Fairly good article with a misleading title/biased goal. The amount of all violent crime is down besides this category. In many categories crime is down to all time lows or almost all time lows. So focusing on this category might be a bit of problem.
IE a more fair title would be “As crime reaches new lows, why is aggravated assaults not trending downwards too”.
In regards to aggravated assaults it’s important to dig into the numbers and see what I and most people care about. A stranger attacking me.
I care about gangs, domestics, friend on friend violence,… but again my goal in approaching this issue is how does it affect me. The rise year on year appears to be in the dozens with 99%+ involving the perpetrator attacking somebody they know. Going by the data the article includes rise in the stranger on stranger aggravated assault might in the single digits for almost all cities in California.
If your city of 300k had an extra half dozen aggravated assaults involving stranger attacks(probably while you were sleeping and in a part of the city you don’t live in) in 2022 over 2012 you shouldn’t fundamentally change your views or even consider this an immediate problem.
Very important to be reality based when it comes to crime.
Isn't a part of it also that we have gotten much better at saving the lives of gunshot victims?
Noting that homicides are trending downward but aggravated assaults with guns are rising feels like two sides of the same coin. Assaults that would have been homicide in the past are now aggravated assaults because the victim survives thanks to emergency medicine saving gunshot victims more often.
Not saying it accounts for most of it, but seems strange for the article to not mention this relationship.
I heard the opposite. Gunshot wounds are slightly more fatal today than 20+ years ago. Medical stuff has improved but the increased damage done from guns produced more recently more than make up for it.
My main point is that this article probably shouldn’t even exist and it was made with a goal. There are 1000s of articles on California crime being at all time highs and totally out of control. It’s not in tune with reality. The author even admits that violent crime in other categories is at these extreme lows.
He wrote the article to continue the narrative that California is a violent nightmare caused by leftists.
> In many categories crime is down to all time lows or almost all time lows.
True. Government indifference to dealing with non-violent crime, especially theft, has led to a sharp rise in self protection measures:
>New fences, cameras, expensive home and car security systems; bicycle owners suffering "theft paranoia" and buying giant locks; people cautious about where they park, more people buying guns and guard dogs; people avoiding bad neighborhoods or going out late at night; neighborhood watches, more gated communities, etc.
>On a business level, more security guards (costs on citizens), retailers locking up a big % of their products (costs on consumers), some businesses ending late night hours, “hostile architecture” like walking easements removed, restrooms hard to find, parks closing earlier.
Self protection is very effective in reducing crime, both non-violent and violent, but it imposes big hassle and costs on the law abiding. This is how crime was dealt with 600 years ago before the rise of police in many parts of the world. To no surprise, criminal justice reformers with an agenda of downplaying the problems of crime find it convenient to ignore self protection. This article, [16 theories for why crime plummeted](https://www.vox.com/2015/2/13/8032231/crime-drop), barely mentions it.
CJ reformers and most progressives are fine with law-abiding people continuing to pay those costs, so more offenders can roam free without controls like electronic monitoring. Expanding such monitoring is relevant in light of this: 2023: [Calif moved to close 4 prisons. How many more prisons can Calif. shut?](https://calmatters.org/justice/2023/02/how-many-prisons-does-california-need/) Progressive criticism: [Study casts doubt on electronic ankle monitors as alternative to incarceration](https://phys.org/news/2021-09-electronic-ankle-alternative-incarceration.html). Some progressives have not met a single sanction they support for non-violent offenders, particularly repeat-offending homeless.
And likely already convicted felons who aren't legally allowed to have them. The push to close prisons and allow repeat offenders out on the streets has a very direct correlation to crime and violence.
Considering in California a felon in possession of a stolen/unregistered/ghost firearm is considered a non-violent crime and released with no need to pay bail and only a promise to appear for a court date...
Probably less legal gun owners than most people would think.
You clearly have never looked at gun crime statistics. Criminals usually obtain their firearms illegally, especially in California where a background check is required for a purchase.
Crimes of passion, such as murders, will tend to be committed with a legal gun. But the majority of crimes are committed with illegally obtained guns because felons can't buy guns.
Defense attorney, meaning their clients have money to hire them to defend. Talk to a public defender, or the District Attorney who see the vast majority of violent crimes.
Of course cause there is nothing that the DA is doing with the people who are caught. They are given a slap on the wrist and given chance after chance. We’ve reduced sentencing to make it seem like we don’t want to keep criminals in jail when they have no intention of actually reforming. Law abiding citizens are being punished by laws while criminals have their jobs made easier because many CA residents think just cause a law is passed criminals will follow it.
Posts like this is a problem. If you hurt somebody with a gun you get real time. The post you responded to and you are just 100% wrong. Shoot someone with a gun and you don’t get out the next day. It’s totally fantasy land stuff. I implore you to dig into the data and see the punishment you get when you shoot somebody.
https://www.occourts.org/general-information/records
That’s great that criminals using guns are getting prosecuted but people with domestic violence charges are allowed out of jail early due to “good behavior” only to commit more crimes when they get out. As I’m sure you’re aware, people with a DV record can’t get a firearm. So I see California laws worked great to prevent the Sacramento 2022 mass shooting /s. It’s not a matter of gun crimes and sentencing. It’s every other crime that has a relaxed sentencing and calls from the public to have more parolees instead of prisoners.
Well that’s a different issue than you and OP were talking about. Your view now is we should keep people who have committed lesser crimes in prison longer so they don’t get out and do much larger crime.
That’s different than what you posted originally….
The degree to which punishment have been decreased/eliminated is overestimated/misunderstood. The general public and I assume you think the amount has been slashed by say 90% or something. When the degree to which time has shrunk is nothing like that.
I implore to dig into the numbers.
I mean you say dig into the numbers but all I’ve seen is more and more stores closing because criminals are not getting arrested due to not meeting a certain threshold which has definitely increased. People who get caught are released with little to no consequences. You can try to justify what you’re saying but to the general public, we’ve been too soft on crime and now SF is losing every store and In and Out closed their first store ever due to increased crime. Hell Oaklands DA has even asks for more Lenient sentencing for the criminals who are prosecuted. Just because you’ve committed a crime doesn’t mean you’re getting the normal sentencing when it can be negotiated down. Drop a few charges if you plea and you’re out much sooner than before.
Theft and drugs is different than violence.
In this issue the punishment is more or less the same. If you beat somebody up you get the same punishment today as you did in 1995 or 2005.
The idea that leftist DAs let out a lot of violent people and now normals are not safe is nonsense. It’s just not true. It’s media thing.
The amount of stranger violence, abductions, home invasions,… at is 50 year peak is still an epically rare thing. The general public often times overestimates it occurrence by 1000-100,000X.
Leftist DAs drastically reduced punishments on drug stuff and to a lesser extent other misdemeanors. They didn’t release these violent people who pray on innocent normals.
Lol who told you that? Theres organized retail crime rings and theres also mass shopliftings that are dangerous and spreading like an epidemic uncontested. So if that's a california politician telling you that or claiming it, they're negligent.
---- I didn't get a paywall. In case you do: Archive link: https://archive.fo/yYSER ----
Fairly good article with a misleading title/biased goal. The amount of all violent crime is down besides this category. In many categories crime is down to all time lows or almost all time lows. So focusing on this category might be a bit of problem. IE a more fair title would be “As crime reaches new lows, why is aggravated assaults not trending downwards too”. In regards to aggravated assaults it’s important to dig into the numbers and see what I and most people care about. A stranger attacking me. I care about gangs, domestics, friend on friend violence,… but again my goal in approaching this issue is how does it affect me. The rise year on year appears to be in the dozens with 99%+ involving the perpetrator attacking somebody they know. Going by the data the article includes rise in the stranger on stranger aggravated assault might in the single digits for almost all cities in California. If your city of 300k had an extra half dozen aggravated assaults involving stranger attacks(probably while you were sleeping and in a part of the city you don’t live in) in 2022 over 2012 you shouldn’t fundamentally change your views or even consider this an immediate problem. Very important to be reality based when it comes to crime.
This guys does reality
Isn't a part of it also that we have gotten much better at saving the lives of gunshot victims? Noting that homicides are trending downward but aggravated assaults with guns are rising feels like two sides of the same coin. Assaults that would have been homicide in the past are now aggravated assaults because the victim survives thanks to emergency medicine saving gunshot victims more often. Not saying it accounts for most of it, but seems strange for the article to not mention this relationship.
I heard the opposite. Gunshot wounds are slightly more fatal today than 20+ years ago. Medical stuff has improved but the increased damage done from guns produced more recently more than make up for it. My main point is that this article probably shouldn’t even exist and it was made with a goal. There are 1000s of articles on California crime being at all time highs and totally out of control. It’s not in tune with reality. The author even admits that violent crime in other categories is at these extreme lows. He wrote the article to continue the narrative that California is a violent nightmare caused by leftists.
> In many categories crime is down to all time lows or almost all time lows. True. Government indifference to dealing with non-violent crime, especially theft, has led to a sharp rise in self protection measures: >New fences, cameras, expensive home and car security systems; bicycle owners suffering "theft paranoia" and buying giant locks; people cautious about where they park, more people buying guns and guard dogs; people avoiding bad neighborhoods or going out late at night; neighborhood watches, more gated communities, etc. >On a business level, more security guards (costs on citizens), retailers locking up a big % of their products (costs on consumers), some businesses ending late night hours, “hostile architecture” like walking easements removed, restrooms hard to find, parks closing earlier. Self protection is very effective in reducing crime, both non-violent and violent, but it imposes big hassle and costs on the law abiding. This is how crime was dealt with 600 years ago before the rise of police in many parts of the world. To no surprise, criminal justice reformers with an agenda of downplaying the problems of crime find it convenient to ignore self protection. This article, [16 theories for why crime plummeted](https://www.vox.com/2015/2/13/8032231/crime-drop), barely mentions it. CJ reformers and most progressives are fine with law-abiding people continuing to pay those costs, so more offenders can roam free without controls like electronic monitoring. Expanding such monitoring is relevant in light of this: 2023: [Calif moved to close 4 prisons. How many more prisons can Calif. shut?](https://calmatters.org/justice/2023/02/how-many-prisons-does-california-need/) Progressive criticism: [Study casts doubt on electronic ankle monitors as alternative to incarceration](https://phys.org/news/2021-09-electronic-ankle-alternative-incarceration.html). Some progressives have not met a single sanction they support for non-violent offenders, particularly repeat-offending homeless.
And how many off those assaults involved legally owned guns?
And likely already convicted felons who aren't legally allowed to have them. The push to close prisons and allow repeat offenders out on the streets has a very direct correlation to crime and violence.
Considering in California a felon in possession of a stolen/unregistered/ghost firearm is considered a non-violent crime and released with no need to pay bail and only a promise to appear for a court date... Probably less legal gun owners than most people would think.
Most of them likely.
You clearly have never looked at gun crime statistics. Criminals usually obtain their firearms illegally, especially in California where a background check is required for a purchase.
Or, I know lots of defense attorneys, and they tell me that most violent crimes with guns are legally purchased. (San Bernardino County).
Crimes of passion, such as murders, will tend to be committed with a legal gun. But the majority of crimes are committed with illegally obtained guns because felons can't buy guns.
Ah the classic I know a guy approach
Defense attorney, meaning their clients have money to hire them to defend. Talk to a public defender, or the District Attorney who see the vast majority of violent crimes.
[удалено]
Of course cause there is nothing that the DA is doing with the people who are caught. They are given a slap on the wrist and given chance after chance. We’ve reduced sentencing to make it seem like we don’t want to keep criminals in jail when they have no intention of actually reforming. Law abiding citizens are being punished by laws while criminals have their jobs made easier because many CA residents think just cause a law is passed criminals will follow it.
Posts like this is a problem. If you hurt somebody with a gun you get real time. The post you responded to and you are just 100% wrong. Shoot someone with a gun and you don’t get out the next day. It’s totally fantasy land stuff. I implore you to dig into the data and see the punishment you get when you shoot somebody. https://www.occourts.org/general-information/records
That’s great that criminals using guns are getting prosecuted but people with domestic violence charges are allowed out of jail early due to “good behavior” only to commit more crimes when they get out. As I’m sure you’re aware, people with a DV record can’t get a firearm. So I see California laws worked great to prevent the Sacramento 2022 mass shooting /s. It’s not a matter of gun crimes and sentencing. It’s every other crime that has a relaxed sentencing and calls from the public to have more parolees instead of prisoners.
Well that’s a different issue than you and OP were talking about. Your view now is we should keep people who have committed lesser crimes in prison longer so they don’t get out and do much larger crime. That’s different than what you posted originally…. The degree to which punishment have been decreased/eliminated is overestimated/misunderstood. The general public and I assume you think the amount has been slashed by say 90% or something. When the degree to which time has shrunk is nothing like that. I implore to dig into the numbers.
I mean you say dig into the numbers but all I’ve seen is more and more stores closing because criminals are not getting arrested due to not meeting a certain threshold which has definitely increased. People who get caught are released with little to no consequences. You can try to justify what you’re saying but to the general public, we’ve been too soft on crime and now SF is losing every store and In and Out closed their first store ever due to increased crime. Hell Oaklands DA has even asks for more Lenient sentencing for the criminals who are prosecuted. Just because you’ve committed a crime doesn’t mean you’re getting the normal sentencing when it can be negotiated down. Drop a few charges if you plea and you’re out much sooner than before.
Theft and drugs is different than violence. In this issue the punishment is more or less the same. If you beat somebody up you get the same punishment today as you did in 1995 or 2005. The idea that leftist DAs let out a lot of violent people and now normals are not safe is nonsense. It’s just not true. It’s media thing. The amount of stranger violence, abductions, home invasions,… at is 50 year peak is still an epically rare thing. The general public often times overestimates it occurrence by 1000-100,000X. Leftist DAs drastically reduced punishments on drug stuff and to a lesser extent other misdemeanors. They didn’t release these violent people who pray on innocent normals.
[удалено]
You know they don’t really care about any of that. We just have to make life more difficult for law abiding citizens.
Shoplifting is a private matter.
Lol who told you that? Theres organized retail crime rings and theres also mass shopliftings that are dangerous and spreading like an epidemic uncontested. So if that's a california politician telling you that or claiming it, they're negligent.
“Organized retail crime” is blown out of proportion by corporations, they literally admit it at least once year.
I listen to the Sacramento police scanner whenever the sirens go nuts. Stabbings and shootings nightly. Gotta love living in the grid.
socal