More Portland Stores Closing Due to Theft

[happycamper]

On 9/28/2023 at 5:13 PM, Dogs4Me said:

Read what you wrote and try a different lens. You make the broad assumption that police are looking for black people committing crimes while letting off criminals that are white. That’s a broad brush…

Ok,  so what's your explanation of the data?

On 9/28/2023 at 5:13 PM, Dogs4Me said:

Sorry, I think the goal should be to go after criminals and leave the color quotas for social justice warriors to find a cause. Talk about racism, profiling to create a victim class for profit and political gain.

K, but again,  if you don't know what the statistics are,  how do you know whether the arrests are just based on crime?

On 9/28/2023 at 5:13 PM, Dogs4Me said:

BTW, I don’t care that Jackie Robinson was black…he was a good ball player and should be credited for his accomplishments, not solely for his skin color which makes his accomplishments conditional.

This is a weird ass attitude 

[happycamper]

On 9/28/2023 at 5:06 PM, Dogs4Me said:

It’s not anything other than consequences for criminals. Most criminals are men, should we try to balance that and look for more women committing crimes? It’s a stupid argument and I am not willing to subscribe to a convoluted mentally where we socially engineer to skew numbers so that we are “fair” or accomplish “equity”.

Maybe if we knew that men committed 5x as many crimes but were arrested at 20x the rate as women that our resource distribution was was nonsense?

[HR_Poke]

On 9/28/2023 at 3:13 PM, Dogs4Me said:

Read what you wrote and try a different lens. You make the broad assumption that police are looking for black people committing crimes while letting off criminals that are white. That’s a broad brush…

Sorry, I think the goal should be to go after criminals and leave the color quotas for social justice warriors to find a cause. Talk about racism, profiling to create a victim class for profit and political gain.

BTW, I don’t care that Jackie Robinson was black…he was a good ball player and should be credited for his accomplishments, not solely for his skin color which makes his accomplishments conditional.

So here's the crux of the situation. Statistics show us that a lot of crimes related to theft, drugs, and murder are done at the lower socioeconomic levels. Due to how we built cities most of these people in lower socioeconomic levels are in major clusters. We obviously police more heavily in these areas because there is more crime. So we are apprehending these individuals at a higher percentage than other socioeconomic groups. And due to previous policies like redlining segregation, Jim crow laws, etc we've pigeon holed a lot of blacks into these socioeconomic groups. This leads to a disproportionate amount of blacks to get arrested when compared to the white population. I remember this starts to balance out when you get to higher socioeconomic levels but I'd have to defer to that as I haven't looked at the stats in a long time. So are we over policing? Over adjudicating? Or is it something or a combination of things. Right now people look at the stats and think it's unfair and racist. Maybe it is, or maybe it's a symptom of previous racist policies. Unfortunately as the west coast has proven lightening up on petty theft arrests is not the answer. 

[toonkee]

Let the cops and the system in general be racist profilers and sweep the streets of the usual suspects. 

Can there be civilization with real honest civil liberty?

I guess there are no libertarians in foxholes (PNW)?

MOAR PRISONS

 

[East Coast Aztec]

On 9/29/2023 at 5:45 AM, HR_Poke said:

So here's the crux of the situation. Statistics show us that a lot of crimes related to theft, drugs, and murder are done at the lower socioeconomic levels. Due to how we built cities most of these people in lower socioeconomic levels are in major clusters. We obviously police more heavily in these areas because there is more crime. So we are apprehending these individuals at a higher percentage than other socioeconomic groups. And due to previous policies like redlining segregation, Jim crow laws, etc we've pigeon holed a lot of blacks into these socioeconomic groups. This leads to a disproportionate amount of blacks to get arrested when compared to the white population. I remember this starts to balance out when you get to higher socioeconomic levels but I'd have to defer to that as I haven't looked at the stats in a long time. So are we over policing? Over adjudicating? Or is it something or a combination of things. Right now people look at the stats and think it's unfair and racist. Maybe it is, or maybe it's a symptom of previous racist policies. Unfortunately as the west coast has proven lightening up on petty theft arrests is not the answer. 

You are hitting it pretty much on the head.  It is absolutely fine to note if there are racial disparities between arrests, because that is how we need to view it.  Now, some can only view it in either the "blacks are bad", or in the "police are chasing blacks" angles, or we can look for the "why are they higher" and be able to be rational, which much of what your point covered.  From that analysis, then we can actually try and address it.  Not talking about does as much good as giving it the limited framework of "cops or blacks are bad".  

 

Right now, no better view of this dialogue exists than Chicago in the media space.  It is a bunch of narrow viewpoints of "Chicago is a shithole" to "No it is just certain areas"  and "How about those gun laws in Chicago?".  We should be looking at why things are happening this way, and seeing how extreme poverty, cyclical gang life with no options, and the only thing that has ever shown them love are also the very thing that ends up wrapped around murder.  Then put it on social media and have the world stoke the flames.  Right now, that is "Chiraq".  Instead of many of us just going "well, that's culcha", we should say "is there are real way to show the youth, and show the parents of the youth, that there is something outside of there immediate areas, before it is too late?  But instead, politicians, media, and consumers of both become rigid and turn sentient beings into widgets in their roundabout conversations.  Essentially, both foxholes are throwing grenades over the heads of Chicago's streets, in a feigned attempt to address Chicago's streets.  And we do it for so much stuff, including this thread.

[SalinasSpartan]

On 9/29/2023 at 7:49 AM, East Coast Aztec said:

You are hitting it pretty much on the head.  It is absolutely fine to note if there are racial disparities between arrests, because that is how we need to view it.  Now, some can only view it in either the "blacks are bad", or in the "police are chasing blacks" angles, or we can look for the "why are they higher" and be able to be rational, which much of what your point covered.  From that analysis, then we can actually try and address it.  Not talking about does as much good as giving it the limited framework of "cops or blacks are bad".  

 

Right now, no better view of this dialogue exists than Chicago in the media space.  It is a bunch of narrow viewpoints of "Chicago is a shithole" to "No it is just certain areas"  and "How about those gun laws in Chicago?".  We should be looking at why things are happening this way, and seeing how extreme poverty, cyclical gang life with no options, and the only thing that has ever shown them love are also the very thing that ends up wrapped around murder.  Then put it on social media and have the world stoke the flames.  Right now, that is "Chiraq".  Instead of many of us just going "well, that's culcha", we should say "is there are real way to show the youth, and show the parents of the youth, that there is something outside of there immediate areas, before it is too late?  But instead, politicians, media, and consumers of both become rigid and turn sentient beings into widgets in their roundabout conversations.  Essentially, both foxholes are throwing grenades over the heads of Chicago's streets, in a feigned attempt to address Chicago's streets.  And we do it for so much stuff, including this thread.

Yea this is all true, but this take also operates under the assumption that everybody involved is going to want to address the disparity once confronted with it. That is not the case. Just in this thread @Dogs4Me has looked at that disparity and said he does not care, his solution is “don’t commit crimes”. And he is far from the only person that looks at the problem like this.
 

A sizable chunk of the electorate thinks the problem being discussed is not one that elected officials should try to address, and the solution is just more cops, more jails, more prisons, longer sentences, and eventually “those people” will get the message. And if they don’t, phuck em. 

[Bob]

On 9/28/2023 at 1:51 PM, SalinasSpartan said:

Wait so you just literally do not care that a distinct group of people is that overrepresented when it comes to arrests? 

So you literally don't care that a distinct group of people is committing way mroe crime?

[East Coast Aztec]

On 9/29/2023 at 8:06 AM, SalinasSpartan said:

Yea this is all true, but this take also operates under the assumption that everybody involved is going to want to address the disparity once confronted with it. That is not the case. Just in this thread @Dogs4Me has looked at that disparity and said he does not care, his solution is “don’t commit crimes”. And he is far from the only person that looks at the problem like this.
 

A sizable chunk of the electorate thinks the problem being discussed is not one that elected officials should try to address, and the solution is just more cops, more jails, more prisons, longer sentences, and eventually “those people” will get the message. And if they don’t, phuck em. 

Right, which is the notion I am saying when people view it in narrow windows, or don't want to discuss it at all, nothing changes.

[SalinasSpartan]

On 9/29/2023 at 8:17 AM, East Coast Aztec said:

Right, which is the notion I am saying when people view it in narrow windows, or don't want to discuss it at all, nothing changes.

Well you are also leaving out the dynamic of municipalities being called on to solve problems where systemic changes are needed. When crime spikes in a city you have a city council and mayor that is yelled at to “fix it”, even though they are ill equipped to actually address the root problems that you were speaking of. No matter how big the city is, a ton of the budget is already earmarked for police, fire, public works, etc. It’s not like they have all this money laying around to fix these systemic problems. A new community center (for example) isn’t reversing decades of legal, structural racism.

[renoskier]

On 9/28/2023 at 1:46 PM, Dogs4Me said:

Are we discussing crime or racism? 

can't really discuss one without the other

[East Coast Aztec]

On 9/29/2023 at 8:33 AM, SalinasSpartan said:

Well you are also leaving out the dynamic of municipalities being called on to solve problems where systemic changes are needed. When crime spikes in a city you have a city council and mayor that is yelled at to “fix it”, even though they are ill equipped to actually address the root problems that you were speaking of. No matter how big the city is, a ton of the budget is already earmarked for police, fire, public works, etc. It’s not like they have all this money laying around to fix these systemic problems. A new community center (for example) isn’t reversing decades of legal, structural racism.

Budgets are certainly the big obstacle.  There are Fed and State funds that are frequently doled out for municipal items.  Especially CBDG funds from the feds, but the issue is that policy is typically shortsighted, and the need to address the issues is a generational project.  Something politicians don't find enticing.  But to address "decades of legal, structural racism" we need to actually try.  Going "aw shucks, what can I do" is what we have been doing.

[SalinasSpartan]

On 9/29/2023 at 9:37 AM, East Coast Aztec said:

Budgets are certainly the big obstacle.  There are Fed and State funds that are frequently doled out for municipal items.  Especially CBDG funds from the feds, but the issue is that policy is typically shortsighted, and the need to address the issues is a generational project.  Something politicians don't find enticing.  But to address "decades of legal, structural racism" we need to actually try.  Going "aw shucks, what can I do" is what we have been doing.

Your posts did not address this municipality vs state/fed dynamic at all, which is why I pointed it out that it needs to be kept in mind that municipalities can’t really address what you are talking about.  I sure as phuck wasn’t advocating to say “aw shucks what can we do”, and figured people here were smart enough to understand I was saying if municipalities can’t address these problems they need to be addressed at the state and federal level. But I guess I’ll be more explicit.

State and federal governments need to take the lead on addressing the root causes of crime as municipalities don’t have the tools to fix these problems.

[renoskier]

On 9/29/2023 at 8:16 AM, Bob said:

So you literally don't care that a distinct group of people is committing way mroe crime?

why is that bob?

do you care?

[East Coast Aztec]

On 9/29/2023 at 10:04 AM, SalinasSpartan said:

Your posts did not address this municipality vs state/fed dynamic at all, which is why I pointed it out that it needs to be kept in mind that municipalities can’t really address what you are talking about.  I sure as phuck wasn’t advocating to say “aw shucks what can we do”, and figured people here were smart enough to understand I was saying if municipalities can’t address these problems they need to be addressed at the state and federal level. But I guess I’ll be more explicit.

State and federal governments need to take the lead on addressing the root causes of crime as municipalities don’t have the tools to fix these problems.

Easy cowboy.  The aw shucks is a generality that was not tied to the funding, but the general attitude of folks looking to do things but since they only think in terms of immediacy and not a long-range strategy, they give up.

 

Actually, I didn't think I needed to go discuss source of funding, more about connecting the dots on the why, as that is the pivotal factor on change.  We have been throwing money after short-run ideology time and again, funding seems to be there if we can get buy-in.  But getting the buy-in is the issue since people are looking for a simple solution to a complex problem all the time, and the politicians are just fine with that since short-term results get them elected, long-term doesn't.

[Billings]

On 9/29/2023 at 8:17 AM, East Coast Aztec said:

Right, which is the notion I am saying when people view it in narrow windows, or don't want to discuss it at all, nothing changes.

bingo

[SharkTanked]

On 9/28/2023 at 5:59 PM, halfmanhalfbronco said:

It's dumb.  Democrats are really +++++ing retarded when they let their further left contingent set policy in their locales.

This is an example.  So is Seattle and SF.  

Bums making a mess, screaming at people, and destroying prosperity in the areas they infest and then rampant theft....the dems in Seattle and Portland and SF created this, and destroyed the lives of so many people living in their city trying to make a living at their ma and pa shop.

+++++ em

Anybody on this board refusing to admit the dems have gone way too far left in certain Western Cities have their head up their ass.

Absolutely if the only reason they are doing this is political philosophy, it is 100% dumb. It certainly seems that way too given the recall of the DA (?) in San Francisco. 

It takes a much better safety net than what we have before you start reducing crimes. You can't just waive them off and expect the problem to go away. 

Sounds like it is time for the Portland citizens to clean house.

[Bob]

On 9/29/2023 at 11:28 AM, renoskier said:

why is that bob?

do you care?

I personally don’t. You commit a crime, you get punished regardless of skin color

[Billings]

On 9/28/2023 at 5:35 PM, HR_Poke said:

I'm not sure. I remember San Francisco implemented something similar as a means to combat social injustice in the legal system. There was a coordinated push to get progressive DAs elected across the US to do similar reforms.

San Francisco did lower the penalties for theft to the point where there was no deterrent.  I don't think Portland did that.  The cops just got tired of catch and release as the people were arrested and then released sometimes the same day.  Situation was blamed on lack of Jail space and public defenders.  Needless to say they never showed up for any court dates.  One was a poor law in San Fran but Portland was bureaucracy and crap budget planning.  Focus on the big crimes and let the minor ones sit on the back burner.   Bit them in the butt.

[Billings]

On 9/29/2023 at 11:15 AM, SharkTanked said:

Absolutely if the only reason they are doing this is political philosophy, it is 100% dumb. It certainly seems that way too given the recall of the DA (?) in San Francisco. 

It takes a much better safety net than what we have before you start reducing crimes. You can't just waive them off and expect the problem to go away. 

Sounds like it is time for the Portland citizens to clean house.

Several incumbent city commissioners were defeated in last election and a whole new form of city government was put in place for 2025 on a ballot initiative.   Voters totally changed how the city is governed.  Way over due.

[SalinasSpartan]

On 9/29/2023 at 10:45 AM, East Coast Aztec said:

Easy cowboy.  The aw shucks is a generality that was not tied to the funding, but the general attitude of folks looking to do things but since they only think in terms of immediacy and not a long-range strategy, they give up.

 

Actually, I didn't think I needed to go discuss source of funding, more about connecting the dots on the why, as that is the pivotal factor on change.  We have been throwing money after short-run ideology time and again, funding seems to be there if we can get buy-in.  But getting the buy-in is the issue since people are looking for a simple solution to a complex problem all the time, and the politicians are just fine with that since short-term results get them elected, long-term doesn't.

I think one of the big impediments to change is the detachment of those with the means to fix the problems (state/fed) and those who feel the political heat (municipalities/counties). It creates a situation where those that face the heat from voters are the ones that can’t do much, and that is what pushes them to “do something”, lest they be branded as “doing nothing”. But the “something” is never going to fix the problem, as those tools don’t exist at the local level. 
 

Meanwhile state and federal lawmakers have the means to do something, but do not face the intense political heat that pushes lawmakers to really prioritize the issue. They can just say, “well crime is a local issue handled by local police” and bingo bango that’s it let’s get to a fundraiser. So instead of getting thoughtful solutions to really address the problems you get them just coming up with lazy “just cut a check” style approaches that might look good in a press release. Because at the end of the day, they know local crime isn’t going to be a true motivating issue for voters in THEIR races, so why spend a ton of time formulating solutions to problems that don’t impact their elections?