misleading....
    Didn't stop you from re-using it.
    /s

  4. #4
    .... I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop where this is somehow a bad thing.

  5. #5
    Herald of the Titans D Luniz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    The Coastal Plaguelands
    Posts
    2,934
    no different than paying people to get vaccinated.

    Some people wont even act like they care for others without some tangible incentive.

    Might need to try that paying people to be civil to see if it can curb all the road rage shootings here in Texas.
    Especially with the flood of guns that will be out there now.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by uuuhname View Post
    .... I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop where this is somehow a bad thing.
    its just bad because it is San Fran, the commiest of Commie California.
    "Law and Order", lots of places have had that, Russia, North Korea, Saddam's Iraq.
    Laws can be made to enforce order of cruelty and brutality.
    Equality and Justice, that is how you have peace and a society that benefits all.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    So they're taking a program that's proven to have public benefits elsewhere and testing it out? That sounds great, if they can get violent crime down and spend less to do so by stopping it proactively, that sounds like a win/win for me.

    Good job, San Francisco!
    It is even more admirable when you consider the fact that San Francisco is not listed in the top US 100 cities by total homicides, homicides per capita or increase in homicide rate. In fact the homicide rate in San Francisco is ridiculously low for the population size. Property crime, especially smash and grab, is a different story. No proper residence of San Francisco parks their car on the street. Definitely not overnight. However, this was true even back in the 80s.

    Murder map: Deadliest U.S. cities

    No San Francisco. Actually, holy bejezus, I saw cities on that list with a fraction of the population of San Francisco and 10 times the homicide number. St. Louis (#1), with population is 300k vs. San Francisco 883k, has a homicide rate of 64.54 per 100,000 residents. San Francisco total homicide for 2021 so far is 21. That's 2.3 per 100,000 residents.
    Last edited by Rasulis; 2021-09-01 at 10:56 PM.

  7. #7
    I am Murloc! Noxx79's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Kansas. Yes, THAT Kansas.
    Posts
    5,474
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    https://www.newsweek.com/new-san-fra...others-1624676

    Apparently it is not enough that we have laws telling people not to shoot each other, now San Francisco wants to pay gang members not to shoot each other.





    So the title of the article is misleading....they are paying people to become "community ambassadors" which seems like a San Francisco way of saying hall monitors. You can even earn an extra 200 for improving your community. The program is based on a similar program in neighboring Richmond, California, which helped reduce gun homicide in the city by 55 percent, according to a 2019 study by the American Journal of Public Health. I do find it hard to believe that a city that has an app to avoid homeless people shitting on the street can curb gun violence by giving gang members $300.
    Better use of money than to deputize the entire country to be Texas abortion snitches.

  8. #8
    Soon to be heard, a gang member saying "I can't come tonight to help, my baby momma really needs the cash right now."
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Soon to be heard, a gang member saying "I can't come tonight to help, my baby momma really needs the cash right now."
    Let's expand it so hopefully we'll get a few conservatives choosing not to shoot up the black church because their socialist hand out..... i mean freedom money is more important.
    “Logic: The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance with the limitations and incapacities of the human misunderstanding.”
    "Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others."
    Ambrose Bierce
    The Bird of Hermes Is My Name, Eating My Wings To Make Me Tame.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Soon to be heard, a gang member saying "I can't come tonight to help, my baby momma really needs the cash right now."
    I understand that the post is meant as a joke. However, there is a kernel of truth in it. In San Francisco, just like any big cities, gang activities account for a large percentage of the homicides. According to SFPD, 12 gangs in San Francisco is responsible for the majority of homicides within the city limit.

    The good thing is that unlike Los Angeles, Chicago and New York where you have gangs with memberships in the hundreds, and even thousands, San Francisco gangs are small (20 - 25). Gentrification has been largely responsible for this by decimating most of the low-income areas in San Francisco. The Hispanic gangs used to rule Mission. Now Mission is full of high-rise luxury apartments and condominiums. Most of the so called “Hoods” are now gone. Fillmore has the last few remaining “Hoods” in San Francisco. It won’t last long.

    Also, Tenderloin and Bayview account for two-third of San Francisco homicides in 2021. Large swath of San Francisco goes for years without seeing a single homicide. Taraval Precinct, which covers Districts 4, 5, 7 & 11 (we live in Sunset which is the very western tip of District 5) saw 1 homicide in 2020 and 0 in 2021.

    Due to the relatively low gang membership in San Francisco, the program actually has a very good chance of working. It it works, it could easily decrease homicides in San Francisco by 50%.

    Last edited by Rasulis; 2021-09-02 at 05:06 PM.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Soon to be heard, a gang member saying "I can't come tonight to help, my baby momma really needs the cash right now."
    Why so dismissive of a program that seems effective at reducing crime while also being cheaper to proactively stop crime than to reactively deal with it?

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Why so dismissive of a program that seems effective at reducing crime while also being cheaper to proactively stop crime than to reactively deal with it?
    because making racist jokes is all he has to add to this conversation.

  13. #13
    Titan Lenonis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    14,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasulis View Post
    I'd like to take this opportunity to point out to our resident group of disingenuous conservatives (oops redundant) where Chicago is on that list.

    Not in the top 10.

    Not even in the top 20.

    Y'all can shut up now thanks.
    Forum badass alert:
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochana Violence View Post
    It's called resistance / rebellion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rochana Violence View Post
    Also, one day the tables might turn.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Why so dismissive of a program that seems effective at reducing crime while also being cheaper to proactively stop crime than to reactively deal with it?
    The city has insane problems even stopping public defecation and urination. Their past attempts at improving the justice system led directly to individuals carrying hundreds of dollars worth of medicine and beauty products out of CVS and Walgreens in the area. I have issues with their competence at a most basic level, and the "seems effective" presumes they're capable of running any program aside from water and electricity competently.

    Quote Originally Posted by shimerra View Post
    Let's expand it so hopefully we'll get a few conservatives choosing not to shoot up the black church because their socialist hand out..... i mean freedom money is more important.
    Those darn conservatives and their penchant for shooting up black churches. You're like embodying the sentiment behind "every aid program is socialism in disguise" by employing the ideological reverse.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    The city has insane problems even stopping public defecation and urination.
    Which has what to do with a program designed to reduce violent crime?

    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Their past attempts at improving the justice system led directly to individuals carrying hundreds of dollars worth of medicine and beauty products out of CVS and Walgreens in the area.
    Not really, that wasn't a "SF policy" thing, that has been happening across the Bay Area and its sources are very different.

    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    I have issues with their competence at a most basic level, and the "seems effective" presumes they're capable of running any program aside from water and electricity competently.
    I'd say their efforts battling covid have been pretty darned stellar. But hey, I guess if they can't control the poop on the streets from their ever-growing homeless population which is partially the result of other states/cities illegally sending their homeless/mentally ill patients they discharge from state facilities to SF it wouldn't be as much of an issue.

    But that's like, complicated and requires actually being aware of how the issue got to the state it's in now and makes it hard to just score internet points dunking on SF because "haha the city has poop"

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Which has what to do with a program designed to reduce violent crime?
    You don’t push a student to solve quadratics if they can barely add. Their programs, as exist, are chronically mismanaged and their leadership is clueless and rudderless. Kinda important to context.

    Not really, that wasn't a "SF policy" thing, that has been happening across the Bay Area and its sources are very different.
    The SF area is a sterling example of the crime problem, though sure, maybe the greater Bay Area also struggles. DA Chesa Boudin is SF. Non-prosecution of nonviolent crime and its attendant effects is SF.

    I'd say their efforts battling covid have been pretty darned stellar. But hey, I guess if they can't control the poop on the streets from their ever-growing homeless population which is partially the result of other states/cities illegally sending their homeless/mentally ill patients they discharge from state facilities to SF it wouldn't be as much of an issue.

    But that's like, complicated and requires actually being aware of how the issue got to the state it's in now and makes it hard to just score internet points dunking on SF because "haha the city has poop"
    Blaming everybody but the responsible parties is a laughable proposition. SF stan all you want. They’ve failed to control more immediate problems, however much hay you want to throw at all the reasons it was so so tough for them, so I expect throwing money at a violent crime problem will end in the same outcome.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Blaming everybody but the responsible parties is a laughable proposition.
    Too late to deal with the rest of it but like, this shit happened. Like, fuckin states got caught doing this shit. It's not blaming them for the problem, it's blaming them for exacerbating and complicating the problem. And it's a pretty monstrously inhumane thing to do, to boot.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...0S02M020151006

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Too late to deal with the rest of it but like, this shit happened. Like, fuckin states got caught doing this shit. It's not blaming them for the problem, it's blaming them for exacerbating and complicating the problem. And it's a pretty monstrously inhumane thing to do, to boot.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...0S02M020151006
    I see them pressing the burden on other entities that might be party to it, and that's a HUGE MIGHT BE, and abdicating their leadership responsibility. It's similar to a student on a deadline bemoaning his headache or tiredness in completing the assignment. No, your job is to do the work, not lecture others as to why there were extra burdens to the completion that were totally out of your control. Proper dischargement of responsibility would mean cleanup, housing, prevention of petty theft etc, perhaps not fully equaling the size of the problem, but showing major addressing of the problem.

    I've seen much effort given to all the extra exacerbations and complications, as you put it, and very little reflection on the dearth of evidence they even set about tackling the problems or putting in their own effort. If you hypothesize a government that says, "Fuck the community, nothing we can do" and compare it with "We're trying our best, but we can't fully supercede all these external hurdles," I'd say San Francisco approximates the former and shows no real progress towards the latter.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    https://www.newsweek.com/new-san-fra...others-1624676

    Apparently it is not enough that we have laws telling people not to shoot each other, now San Francisco wants to pay gang members not to shoot each other.





    So the title of the article is misleading....they are paying people to become "community ambassadors" which seems like a San Francisco way of saying hall monitors. You can even earn an extra 200 for improving your community. The program is based on a similar program in neighboring Richmond, California, which helped reduce gun homicide in the city by 55 percent, according to a 2019 study by the American Journal of Public Health. I do find it hard to believe that a city that has an app to avoid homeless people shitting on the street can curb gun violence by giving gang members $300.
    Yeah, I'm skeptical, too. Most cops don't join the police for the salary and benefits.
    Banned from Twitter by Elon, so now I'm your problem.
    Quote Originally Posted by Brexitexit View Post
    I am the total opposite of a cuck.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Lenonis View Post
    Y'all can shut up now thanks.
    Speaking of being disingenuous, where is Chicago historically on that list?
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •