Yes, I understand that you're pro-theft b/c you haven't thought this matter through. When crime drives businesses out of a neighborhood, what usually takes their place is ... nothing. Within a few years, there are no businesses left to steal from.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Over time, widespread crime makes it much more difficult for people to obtain basic needs. If you were, as you claim, "pro housing and feeding people," you would not be pro-crime. Active policing is the solution here, not vigilantism.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
The past twenty-five years proves you dead wrong on your last 2 points. I'll agree with you that we incarcerate too many criminals & criminalize some of the wrong things. But that doesn't mean we should adopt a pro-theft position as you do, & dispense with law & order altogether.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
In that tweet you just deleted, where your position was pretty much that thieves should be allowed to take what they want & not get punished for it.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
You also made the argument when you wrote, "So when people aren’t able to obtain their basic needs... I’ll tell what they do, they try to survive anyway they can. Sometimes the only way they can prevent starvation is by taking what they need." That's pro-theft.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
No, you're making a pro-theft argument: You claim that police & local government should allow people to steal from businesses. The problem for you is that in many neighborhoods (including most of San Francisco), they already do, & businesses are leaving.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.