Sideshows are victimless, non-violent crimes. There’s not much value in stopping them other than abating a nuisance... unless you stop them in order to prevent/detect more serious crimes, which means stopping them is pretextual, which the DA says the police should have done.
My point is that much of police activity is pretextual. But critics of tend to only bemoan pretextual activity when it’s convenient for them to do so. In this case, the DA, a critic of it, actually criticized the police for NOT engaging in pretextual activity.
-
-
That same DA is a critic of over-enforcement of quality-of-life, low-level, and nuisance crimes, but in this case he criticized the police for not enforcing those laws, regardless of whether the 1 police car there would have even been capable of managing a crowd that size.
-
It seems then that there’s a type and extent of pretextual activity that he is willing to accept and it may be the type that turns eyes away from him and the increase in shootings and homicides SF is experiencing.
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.