
California car burglaries are at crisis levels - nickgrosvenor
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-12-02/california-car-burglaries-lawmakers-loophole
======
Shivetya
Proposition 47 is the real bugaboo, it moved from felony to misdemeanor thefts
under $950 which includes damage caused by them. this made breaking into cars
pretty much a free pass because window damage rarely could exceed that.
becoming a misdemeanor meant cops have no real reason to follow up. throw in
the requirement to prove the doors are locked, well its easy to understand

however the real dishonesty is from Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego) who claims a
bill to at least remove the requirement for prosecutors prove a car was locked
before being broken into based on costs. As in, they are very willing to pass
the costs onto individuals; hence there still is a cost but to government it
does not occur unless on their books. As it was pointed out, how is it never a
crime to enter a vehicle you do not own without permission?

Prop 47 lead to an increase in shop lifting because it set the limit high
enough that it basically insured no one would get prosecuted. the common
method is to send a bunch of people into a store at one time to get the goods
in volume but with each individual being under the limit in monetary value if
being young enough prosecution won't work either

~~~
mc32
At a local Safeway woman loads cart with bottles of liquor. Walks out. She
yells “I know my rights, I know my rights”. What are the cashiers and security
going to do? Nothing, they let her go.

At another place kids get caught stealing they turn over a display and run
out. Again, nothing done. All those costs are borne by the paying customers.

People are gonna get sick of it; the progressive supes are gonna rue this
move. The DA race in SF was close. I think it’s gonna go the other way next
election.

Also word on the street is apparently thieves prefer SF to Daly City because
San Mateo county doesn’t play as nice as SF.

~~~
throwaway5752
What you are describing is a particular sort of story that's meant to inflame
and probably speaks to where you get you news, which sounds like it's
political and partisan.

Both of the things you describe are corporate policies. They have nothing to
do with state law anywhere, and they are there because of liability. Safeway
doesn't want to get sued for 1) if an employee is an idiot/racist and
misidentifies someone and harms them 2) employees get harmed substantially
trying to stop a shoplifter. In these cases you have rare and small losses
that are miniscule compared to bad financial outcomes of intervention.

It would be easy to stop, but that costs money. It's a very simple business
decision for retailers: is the cost of loss prevention higher than the loss.

The fact that this surprises you is surprising to me, this problem is many
decades old in retail.

Car burglaries are a much different dynamic, and another poster mentions that
it's a felony that was reclassified to a misdemeanor, and that law probably
does need to be changed and is a problem for lawmakers.

edit: and can we raise the elephant in the room, which is that this is fairly
solvable with a national facial recognition database and fairly low end
iptv/image capture tech?

~~~
BurningFrog
One point is that grocers shouldn't have to fend for themselves against crime.

Supplying the public good of crime fighting is _the_ main reason to form
governments in the first place.

~~~
mrpippy
The police can't be in every store all the time. Presumably the police did
show up and file reports about these crimes, but when a shoplifter is running
away and the window to catch/arrest them is <60 seconds, I don't know what
more the police could be doing.

~~~
ed
I can think of a few San Francisco retail locations where blatant theft
happens maybe every 15 minutes. The Walgreens at 9th and Market, the Gateway
Safeway, the CVS at Pine and Kearney. The city has a task force for poop (much
of the city is treated as a literal toilet); petty theft is almost equally
visible and problematic.

~~~
anxman
The Safeway at 4th and King was basically a free market for crackheads. I
lived nearby for five years and I would see shoplifting _every_ time that I
entered the store. I'm not even exaggerating.

------
samcday
Fun anecdote. I was living/working in San Francisco a couple of years ago. It
was 10am on a work day. I was walking towards my office, along Folsom coming
from the 101 towards 8th. Out of nowhere a guy just walks up to one of the
cars parked on the street, smashes the rear window, and starts taking whatever
was inside. There was several homeless people nearby just casually observing
it, along with myself. The perpetrator clearly gave zero fucks and undertook
the whole thing as casually as one might stop to tie their shoe on the street.
It was a little surreal, and I was already desensitized to the ... interesting
characteristics of SoMa streets by that point.

~~~
webninja
I saw a similar surreal thing in San Fransisco. I was in the back left seat of
a Lyft when I saw a man who appeared to be homeless walk up to a parked car on
the side of the road. The traffic light was red so we were stopped with
several cars in front of and behind us. The man peered into the windows,
picked up his skateboard and bashed the back left side window of the car. He
started pull out a non-descript black suitcase. The hole wasn’t big enough, so
he had to bash the window more. I’m stunned as he’s doing this and I said
aloud “Is he breaking into that car?”. “...Yeah he is.” - The Lyft driver
cautiously replied. He got on his skateboard and casually skated away with the
black suitcase. What can you do when that happens? The cops don’t accept
picture text messages yet. Can you just shoot these burglars on sight or do
they have to be on your private property for that?

~~~
samcday
> Can you just shoot these burglars on sight or do they have to be on your
> private property for that?

No idea about the law, but I would hope you value human life more than a
stolen black suitcase.

------
macinjosh
For all those out there that applauded Prop 47 that helped lead to this mess
let me tell you a story of how this law leads to more inequality not less.

A single mother working 2 minimum wage jobs in different parts of the city
uses her car to travel to work. She basically lives in her car so she must
keep belongings she will need in there. While working her first shift for the
day her car is broken into. Her bag with her uniform for her second shift is
stolen along with everything else.

The cops tell her that the damage to her 20 year old used car's window and the
items stolen add up to less than $950 so they can't do much of anything for
her.

Meanwhile, across town, a rich tech elite's high end electric car is broken
into and some valuable electronics are stolen. The damage and theft adds up to
well over $950 so the police are able to investigate.

At the end of the day the tech elite orders replacement electronics with next
day prime delivery and has their assistant work on repairing the window. The
single mother gets fired from her second job for not having the appropriate
attire. Great work California.

~~~
tree3
I'll present a counter argument: these crimes are born out of poverty and
addiction. Charging even more addicts & poor people with felonies does nothing
to help equality.

~~~
asdff
If I were on crank stealing bike cranks to buy more crank, I _would_ want to
be arrested and sweat out withdrawal in treatment or even jail. Whatever the
facility, I'd have medical staff monitoring my symptoms every step of the way,
unlike in my tent on the sidewalk.

The last thing I would want is to spend a night in jail then released for time
served, wander back to my crank den, where after getting more crank into my
veins I will be back on the street finding more bike cranks to sell for scrap
and continue feeding the beast until I die. You might say that sounds bleaker
than reality, but Los Angeles just buried some 1500 unclaimed dead the other
day.

~~~
tree3
> If I were on crank stealing bike cranks to buy more crank, I would want to
> be arrested and sweat out withdrawal

You are speaking as someone who hasn't suffered from addiction. If you are an
addict, you want drugs and you'll avoid withdrawl at all costs.

> Whatever the facility, I'd have medical staff monitoring my symptoms

You get the bare minimum in jail.

> The last thing I would want is to spend a night in jail then released for
> time served, wander back to my crank den, where after getting more crank
> into my veins

If you were an addict, that's exactly what you would want.

------
yalogin
So a car is not considered personal property if it’s parked on the street? I
thought me taking someone else’s property is illegal, isn’t it? Say I swiped
your wallet, it’s obviously not locked in your pocket and you are on the
street next to your car. Will I be prosecuted or not?

~~~
StuffedParrot
The arrest rate for car breakin in SF is 2%, let alone prosecution. What’s
your suggestion for raising that rate—hire a cop for every car in the city?

~~~
sansnomme
This is precisely the sort of policy that drives development and acceptance of
mass surveillance software. What exactly do you think a city of technologists
is going to do when driven against a wall, stuck between trying to appear
progressive and chronic material loss of personal property?

It just takes one wrong middle manager to have a bad day and their car broken
into before a certain cloud computing company decides that their smart
surveillance doorbells can easily be adapted as car cams.

------
Zelphyr
This strikes me as such an odd law. Does CA feel the same about houses? Can
one go break into a house and get away with it if the homeowner can't prove
the doors were locked? I suspect not and, so, if not, why not? What was the
impetus for such a law to begin with? Was there a rash of people leaving their
cars unlocked and some politician decided it "serves them right" for getting
broken into? The questions abound!

~~~
svachalek
This year someone broke into my car in my driveway, got the garage door
opener, opened the garage, stole some things there, opened the door into the
house from the garage since we didn't habitually lock it back then, stole some
things from the common areas while we slept in the bedrooms, then left a small
pile of inferior loot from other stops in our front yard, some with nametags
still on it.

While I credit the police for showing up and putting a minor effort into
investigating it, they were certainly not taking pictures and fingerprints and
all the stuff you expect from TV. The attitude was mostly "eh, teenagers get
up to bad stuff, make sure to lock your doors."

------
skindog
Easy solution, break into the cars of the lawmakers.

~~~
macinjosh
Agreed, though I have a feeling those cases would be prosecuted to the full
extent of the law.

~~~
gambiting
So....they would also hit a dead wall of having to prove the car was locked at
the time when it was broken into? Because that's the crux of the issue here.

~~~
heimatau
I'm sure the 'crime' will be put under a different part of the law. I.e.
Attacking a public official's property.

They have different laws for them. Wouldn't change a thing.

------
goatinaboat
_prosecutors prove a car’s doors were locked at the time of a break-in_

Weird law. Here in Wales if you leave it unlocked you might have a problem
with your insurance but it’s still equally a crime.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
"eliminate a requirement that prosecutors prove a car’s doors were locked at
the time of a break-in, has been shelved two years in a row"

I lived in San Jose, left my crap car's doors unlocked because there was
nothing in it. Still, the thief just broke the passenger window (without
trying the door?) , opened the glove compartment, saw there was nothing in
there, and moved on.

So, not a crime I guess. Yay California. I don't live there anymore.

~~~
knute
Based on the anecdote in the story, you should always break the window without
trying the door, because if you're on video trying and failing to open the
door, that's evidence the door was locked and they can prosecute you.

Talk about perverse incentives.

------
BatFastard
As someone who has lived in a major city for the last 30 years there is just
ONE rule.

Leave nothing in your car and leave the doors unlocked.

Leaving the door unlocked is the rule I adopted after a break in 30 years ago
when only one of my doors was locked, and of course that window was broken!

~~~
ironmagma
Sadly, this is not sufficient in SF. Many people have gotten so desperate as
to hang posters that send the message to potential thieves: “please don’t
break my window, there is nothing valuable in this car.” I’d say there’s far
more than just one rule.

~~~
BatFastard
What other rules would you suggest?

~~~
ironmagma
I'm not sure the premise is sound -- that there is a set of rules that if you
abide by them, you won't have a car burglarized. Well, besides one that
includes "don't have a car," at least. What says that there must be such a
set? It seems essentially unavoidable, in San Francisco.

------
mensetmanusman
Wait, was this the reason the cybertruck had a glass breaking demo?

------
rrauenza
There’s a YouTube channel Gas Station Encounters that videos shop lifters in
their store in order to publicly shame them. They began publishing their
videos out of frustration.

Besides being pretty funny, it gives you some perspective on the people who
shoplift with no shame.

Link:
[https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWAhPpdcWedLgaB1KJEvfqA](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWAhPpdcWedLgaB1KJEvfqA)

------
subsaharancoder
San Francisco is basically Gotham city without Batman and City hall is Arkham
Asylum. The newly elected DA is bound to make it worse as he focuses on
decriminalizing all non-violent crimes. In the words of my Uncle "You made
your bed, now you must sleep in it.."

------
egdod
San Francisco is becoming a third world shithole, but with first world rent
prices. Why would anyone choose to live there? Do people _enjoy_ stepping in
human feces and getting their cars stolen?

~~~
thorwasdfasdf
there's no choice. that's where all the jobs are.

software companies were incentivized to go to SF many years ago by the
mayor/tax breaks then, which seems kinda corrupt, or at least misrepresenting
the will of the people: most SF residents don't want tech companies there in
the first place.

------
BurningFrog
Conspiracy theory:

Allowing rampant car theft is yet another way rich San Franciscans - who can
afford both indoor parking and new windows a few times a year - keep the non
millionaire rabble away from the city.

~~~
yellowapple
Well it's working, because as one member of that non-millionaire rabble, after
moving here a year ago I desire nothing less than to move right back out.

------
russellbeattie
Numbers. How many suspects are actually set free because of this law? I
suspect very few, and this is just a way to vilify those who want to look out
for the working class and those in poverty. If lawmakers really want to solve
car thefts, they need to look at the systemic economic problems that cause the
need for such theft to occur, not look for more ways to put poor people in
jail.

------
blhack
I know a lot of you guys all live in CA, and the bay area particularly. Just
so you know: this stuff sounds like _madness_ to an outsider reading the
stories in this thread.

If things are actually the way some of you are describing them, it sounds like
SF particularly is about to collapse completely. Yikes. I can't imagine living
there, much less having kids there.

~~~
rsync
"If things are actually the way some of you are describing them, it sounds
like SF particularly is about to collapse completely."

It's all very sensationalist - all of it.

There are very small grains of truth (about needles and homeless and feces and
car break-ins) that are spun out of all proportion.

As a resident of the SFBA and somebody that spends a fair amount of time in,
and all over, the city, I can confirm all of it[1] ... but at the same time,
SF is quite nice overall and I repeatedly have complete, multi-day
interactions in the city with _zero dysfunction_.

[1] I have been the victim of one car break-in, I have had run-ins with people
using the tenderloin as a toilet, etc.

~~~
OstrichFarm
Honestly, I find this comment hilarious.

Every time I've heard someone defending the Bay Area recently it sounds like
utter normalization of the insane. You've been the victim of 'only' one car
break-in yourself, have seen people shitting in the street, view the homeless
and drug epidemic daily, and yet expect people to think these issues are
overblown because they haven't happened for multiple days at points?

As someone from the outside looking in, I truly hope the U.S. gets their shit
together, because it's looking pretty bleak at this point.

~~~
asdff
When I lived in Columbus, Ohio, I too had my car broken into multiple times,
saw shitting in the street, passed out drunks on the bus, screaming in the
grocery store, the works. Of course, none of this happened in the WASPy burbs.

The insane is in every city in the U.S., whether or not you find it during
your daily life is another thing. It depends on whether you live in the rich
city or the parallel working class city, and whether those two cities
interface.

In cities where the rich are well separated from the working class (most of
the east where the rich live in suburbs separated by distances only
traversable by private car due to chronically poor transit), homeless is
ignored because it's never seen way out in the suburbs.

In cities like the west cost and the few growing cities in the east, where
rich people are moving into formerly working class inner city neighborhoods,
of course there is now friction. The rich and working class cities are
suddenly face each other directly and constantly, and the end result is the
working class is pushed out as housing prices increase, or the rich leave
again and it all collapses again.

Take LA. Way more homeless. Yet you get neighborhoods like hancock park, smack
dab in the middle of the city, where you will just not see any homeless
people, because there is no reason for anyone working class to set foot in
that neighborhood. You are priced out of housing and priced out of even
lattes. It's a rich suburb full of mansions, you aren't gonna get much
panhandling done and will stand out like a sore thumb to police and private
security who love doing favors to nagging rich white women without jobs.

But there are parts like downtown la, that used to have flophouses where
drunks and addicts could actually rent housing. Or echo park that was a
gangland in the 90s or a thriving working class latino community depending on
whose reality you consult. Now 1brs cost 2k, the flophouses are bulldozed or
renovated (or just get a new coat of paint), people commanding high salaries
now interface with homeless and working class people and compete for the same
apartments; the two cities merge in DTLA and echo park, as well as other
neighborhoods in LA with increasing gentrification.

NYC has the most homeless of anywhere, 90k, and nearly half a million more
living in public housing below market rents, but you don't see homeless
encampments because NYC builds shelters and housing without NIMBY fuss;
something like 95% of homeless are housed in NYC.

In any city you see these problems, and in cities with any semblance of demand
that refuse to build supply to match, resulting in unaffordable housing for
everyone not pulling >60k a year, you can see how this problem can grow
exponentially larger. Never forget that the problem is present in every city,
be it Columbus, NYC, LA, or Tulsa. The solutions are there and accepted in
academic circles, but whether or not you see these solutions and their effect
is directly reflective on the local political climate.

------
xwdv
This is why vehicles like the cybertruck are increasingly needed. If the
government has failed to protect us and our property, then we need to have
more hardened property and take matters into our own hands.

~~~
hodder
Just as long as the burglars don't hit the window with a gently lofted marble
right?

~~~
chacha2
Didn't go through!

------
empath75
>“With approximately 70 auto burglaries a day”

That doesn’t seem like a crisis in a city the size of San Francisco.

~~~
httpsterio
San Fran has rougly 800k people and assuming that 70 cars gets stolen a day
and everyone there has a car, that's a 3% chance that your car will get stolen
within a year.

This doesn't obviously address the issue that I doubt there's even 400k cars
there which more than doubles the likelyhood. That's not nothing, it's over
25k stolen cars in a year and an enormous burden on the local police force.

~~~
jmkb
Car burglary != car theft. The 70/day number refers to break-ins, generally a
broken car window and stolen belongings -- loose change, usb charger, fuzzy
dice, laptop, whatever.

~~~
gruez
Don't forget the side window that costs a few hundred (at least) to replace.

~~~
asdff
I've been burgled (sp?) twice now and both times the window was intact. I
think people who do this regularly have the tools the cops and tow guys have.
Makes it look waay discrete rifling in a car with the door opened normally,
you could probably do it in broad daylight in front of the police station and
be fine.

Smash and grab makes sense if you don't have those tools and know no one, not
even pedestrians, react to broken glass or car alarms in that part of town.

------
habnds
I've always left nothing in the car and the doors unlocked in the hope that my
windows won't be broken.

Not SF but I once had the cup holder/ashtray stolen from an old mini van I was
driving, I assume because it had a few dollars in change in the ash tray.

More amusing than anything.

Cars are terrible for cities, doesn't bother me in the least that protecting
tourist's cameras isn't an enforcement priority.

> Tourists are disproportionately targeted because they are more likely to
> have valuables in their cars

~~~
macinjosh
> Cars are terrible for cities, doesn't bother me in the least that protecting
> tourist's cameras isn't an enforcement priority.

What a flippant and short sighted thing to say. I've known people whose car
was broken into and had their medical devices, medication, and clothes stolen.
That's more of a problem than a tourist's camera.

Regardless of your opinion on car transportation in cities the idea that
victims of a crime should take the blame because they left something valuable
in their car and locked it is the same as saying a rape victim is at fault for
the crime because of what they were wearing. It is pretty sickening.

~~~
goblin89
Any crime is inherently evaluated as “worse” or “better” than another crime
under most judicial systems, which is reflected in sentences and in allocation
of police resources.

One can express their agreement with current allocation of resources without
blaming victims for the crime, can’t they? To me, as to someone who knows a
rape victim, likening car burglary to rape sounds much more horrific than
that.

Did victim-blaming get edited out of the comment you were replying to after
your post?

~~~
macinjosh
I see your point. To me, victim blaming was implied by implying tourists
having their camera's stolen don't deserve help because they aren't street
smart in SF. I am not saying police shouldn't allocate resources to 'worse'
crimes but we shouldn't also say it is the tourist victim's fault (e.g. "They
should've known better!". I think that's a slippery slope that is best
avoided. I may have read too deeply into the intent behind that comment
though.

~~~
habnds
> I may have read too deeply into the intent behind that comment though.

